---
title: "Language Family Relationship Preserved in Non-native English"
description: "The author proposes a \"probabilistic module\": learners carry over L1 preferences among grammatically… 17 references, cited by 3 papers here."
authors: ["Ryo Nagata"]
year: 2014
venue: "Proceedings of COLING 2014, the 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers"
source: "https://aclanthology.org/C14-1183/"
licence: "CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 (ACL Anthology, before 2016)"
licence_url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/"
summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License"
canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/nagata-2014-language-family-relationship-preserved-non/"
---
[Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/nagata-2014-language-family-relationship-preserved-non/)

[home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/) / [2014](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2014/page/3/) / Language Family Relationship Preserved in Non-native English

# Language Family Relationship Preserved in Non-native English

**Authors:** [Ryo Nagata](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/ryo-nagata/) · **Year:** 2014 · **Venue:** [Proceedings of COLING 2014, the 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/coling/) ([COLING 2014](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/coling/2014/)) · **Publisher:** [Dublin City University](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/publishers/dublin-city-university/) · **Licence:** [CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 (ACL Anthology, before 2016)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/)

**Links:** [Publisher's page](https://aclanthology.org/C14-1183/) · [PDF](https://aclanthology.org/C14-1183.pdf) · [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W2155939044)

**Citations:** 6 citations (OpenAlex, 2026-10-14) · 3 in our library, of the 149,439 papers whose bibliographies we read

## Summary
Nagata asks whether traces of a writer's mother tongue in their English are strong enough to recover language family structure outside the Indo-European setting. Earlier work by Nagata and Whittaker (2013) had shown this for European learners. This paper tests two hypotheses on Asian English essays from ICNALE, covering both the outer and expanding circles:
- that family relations survive in all non-native English;
- that their survival depends on proficiency.

**Method.** Each L1 group is modelled with a trigram model over a mix of function words and POS tags, which reduces topic effects. The groups are then clustered hierarchically by a symmetric divergence between models.

**Results.**
- The trees pair Chinese with Taiwanese English and Japanese with Korean English. This supports preservation, but only for the expanding circle.
- Splitting essays by proficiency does not erase the relationship, so the proficiency hypothesis is rejected.

**Explanation.** The author proposes a "probabilistic module": learners carry over L1 preferences among grammatically equivalent options, such as compound noun vs. "NN of NN" or adverb placement. These preferences change slowly because no teacher corrects them.

**Why it matters.** This matters for native language identification and for grammatical error tools.

## Key points
- **Data:** ICNALE, with 400 native essays plus outer-circle groups (Hong Kong, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore) and expanding-circle groups (China, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Thailand, Taiwan). Proficiency is labelled A2, B1_1, B1_2 or B2+, with each level mapped to a TOEIC score band.
- **Language models:** trigram models with Kneser-Ney smoothing, built with the Kyoto Language Modeling toolkit. N-grams seen fewer than five times were dropped.
- **Clustering:** agglomerative clustering with average linkage. The distance is a per-token log-likelihood ratio in the style of Juang & Rabiner, averaged over both directions to make it symmetric.
- **Tagging:** a Penn Treebank-tagset POS tagger trained on manually tagged native and learner text, part of which is released as the Konan-JIEM (KJ) learner corpus.
- **Conclusions:** the paper revises the hypotheses to I′ (preservation holds in the expanding circle) and II′ (preservation does not depend on proficiency). Supporting evidence comes from "NN of NN" frequencies in ICLE and ICNALE and from sentence-initial vs. sentence-final adverb ratios.

## Interesting ideas
- Replace content words with POS tags but keep function words (determiners, prepositions, modals, pronouns) as literal tokens, which strips topic while keeping grammatical habits visible
- Compare corpora by how much worse one group's model predicts another group's text, symmetrised and normalised per token, then cluster the results into a tree
- Look at choices among equally grammatical alternatives (compound vs. "of"-phrase, adverb position, clause order), because writers' preferences there escape correction and persist
- Test whether a signal is robust by splitting each group by proficiency and checking that the subgroups still land next to their own group
- Avoid confusing "outer circle" varieties with L1-influenced English, since institutionalised varieties do not cluster by mother tongue

## For Mova

How these ideas could serve Mova, our small open language model — its files, stages and tests:

- **I1** (tokens): a "topic-blind" token view from crate en could act as a style or dialect fingerprint for detecting learner or non-standard input before tagging decisions are made.
- **I2** (learn): the same cross-likelihood distance could compare silver treebanks or witness parsers' output distributions and flag which data sources are near-duplicates or outliers.
- **I3** (tree): tracking such optional-variant frequencies over UD trees gives a cheap check that the parser handles each variant consistently, and a signal of which dialect of input it is seeing.
- **I4** (learn): a similar split-and-reposition test can serve as a negative control, showing that an evaluation metric reflects real structure rather than the skill level of the data.
- **I5** (world): when compiling knowledge about text sources, recording the variety of English as distinct from the writer's L1 would keep regional usage from being mistaken for errors.

*Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.*

## Institutions

- [Hyogo University of Teacher Education](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/universities/hyogo-university-of-teacher-education/) — University, Katō, Japan · 4 works · 117 citations

📚 Shelves (4): [🖥️ Computer Science](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/) · 18,614 works · [🤖 Artificial Intelligence](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/artificial-intelligence/) · 17,965 works · [🎭 Arts and Humanities](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/) · 17,450 works · [🗣️ Language and Linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/language-and-linguistics/) · 17,296 works

🧭 Topics (1): [English](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/topics/english/) · 2,379 works

## Cite

Cite as: Ryo Nagata. 2014. Language Family Relationship Preserved in Non-native English. Proceedings of COLING 2014, the 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

```bibtex
@inproceedings{nagata2014language,
  title = {{Language Family Relationship Preserved in Non-native English}},
  author = {Ryo Nagata},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of COLING 2014, the 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers},
  year = {2014},
  url = {https://aclanthology.org/C14-1183/}
}
```

- [← previous Representing Caused Motion in Embodied Construction Grammar](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/dodge-2014-representing-caused-motion-embodied-construction/)
- [next → Negation scope and spelling variation for text-mining of Danish electronic patient records](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/thomas-2014-negation-scope-spelling-variation-text/)
- [↑ back to papers of 2014](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2014/page/3/)

## References

17 references, 2 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Jan Aarts and Sylviane Granger, 1998. Tag sequences in learner corpora: a key to interlanguage grammar and discourse, pages 132–141. Longman, New York. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jan+Aarts+and+Sylviane+Granger%2C+1998%2E+Tag+sequences+in+learner+corpora%3A+a+key+to+interlanguage+grammar+and+discourse%2C+pages+132%E2%80%93141%2E+Longman%2C+New+York%2E)
2. Bengt Altenberg and Marie Tapper, 1998. The use of adverbial connectors in advanced Swedish learners’ written English, pages 80–93. Longman, New York. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bengt+Altenberg+and+Marie+Tapper%2C+1998%2E+The+use+of+adverbial+connectors+in+advanced+Swedish+learners%E2%80%99+written+English%2C+pages+80%E2%80%9393%2E+Longman%2C+New+York%2E)
3. Robert S.P. Beekes. 2011. Comparative Indo-European Linguistics: An Introduction (2nd ed.). John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Robert+S%2EP%2E+Beekes%2E+2011%2E+Comparative+Indo%2DEuropean+Linguistics%3A+An+Introduction+%282nd+ed%2E%29%2E+John+Benjamins+Publishing+Company%2C+Amsterdam%2E)
4. David Crystal. 1997. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=David+Crystal%2E+1997%2E+The+Cambridge+Encyclopedia+of+Language+%282nd+ed%2E%29%2E+Cambridge+University+Press%2C+Cambridge%2E)
5. Daniel Dahlmeier, Hwee Tou Ng, and Siew Mei Wu. 2013. [Building a large annotated corpus of learner English: The NUS corpus of learner English](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/dahlmeier-2013-building-large-annotated-corpus-learner/). In Proc. of 8th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications, pages 22–31.
6. Sylviane Granger, Estelle Dagneaux, Fanny Meunier, and Magali Paquot. 2009. International Corpus of Learner English v2. Presses universitaires de Louvain, Louvain. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Sylviane+Granger%2C+Estelle+Dagneaux%2C+Fanny+Meunier%2C+and+Magali+Paquot%2E+2009%2E+International+Corpus+of+Learner+English+v2%2E+Presses+universitaires+de+Louvain%2C+Louvain%2E)
7. Jiawei Han and Micheline Kamber. 2006. Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques (2nd Ed.). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jiawei+Han+and+Micheline+Kamber%2E+2006%2E+Data+Mining%3A+Concepts+and+Techniques+%282nd+Ed%2E%29%2E+Morgan+Kaufmann+Publishers%2C+San+Francisco%2E)
8. Shinichiro Ishikawa, 2011. A new horizon in learner corpus studies: The aim of the ICNALE project, pages 3–11. University of Strathclyde Publishing, Glasgow. JPN-L THA-L Ratio of adverbs at the end (%) THA-H JPN-H KOR-L CHN-L KOR-H HKG-H CHN-H HKG-L TWN-H TWN-L PAK-H PAK-L PHL-L IDN-L IDN-H PHL-H SIN-H 25 30 35 Ratio of adverbs at the beginning (%) (ii) High and low levels Bing-Hwang Juang and Lawrence R. Rabiner. 1985. A probabilistic distance measure for hidden Markov models. AT&T Technical Journal, 64(2):391–408. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Shinichiro+Ishikawa%2C+2011%2E+A+new+horizon+in+learner+corpus+studies%3A+The+aim+of+the+ICNALE+project%2C+pages+3%E2%80%9311%2E+University+of+Strathclyde+Publishing%2C+Glasgow%2E+JPN%2DL+THA%2DL+Ratio+of+adverbs+at+the+end+%28%25)
9. Braj B. Kachru, 1992. Teaching World Englishes, pages 355–365. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Braj+B%2E+Kachru%2C+1992%2E+Teaching+World+Englishes%2C+pages+355%E2%80%93365%2E+University+of+Illinois+Press%2C+Urbana+and+Chicago%2E)
10. Kenji Kita. 1999. Automatic clustering of languages based on probabilistic models. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 6(2):167–171. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1076/jqul.6.2.167.4134)
11. Reinhard Kneser and Hermann Ney. 1995. Improved backing-off for m-gram language modeling. In Proc. of International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, volume 1, pages 181–184. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Reinhard+Kneser+and+Hermann+Ney%2E+1995%2E+Improved+backing%2Doff+for+m%2Dgram+language+modeling%2E+In+Proc%2E+of+International+Conference+on+Acoustics%2C+Speech%2C+and+Signal+Processing%2C+volume+1%2C+pages+181%E2%80%93184%2E)
12. Ryo Nagata and Edward Whittaker. 2013. [Reconstructing an Indo-European family tree from non-native English texts](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/nagata-2013-reconstructing-indo-european-family-tree/). In Proc. of 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 1137–1147.
13. Ryo Nagata, Edward Whittaker, and Vera Sheinman. 2011. Creating a manually error-tagged and shallow-parsed learner corpus. In Proc. of 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 1210–1219. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ryo+Nagata%2C+Edward+Whittaker%2C+and+Vera+Sheinman%2E+2011%2E+Creating+a+manually+error%2Dtagged+and+shallow%2Dparsed+learner+corpus%2E+In+Proc%2E+of+49th+Annual+Meeting+of+the+Association+for+Computational+Linguist)
14. Anna Giacalone Ramat and Paolo Ramat. 2006. The Indo-European Languages. Routledge, New York. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Anna+Giacalone+Ramat+and+Paolo+Ramat%2E+2006%2E+The+Indo%2DEuropean+Languages%2E+Routledge%2C+New+York%2E)
15. Beatrice Santorini. 1990. Part-of-speech tagging guidelines for the Penn Treebank Project. University of Pennsylvania. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Beatrice+Santorini%2E+1990%2E+Part%2Dof%2Dspeech+tagging+guidelines+for+the+Penn+Treebank+Project%2E+University+of+Pennsylvania%2E)
16. Michael Swan and Bernard Smith. 2001. Learner English (2nd Ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Michael+Swan+and+Bernard+Smith%2E+2001%2E+Learner+English+%282nd+Ed%2E%29%2E+Cambridge+University+Press%2C+Cambridge%2E)
17. Sze-Meng J. Wong and Mark Dras. 2009. Contrastive analysis and native language identification. In Proc. Australasian Language Technology Workshop, pages 53–61. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Sze%2DMeng+J%2E+Wong+and+Mark+Dras%2E+2009%2E+Contrastive+analysis+and+native+language+identification%2E+In+Proc%2E+Australasian+Language+Technology+Workshop%2C+pages+53%E2%80%9361%2E)

*Updated 1 November 2026*