Literary and Linguistic Computing Advance Access originally published online on November 20, 2007
Literary and Linguistic Computing 2008 23(1):51-63; doi:10.1093/llc/fqm043
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
BE and HAVE: Qualities and Shortcomings
E.A. Formes-Discours-Cognition and C.A.T.I., Université de Paris IV-Sorbonne, Paris, France
Correspondence: Pierre Labrosse, UFR d'anglais, Université de Paris IV – Sorbonne, 1 rue Victor Cousin, 75230 Paris Cedex 05, France. E-mail: pierre.labrosse{at}club-internet.fr
 |
Abstract |
|---|
This article examines the hypothesis that a speaker uses the HAVE + noun construction when (s)he wants to express somebody's positive qualities. This hypothesis was tested with two different corpora using two different retrieval programs. The numerous steps that are necessary show that it can take a considerable amount of time to reach sound conclusions and suggests the need to improve the building of those corpora or their retrieval software programs. 
2 and z-score tests were used to analyse the results. The above hypothesis proves to be too strong: although the verb HAVE is never significantly associated more frequently with shortcomings, the verb BE is sometimes associated more frequently with qualities. The lists of qualities and shortcomings expressed with HAVE or with BE show that BE collocates with a wider range of qualities than shortcomings. These lists also indicate that the qualities often quoted by the theoretical linguist are not those most frequently found in corpora. They also point to differences between the qualities that collocate with HAVE and those that collocate with BE. The use of corpora enabled me to widen the range of qualities or shortcomings that are said to collocate with HAVE or BE, and revealed that, contrary to the hypothesis, the HAVE + noun construction can apply to inanimate subject referents.