** ICE-GB**

**4.6 SPSS Analysis of the Quantitative Data**

The study employs the use of SPSS analysis so as to describe the significance and insignificance of each category. Statistical analysis makes it possible to describe this. The analysis has been approached manually before the invention of the statistical software tools.

Now that the software is available, it saves time as well as eases the analytical procedures with accuracy and clarity.

This section attempts to quantitatively answer research question two (RQ2) “How do the patterns of use of the preposition of in ICE-Nig. compare to those in ICE-GB?”

105 Figure 4.3 Categories and the percentages shared across the two corpora The uneven distribution of the preposition appears to be clear across the categorization paradigm in both of the corpora with Process Relationship Category emerging as the highest in ICE-Nig. and Attributive Relationship category being the topmost in the ICE-GB. Differences have been described in respect of each category. The level of significance of the differences of the use of the preposition of in each category is stated. As in the tradition of the statistical analysis, this leads to the acceptance or rejection of the null hypotheses, the heading of each category.

*p<α *

*p<α *

*p<α *

*p<α *

*p<α *

106

**``4.6.1 Null Hypothesis 1: **There is equal proportion of frequency in *Partitive Relationship *
*Category of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB. *

** Table 4.2a Descriptive statistics results for Partitive Relationship frequencies **
Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual
ICE-Nig.

ICE-GB Total

44 56 100

126 162 288

144.0 144.0 288

-18.0 18.0

Partitive

**Figure 4.4 Distributions of Partitive Relationship Frequencies across ICE-Nig. and **
**ICE-GB **

As Table 4.2a and Figure 4.4 indicate, the percentage of occurrence of the proposition of is lower in ICE-Nig. (44%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (56%).

** Table 4.2b Chi-square Results for Partitive Relationship **

**Parameters ** **Partitive **

Chi-Square 4.500^{a}

Df 1

Asymp. Sig. .034

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5.

The minimum expected cell frequency is 144.0.

107
Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=287) = 4.50, p = .034, (Table *
4.2a) this difference was statistically significant. That is, the *partitive relationship category has *
been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a higher number of occurences in
ICE-GB. This leads to the rejection of the nul hypothesis and it proves that there is a
sinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the Partitive category across the two
corpora as alpha is <.05

**4.6.2 Null Hypothesis 2: There is equal proportion of frequency in Content Relationship Category **
of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB.

**Table 4.3a Descriptive Statistics Results for Content Relationship Frequencies **
Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 63 60 47.5 12.5

ICE-GB 37 35 47.5 -12.5

Total 100 95 95

Content

**Figure 4.5 Distributions of Content Relationship Frequencies across ICE-Nig. and **
**ICE-GB **

As Table 4.3a and Figure 4.5 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the proposition is higher in ICE-Nig. (63%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (37%).

108
**Table 4.3b Chi-square Results for Content Relationship **

Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2} (1, *N=95) = 6, p *= .010
(Table 4.3a) this difference was statistically significant. That is, the content relationship
category has been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a higher
number of occurences in ICE-Nig. This leads to the rejection of the nul hypothesis and it
proves that there is a sinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the Content
category across the two corpora as alpha is <.05

**4.6.3 Null Hypothesis 3: There is equal proportion of frequency in Quantitative Relationship **
*Categories of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB. *

**Table 4.4a Descriptive Statistics Results for Quantitative Relationship Frequencies **
Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 48 61 64.0 -3.0

ICE-GB 52 67 64.0 3.0

Total 100 128 128

**Parameters ** **Content **

Chi-Square 6.579^{a}

df 1

Asymp. Sig. .010

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 47.5.

109
**Figure 4.6 Distributions of Quantitative Relationship Frequencies across ICE-Nig. **

**and ICE-GB **

As Table 4.4a and Figure 4.6 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the proposition is lower in ICE-Nig. (48%) as compared with that of ICE-GB Corpus (52%).

** Table 4.4b Chi-square Results for Quantitative Relationship **

Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=128) = .281, p = .596, *
(Table 4.4a) this difference was statistically insignificant. That is, the quantitative
relationship category has been closely distributed across the two corpora with slightly
higher number of occurences in ICE-GB. This leads to the acceptance of the nul hypothesis
and it proves that there is an insinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the
Quantitative category across the two corpora as alpha is >.05

**4.6.4 Null Hypothesis 4: There is equal proportion of frequency in Extent Relationship Categories **
of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB.

** Parameters ** ** Quantitative **

Chi-Square .281^{a}

Df 1

Asymp. Sig. .596

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 64.0.

110
** Table 4.5a Descriptive Statistics Results for Extent Relationship Frequencies**

Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 48 57 59.0 -2.0

ICE-GB 52 61 59.0 2.0

Total 100 118 118

**Figure 4.7 Distributions of Extent Relationship Frequencies across Nig. and **
**ICE-GB **

As Table 4.5a and Figure 4.7 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the proposition is lower in ICE-Nig. (48%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (52%).

**Table 4.5b Chi-square results for Extent Relationship **

**Parameters ** **Extent **

Chi-Square df Asymp Sig

.136^{a }
1
.713
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5.

The minimum expected cell frequency is 59.0.

Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=118) = .136, p = .713, *
(Table 5a) this difference was statistically insignificant. Extent relationship category has
been closely distributed across the two corpora with slightly higher number of occurences
in ICE-GB. This leads to the acceptance of the nul hypothesis and it proves that there is an

111 insignificant difference in the use of the preposition in the Extent category across the two corpora as alpha is >.05

**4.6.5 Null Hypothesis 5: There is equal proportion of frequency in ***Source Relationship *
*Categories of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB. *

** Table 4.6a Descriptive Statistics Results for Source Relationship Frequencies **
Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 53 20 19.0 1.0

ICE-GB 47 18 19.0 -1.0

Total 100 38 38

**Figure 4.8 Distribution of Source Relationship Frequency across Nig. and **
**ICE-GB **

As Table 4.6a and Figure 4.8 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the proposition is higher in ICE-Nig. (53%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (47%).

** Table 4.6b Chi-square Results for Source Relationship **

**Parameters ** **Source **

Chi-Square .105^{a}

Df 1

Asymp. Sig. .746

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5.

The minimum expected cell frequency is 19.0.

112
Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=38) = 105, p = .746, *
(Table 4.6a) this difference was statistically insignificant. That is, the source relationship
category has been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a higher
number of occurences in ICE-Nig. This leads to the acceptance of the nul hypothesis and it
proves that there is an insinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the Source
category across the two corpora as alpha is >.05

**4.6.6 Null Hypothesis 6: There is equal proportion of frequency in Attributive Relationship **
*Categories of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB. *

**Table 4.7a Descriptive Statistics Results for Attributive Relationship Frequencies**
Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 30 82 137.0 -55.0

ICE-GB 70 192 137.0 55.0

Total 100 274 274

**Figure 4.9 Distributions of Attributive Relationship Frequencies across ICE-Nig. and **
**ICE-GB **

113 As Table 4.7a and Figure 4.9 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the proposition is lower in ICE-Nig. (30%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (70%).

** Table 4.7b Chi-Square Results for Attributive Relationship **

**Parameters ** ** Attributive **

Chi-Square 44.161^{a}

Df 1

Asymp. Sig. .000

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5.

The minimum expected cell frequency is 137.0.

Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2} (1, *N=274) = 44.161, p *=
.000, (Table 4.7a) this difference was statistically significant. That is, the attributive
relationship category has been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a
higher number of occurences in ICE-GB. This leads to the rejection of the nul hypothesis
and it proves that there is a sinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the
Attribution category as alpha is < .05

**4.6.7 Null Hypothesis 7: There is equal proportion of frequency in Temporal Relationship **
*Categories of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB. *

**Table 4.8a Descriptive Statistics Results for Temporal Relationship Frequencies**
Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 53 19 18.0 1.0

ICE-GB 47 17 18.0 -1.0

Total 100 36 36

114
**Figure 4.10 Distributions of Temporal Relationship Frequencies across ICE-Nig. and **
**ICE-GB **

As Table 4.8 and Figure 4.10 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the proposition is higher in ICE-Nig. (53%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (47%).

**Table 4.8b Chi-square Results for Temporal Relationship **

**Parameters ** **Temporal **

Chi-Square .111^{a}

Df 1

Asymp. Sig. .739

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5.

The minimum expected cell frequency is 18.0.

Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=36) = .111, p =.739, *
(Table 4.8a) this difference was statistically significant. That is, the Temoral relationship
category has been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a higher
number of occurences in ICE-Nig. This leads to the acceptance of the nul hypothesis and it
proves that there is an insinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the Temporal
category across the two corpora as alpha is >.05.

**4.6.8 Null Hypothesis 8: There is equal proportion of frequency in Cause Relationship Categories **
of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB.

115
** Table 4.9a Descriptive Statistics Results for Cause Relationship Frequencies **

Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 61 40 33.0 7.0

ICE-GB 39 26 33.0 -7.0

Total 100 66 66

**Figure 4.11 Distributions of Cause Relationship Frequencies across ICE-Nig. and **
**ICE-GB **

As Table 4.9a and Figure 4.11 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the proposition is higher in ICE-Nig. (61%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (39%).

**Table 4.9b Chi-square Results for Cause Relationship **

**Parameters ** **Cause **

Chi-Square 2.970^{a}

df 1

Asymp. Sig. .085

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 33.0.

Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=66) = 2.970, p=.085, *
(Table 4.9a) this difference was statistically insignificant. That is, the cause relationship
category has been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a higher
number of occurences in ICE-Nig. This leads to the acceptance of the nul hypothesis and it

116 proves that there is an insinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the Cause category across the two corpora as alpha is >.05.

**4.6.9 Null Hypothesis 9: There is equal proportion of frequency in Possessive Relationship **
*Cate-gories of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB. *

**Table 4.10a Descriptive Statistics Results for Possessive Relationship Frequencies **
Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 56 28 25.0 3.0

ICE-GB 44 22 25.0 -3.0

Total 100 50 50

**Figure 4.12 Distributions of Possessive Relationship Frequencies across ICE-Nig. and **
**ICE-GB **

As Table 4.10a and Figure 4.12 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the pre- position is higher in ICE-Nig. (56%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (44%).

**Table 4.10b Chi-square Results for Possessive Relationship **

**Parameters ** **Possessive **

Chi-Square .720^{a}

df 1

Asymp. Sig. .396

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 25.0.

117
Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=50) = .720, p =.396, *
(Table 4.10a) this difference was statistically significant. That is, the possessive
relationship category has been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a
higher number of occurences in ICE-Nig. This leads to the acceptance of the nul hypothesis
and it proves that there is an insinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the
Possession category across the two corpora as alpha is >.05.

**4.6.10 Null Hypothesis 10: There is equal proportion of frequency in Position/Location Relation**
*-ship Categories of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB. *

**Table 4.11a Descriptive Statistics Results for Position/Location Relationship **
**Frequencies **

**Figure 4.13 Distributions of Position/Location Relationship Frequencies across **
**ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB **

Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 26 20 38.5 -18.5

ICE-GB 74 57 38.5 18.5

Total 100 77 77

118 As Table 4.11a and Figure 4.13 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the proposition is lower in ICE-Nig. (26%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (74%).

** ****Table 4.11b Chi-square Results for Position/Location Relationship **

**Parameters ** **Position/Location **

Chi-Square 17.779^{a}

df 1

Asymp. Sig. .000

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5.

The minimum expected cell frequency is 38.5.

Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=77) = 17.779, p =.000, *
(Table 4.11a) this difference was statistically significant. That is, the Position/Location
relationship category has been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a
higher number of occurences in ICE-GB. This leads to the rejection of the nul hypothesis
and it proves that there is an insinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the
Position/Location category across the two corpora as alpha is >.05.

**4.6.11 Null Hypothesis 11: There is equal proportion of frequency in Process Relationship **
*Cate-gories of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB. *

**Table 4.12a Descriptive Statistics Results for Process Relationship Frequencies **
Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 51 171 167.5 3.5

ICE-GB 49 164 167.5 -3.5

Total 100 335 335

119
**Figure 4.14 Distributions of Process Relationship Frequencies across ICE-Nig. and **
**ICE-GB **

As Table 4.12a and Figure 4.14 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the proposition is higher in ICE-Nig. (51.0%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (49.0%)

**Table 4.12b Chi-square Results for Process Relationship **

**Parameters ** **Process **

Chi-Square .146^{a}

Df 1

Asymp. Sig. .702

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5.

The minimum expected cell frequency is 167.5.

Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=335) = .146, p =.702, *
(Table 4.12a) this difference was statistically significant. That is, the process relationship
category has been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a higher
number of occurences in ICE-Nig. This leads to the acceptance of the nul hypothesis and it
proves that there is an insinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the Process
category across the two corpora as alpha is >.05.

**4.6.12 Null Hypothesis 12: There is equal proportion of frequency in Separate-From Relationship **
*Categories of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB. *

120
**Table 4.13a Descriptive Statistics Results for Separate-From Relationship Frequencies**

Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 67 8 6.0 2.0

ICE-GB 33 4 6.0 -2.0

Total 100 12 12

**Figure 4.15 Distributions of Separate-From Relationship Frequencies across ICE-Nig. **

**and ICE-GB **

As Table 4.13a and Figure 4.15 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the pre-position is higher in ICE-Nig. (67%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (33%).

**Table 4.13b Chi-square Results for Separate-From Relationship **

**Parameters ** **Separate-From **

Chi-Square 1.333^{a}

Df 1

Asymp. Sig. .248

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5.

The minimum expected cell frequency is 6.0.

Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=12) = 1.333, p =.248, *
(Table 4.13a) this difference was statistically significant. That is, the Separate-From
relationship category has been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a
higher number of occurences in ICE-Nig. This leads to the acceptance of the nul hypothesis

121 and it proves that there is an insinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the Separate-From category across the two corpora as alpha is >.05.

**4.6.13 Null Hypothesis 13: There is equal proportion of frequency in Loss Relationship Categories **
of the preposition of across ICE-Nig. and ICE-GB

**Table 4.14a Descriptive Statistics Results for Loss Relationship Frequencies **
Parameters Percent Observed N Expected N Residual

ICE-Nig. 19 7 18.0 -11.0

ICE-GB 81 29 18.0 11.0

Total 100 36 36

**Figure 4.16 Distributions of Loss Relationship Frequencies across Nig. and **
**ICE-GB **

As Table 4.14a and Figure 4.16 indicate, the overall percentage of occurrence of the proposition is lower in ICE-Nig. (19%) as compared with that of ICE-GB (81%)

122
**Table 4.14b Chi-square Results for Loss Relationship **

**Parameters ** **Loss **

Chi-Square 13.444^{a}

Df 1

Asymp. Sig. .000

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5.

The minimum expected cell frequency is 18.0.

Based on the results of Goodness of fit Chi Square, X^{2}* (1, N=36) =13 .444, p =.000, *
(Table 4.14a) this difference was statistically significant. That is, the Loss relationship
category has been disproportionately distributed across the two corpora with a higher
number of occurences in ICE-GB. This leads to the rejection of the nul hypothesis and it
proves that there is a insinificant difference in the use of the preposition in the Loss
category across the two corpora as alpha is >.05.