>ČASOPIS PRO MODERNÍ FILOLOGII 2025 (107) 1
Possible Uses of Syntactic Complexity Annotation in a Parallel Corpus: The Case of French -ant Forms in Converbal Function and Their Czech Counterparts
(Received 18 February 2025, Revised 28 February 2025, Accepted 21 May 2025, Available online 2 July 2025)
ABSTRACT (en)
This study explores new research opportunities offered by the InterCorp v16ud parallel corpus, annotated using the Universal Dependencies scheme and enriched with syntactic complexity (SC) measures. The analysis focuses on French sentences containing -ant forms (gerund and present participle) and their Czech translations, with participles restricted to adverbial (converbal) usage for comparability. The results show significant SC variation in literary texts, with Czech translations displaying lower values than French originals. Coefficient of variation and correlation analyses suggest that participles may function as stylistic markers, unlike gerunds. At the sentence level, participles are associated with higher SC than gerunds, though the differences are moderate. The contrastive analysis reveals substantial reductions in clausal SC measures in the Czech translations, probably due to the replacement of subordination by coordination. These shifts affect SC information hierarchy, and occasionally temporal relations. The study underscores the potential of InterCorp v16ud for syntactic research in contrastive linguistics and beyond, while emphasizing the multidimensional nature of SC.
KEYWORDS (cz)
syntaktická komplexita, participium, konverbum, Universal Dependencies, paralelní korpus
KEYWORDS (en)
syntactic complexity, participle, converb, Universal Dependencies, parallel corpus
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14712/23366591.2025.1.7
LITERATURE
Beaman, K. (1984): Coordination and Subordination Revisited: Syntactic Complexity in Spoken and Written Narrative Discourse. In: D. Tannen — R. Freedle (eds.), Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing, s. 45–80.
Berdicevskis, A. — Bentz, C. (eds.). (2018): Proceedings of the First Shared Task on Measuring Language Complexity. Toruń. http://www. christianbentz.de/MLC2018/proceedings.pdf
Biber, D. — Gray, B. (2016): Grammatical Complexity in Academic English: Linguistic Change in Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D. — Larsson, T. — Hancock, G. R. (2024): The linguistic organization of grammatical text complexity: comparing the empirical adequacy of theory-based models. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 20, 2, 2024, s. 347–373. https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2023-0016
Brunato, D — Cimino, A. — Dell’Orletta, F. — Venturi, G. — Montemagni, S. (2020): Profiling-UD: a Tool for Linguistic Profiling of Texts. In: N. Calzolari a kol. (eds.), Proceedings of the 12th LREC Conference. Marseille, France: ELRA, s. 7145–7151. https://aclanthology.org/2020. lrec-1.883
Brunato, D. — Venturi, G. (2022): Why is this language complex? Cherry-pick the optimal set of features in multilingual treebanks. Linguistics Vanguard, 9, 1, s. 59–72. https://doi. org/10.1515/lingvan-2021-0017
Carvalho, P. D. (2003): « Gérondif », « participe présent » et « adjectif déverbal » en morphosyntaxe comparative. Langages, 149, s. 100–126.
Čechová, M. (1997): Stylistika současné češtiny. Praha: Institut sociálních vztahů.
Čermák, F. — Rosen, A. (2012): The Case of InterCorp, a multilingual parallel corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 13, 3, s. 411–427.
Čermák, P. — Nádvorníková, O. — Štichauer, P. — Bratánková, L. — Černikovská, Š. — Hricsina, J. a kol. (2015): Románské jazyky a čeština ve světle paralelních korpusů. Praha: Karolinum.
Cvrček, V. — Laubeová, Z. — Lukeš, D. — Poukarová, P. — Řehořková, A. — Zasina, A. J. (2020): Registry v češtině. Praha: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny.
De Clercq, B. (2016): Le développement de la complexité syntaxique en français langue seconde : complexité structurelle et diversité. In: F. Neveu — G. Bergounioux — M. H. Cote — J. M. Fournier — L. Hriba — S. Prevost (eds.), 5e CMLF (Vol. 27). SHS Web of Conferences. https://doi.org/10.1051/ shsconf/20162707006 , s. 1–19.
de Marneffe, M.-C. — Manning, C. D. — Nivre, J. — Zeman, D. (2021): Universal Dependencies. Computational Linguistics, 47, 2, s. 255–308. https://doi.org/10.1162/ coli_a_00402 Dvořák, E. (1983): Přechodníkové konstrukce v nové češtině. Praha: Universita Karlova.
Filiouchkina Krave, M. F. (2012): The meaning of Russian converbs. In: C. Fabricius-Hansen — D. Haug (eds.), Big Events, Small Clauses. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter, s. 323–362.
Gast, V. (2012): Contrastive linguistics: Theories and methods. In: B. Kortmann — J. Kabatek (eds.), Dictionaries of linguistics and communication science: Linguistic theory and methodology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/265070904_Contrastive_ Linguistics_Theories_and_Methods
Gruszczyński, W. — Ogrodniczuk, M. (eds.). (2015): Jasnopis, czyli mierzenie zrozumiałości polskich tekstów użytkowych. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo ASPRA-JR. http://www.aspra. pl/katalog-wydawniczy/book/620
Halmøy, O. (2003): Le gérondif en français. Paris: Éditions Ophrys.
Halmøy, O. (2008): Les formes verbales en -ant et la prédication seconde. Travaux de linguistique, 57, 2, s. 43–62.
Haspelmath, M. (1995): The converb as a cross-linguistically valid category. In: M. Haspelmath — E. König (eds.), Converbs in Cross-Linguistic Perspective: Structure and Meaning of Adverbial Verb Forms — Adverbial Participles, Gerunds. Berlin / Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, s. 1–56. https://doi.org/ doi:10.1515/9783110884463-003
Haspelmath, M. (2010): Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language, 86, 3, s. 663–687. https:// doi.org/10.1353/lan.2010.0021
Havu, E. — Pierrard, M. (2008): L’interprétation des participes présents adjoints : converbalité et portée du rapport entre prédications. In: D. Jacques — B. Habert — B. Laks (eds.), CMLF’08. Paris, France: Institut de Linguistique Française, s. 2507–2517. https://shs.hal.science/ halshs-00354100
Herslund, M. (2000): Le participe présent comme co-verbe. Langue française, 127, 1, s. 86–94.
Hunt, K. W. (1965): Grammatical structures written at three grade levels (Research Report No. 3). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED113735
Jagaiah, T. — Olinghouse, N. G. — Kearns, D. M. (2020): Syntactic complexity measures: variation by genre, grade-level, students’ writing abilities, and writing quality. Reading and Writing, 33, s. 2577–2638. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11145-020-10057-x
Kocková, J. (2022): Neurčité tvary slovesné v češtině, ruštině a němčině a jejich vzájemná ekvivalence. Praha: Academia, Slovanský ústav AV ČR.
König, E. — Auwera, J. van der. (1990): Adverbial participles, gerunds and absolute constructions in the languages of Europe. In: J. Bechert — G. Bernini — C. Buridant (eds.), Toward a Typology of European Languages. Berlin / New York: De Gruyter Mouton, s. 337–356. https://doi.org/ doi:10.1515/9783110863178.337
Kortmann, B. (1997): Adverbial Subordination: A Typology and History of Adverbial Subordinators Based on European Languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kortmann, B. — Szmrecsanyi, B. (eds.). (2012): Linguistic Complexity: Second Language Acquisition, Indigenization, Contact. Berlin / New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Korzen, H. (2000): En kontrastiv analyse af frie prædikativer på dansk og fransk. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.
Kuboň, V. (2001): A Method for Analyzing Clause Complexity. Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics, 75, s. 5–28.
Levý, J. (1963): Umění překladu (Vol. 10). Praha: Československý spisovatel.
Liu, H. (2008): Dependency Distance as a Metric of Language Comprehension Difficulty. Journal of Cognitive Science, 9, s. 159–191. https://doi.org/10.17791/ jcs.2008.9.2.159
Mačutek, J. — Čech, R. — Courtin, M. (2021): The Menzerath-Altmann law in syntactic structure revisited. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Quantitative Syntax (Quasy, SyntaxFest 2021). Sofia, Bulgaria: Association for Computational Linguistics, s. 65–73. https://aclanthology.org/2021.quasy-1.6.pdf
Mačutek, J. — Čech, R. — Milička, J. (2019): Length of non-projective sentences: A pilot study using a Czech UD treebank. In: X. Chen — R. Ferrer-i-Cancho (eds.), Proceedings of the First Workshop on Quantitative Syntax (Quasy, SyntaxFest 2019). Paris, France: Association for Computational Linguistics, s. 110–117. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W19- 7913
Malá, M. — Šaldová, P. (2012): Complex condensation — Vilém Mathesius, Josef Vachek, Jiří Nosek, and beyond. In: M. Malá — P. Šaldová (eds.), A centenary of English studies at Charles University: From Mathesius to present-day linguistics. Praha: Univerzita Karlova, Filozofická fakulta.
Masica, C. P. (2005): Defining a linguistic area: South Asia. New Delhi: Chronicle Books.
Miestamo, M. (2009): Implicational hierarchies and grammatical complexity. In: G. Sampson — D. Gil — P. Trudgill (eds.), Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://api. semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:60165829
Moortgat, B. (1978): Participe et gérondif. Étude de l’opposition entre la présence et l’absence de EN devant la forme en –ant. Thèse de 3e cycle (PhD Thesis). Metz: Université de Metz.
Mossberg, M. (2011): L’emploi du gérondif et de la construction V1 och V2 dans l’incise: Étude contrastive français-suédois. Revue romane, 46, 1, s. 1–41.
Nádvorníková, O. (2020): The Use of English, Czech and French Punctuation Marks in Reference, Parallel and Comparable Web Corpora: A Question of Methodology. Linguistica Pragensia [online], 30, 2, s. 30–50.
Nádvorníková, O. (2021): Le gérondif et le participe présent en français contemporain : Différence revisitée à la lumière de leur compatibilité avec les verbes de perception. In: Ch. Lacassain-Lagoin — F. Marsac — W. Ucherek — K. Chovancová — M. Zázrivcová (eds.), Sens (inter)dits, vol. 2 (Verbes et architectures syntaxico-discursives), Paris: L’Harmattan, s. 67–84.
Nádvorníková, O. (2023): Český přechodník jako konverbum: Korpusová analýza překladových a nepřekladových textů. Praha: Vydavatelství FF UK.
Nádvorníková, O. (2024): French, Polish and Czech converbs: A contrastive corpus-based study. Languages in Contrast, 24, 2, s. 197–225.
Nádvorníková, O. (2025): The Czech converb confronted with its French and Polish counterparts: Investigation of diachronic factors shaping the properties of converbs. In: P. Cotticelli-Kurras — E. Dahl — J. Živojinović (eds.), Diachronic, Typological and Areal Aspects of Converbs (Vol. 388). Berlin / Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, s. 361–414.
Nedjalkov, V. P. (1995): Some typological parameters of converbs. In: M. Haspelmath — E. König (eds.), Structure and Meaning of Adverbial Verb Forms — Adverbial Participles, Gerunds. Berlin / Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, s. 97–136. https://doi.org/ doi:10.1515/9783110884463-005
Pavlíková, K. (2024): Konkurence přítomných participií a vztažných vět ve francouzštině a v češtině. Kontrastivní analýza adnominální modifikace (Master’s Thesis). Praha: Univerzita Karlova, Filozofická fakulta.
Rescher, N. (1998): Complexity: A Philosophical Overview. New Brunswick NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Ross, D. (2021): Pseudocoordination, serial verb constructions and multi-verb predicates: The relationship between form and structure (PhD Thesis). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. http://hdl.handle. net/2142/113888
Ross, D. (2025): The life cycle of converbs: A diachronic typology. In: P. Cotticelli-Kurras — E. Dahl — J. Živojinović (eds.), Diachronic, Typological and Areal Aspects of Converbs. Berlin / Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, s. 317–360.
Szmrecsanyi, B. (2004): On operationalizing syntactic complexity. In: B. Szmrecsanyi — G. Purnelle — C. Fairon — A. Dister (eds.), Le poids des mots. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Textual Data Statistical Analysis. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses universitaires de Louvain, s. 1032–1039.
Těšitelová, M. (1985): Kvantitativní charakteristiky současné češtiny. Praha: Academia.
Vangaever, J. (2021): Categories under pressure: the gerund and the present participle from Late Latin to Old French (PhD Thesis). Gent: Universiteit Gent.
Xu, J. — Li, J. (2021): A syntactic complexity analysis of translational English across genres. Across Languages and Cultures, 22, 2, s. 214–232. https://doi. org/10.1556/084.2021.00015
