1. Introduction

The importance of causal phenomena in multiple disciplines was discussed, and it was pointed out that BECASUSE and SINCE, as commonly used causal conjunctions in English, have similar usage but internal differences. Explored the factors behind the interchangeability and variability of these two conjunctions, as well as the semantic parameters and roles they conceptualize. The article aims to explore in depth the syntactic, semantic, pragmatic, cognitive, and discourse dimensions of BECASUSE and SINCE through a construction perspective and multiple correspondence analysis, revealing their categorization characteristics and deep cognitive mechanisms.

2. Literature review

This paper reviews the research on causal conjunctions BECASUSE and SINCE, and explores their usage characteristics in vocabulary, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, cognition, and discourse. BECASUSE and SINCE are difficult to distinguish in terms of lexical meaning, and in syntax, BECASUSE clauses are often located at the beginning of the sentence, while SINCE clauses are located at the end. Semantically, both can represent direct and indirect causes, while pragmatically and cognitively, SINCE tends to express preset meanings. In terms of discourse, causal conjunctions embody the characteristics of cohesion and coherence. Previous studies have deepened our understanding of causal structures, but there are still shortcomings, such as inconsistent prototype interpretation, unclear classification criteria, and insufficient specific research. This article will use multiple correspondence analysis from a structural perspective to statistically examine the variability and interchangeability of BECASUSE and SINCE, aiming to answer questions about core variable characteristics, driving factors, and contribution ranking.

3. Research Design

This chapter introduces the design of empirical research on causal structural force dynamics, including research methods and steps. The research method adopts corpus based behavioral feature analysis and multidimensional scaling (MCA) to analyze the causal conjunctions BECASUSE and SINCE from a construction perspective. MCA uses dimensionality reduction techniques to examine the degree and type of correlation between categorical variables, and uses concept space maps to represent the distance between variables, reflecting the strength of the correlation. The research steps include corpus collection and annotation. The corpus comes from the BNCweb corpus, and the BECASUSE and SINCE constructions are retrieved through regular expressions. After cleaning and organizing, 1000 of them are randomly selected as research objects. Corpus annotation is conducted from the dimensions of syntax, semantics, pragmatics, cognition, and discourse, involving 6 conceptual variables and 13 variable levels. The annotation parameters include causal order, barrier markers, force dynamics, force dynamics type, force dynamics domain, and result type. To ensure the quality of annotation, five annotators independently annotated and cross checked, and the author conducted the final verification.

4. Research has found that

Through multidimensional comparative analysis (MCA), the core conceptual variable characteristics of the causal constructs BECASUSE and SINCE were explored. Research has found that these two constructs exhibit centrosymmetric distributions in a two-dimensional concept space map, with the BECASUSE construct tending to describe static features and the SINCE construct tending to express dynamically changing events. There is a mutual influence and constraint relationship between syntactic hierarchy and dynamic semantic hierarchy. In addition, the prototype usage of BECASUSE construction and SINCE construction is completely different, without fuzzy intersection, but their variable horizontal boundaries are fuzzy and there is mutual infiltration. The BECASUSE configuration is more widely used than the SINCE configuration. Among the 13 variable levels, the harmonious relationship and enabling type contribute the most to the variability of the two constructs, making them difficult to achieve interchangeability.

5. Discussion

Explored in depth the prototype usage and differences between the BECASUSE and SINCE constructions. The BECASUSE construction is characterized by "causal order" and "objective force dynamics", emphasizing objective facts and less reliance on cognitive reasoning, while the SINCE construction is characterized by "obstructive markers" and "subjective force dynamics", tending towards conditional inferential causal relationships. Although the two constructions have independent prototype usage, they can be interchanged in certain situations, especially when it comes to variable levels of "obstructive", "causative", "antagonistic", and "dynamic features". The study validated this concept overlap and interchangeability through a questionnaire survey. In addition, the article also analyzed the tightness of the concept fusion of causal complex sentences, pointing out that the positions of BECASUSE and SINCE constructions in the dynamic continuity of causal forces are different. The mutual influence and constraint relationship between their variable levels reveal the strength of the correlation between concepts, which affects the directness of causal relationships.

6. Conclusion

Summarized the multidimensional empirical research results of corpus based causal conjunctions BECASUSE and SINCE. Research has found that: 1) The initial meaning of conjunctions in the BECASUSE and SINCE constructions plays a key role in categorization, with typical examples representing the initial meaning, and different levels of core variables approaching their respective prototype categories. 2) There is no conceptual overlap between the two constructs when representing prototype features, but there is overlap when representing atypical examples. Interchangeability and variability are driven by specific variable levels. 3) The two constructs are located at different positions in the dynamic continuum of causal forces, with variables horizontally influencing and constraining each other. Insufficient research: only examined the differences in two dimensions, which can be expanded to more dimensions in the future; Only two constructs were examined, and in the future, the corpus can be expanded to investigate more constructs for a comprehensive, multi-level, and multi-dimensional exploration.