For a new semiotics in Construction Grammar: A statistical analysis of the relationship between transitive syntax and semantics

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Lepesqueur ◽  
Adriana Maria Tenuta
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Estimating Equation ◽  
Construction Grammar ◽  
Formal Structure ◽  
Semantic Interpretation ◽  
Formal Organization ◽  
Global Pattern ◽  
Semiotic Model ◽  
Irregular Structures

Abstract By extending the notion of constructions beyond “irregular” structures, Goldberg (1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press) made possible the analysis of clause units as a global pattern associating syntax to principles for semantic interpretation. Despite this theoretical advance, Construction Grammar’s pairing of syntactic structure and conceptual form reflects Saussure’s signifier/signified semiotic model, which poses some issues. Problems arise when a single formal structure expresses distinct semantic patterns or, conversely, when semantics persists notwithstanding formal variation. In order to approach this unstable syntax/semantics interface, this work proposes a statistical methodology to capture the correlation between syntax and Hopper and Thompson's (1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56(2). 251–299) parameters of transitivity. In a corpus of 7,939 clauses from 23 oral interviews, 690 randomly sampled clause units were analyzed using Generalized Estimating Equation. The data suggests that, in Brazilian Portuguese, most of those parameters are not particularly related to the prototypical transitive syntax and might be specified outside the scope of this clausal structure. Nonetheless, Affectedness is a syntax/semantic interface point that is, first, largely independent of lexical items and, second, capable of distinguishing transitive syntax from other clausal patterns. Based on this analysis, we conceive the Transitive Construction as a superordinate rule that acts upon the formal organization of a language, establishing clausal patterns both synchronically and diachronically.

Argument structure licensing and Englishhave

2011 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
KYUMIN KIM
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Argument Structure ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Causative Constructions ◽  
Theoretical Claim ◽  
Possessive Constructions ◽  
Typological Classification

This paper provides a unified syntactic account of the distribution of Englishhavein causative constructions (e.g.John had Mary read a book) and experiencer constructions (e.g.John had the student walk out of his classroom). It is argued thathaveis realized in the context of anapplicative head(Appl) and an event-introducer v, regardless of the type of v.Haveis spelled out in the causative when Appl merges under vCAUSE, and in the experiencer construction when Appl merges under vBE. This proposal is extended tohavein possessive constructions (e.g.John has a hat/a brother):haveis realized in the context of vBEand Appl. The proposed account provides empirical evidence for expanding the distribution of Appl: (i) a causative can take ApplP as a complement, which was absent in Pylkkänen's (2008) typological classification, and (ii) Appl can merge above Voice, contrary to Pylkkänen's analysis in which Appl is argued to always merge below VoiceP, never above. Moreover, the proposed account supports the theoretical claim that argument structure is licensed by functional syntactic structure; in particular, it shows that the relevant functional heads are not aspectual heads, but Appl and v.

scholarly journals Moving in a Gyre: A Discourse Analysis of President Rouhani’s De Facto Inaugural Speech

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 237
Author(s):  
Rahman Sahragard ◽  
Meisam Moghadam
Keyword(s):  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
Critical Discourse Analysis ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Cognitive Model ◽  
Social Background ◽  
Formal Structure ◽  
Critical Discourse ◽  
Lexical Choice ◽  
Inaugural Speech ◽  
Political Groups

<em>The purpose of this study is to critically analyze the discourse of the de facto inaugural speech presented by president Rouhani while receiving his presidential percept from the leader, to seek the ideology beyond his speech and to detect the point that to which of discourses, reformists’ or principalists’, Rouhani’s discourse belong to. Based on Dijk’s socio-cognitive model of critical discourse analysis the selected corpus’ ideological and persuasive components are assessed. To this end and based on the model, the historical, political or social background of the election is discussed firstly. Then, the political groups and parties, specifically reformists and principalists, their ideologies and power relations are elaborated. Finally, based on the examination of all formal structure, lexical choice and syntactic structure, the presupposed and the implied notions are made explicit, to determine the ideology beyond the formal text. Comparing the extracted notions from the speech with the polarized viewpoints of two political parties, it was concluded that Rouhani tried to keep the golden middle path while presenting his ideas, trying to introduce himself a moderate person and base all his plans on moderation. His speech revealed the strategies to move in a gyre of ideas trying to avoid condemning any party or person of eminence in line to keep all parties in one line to make his move.</em>

A construction grammar analysis of the transitivebeperfect in present-day Canadian English

2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 157-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
YURI YERASTOV
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Construction Grammar ◽  
Syntactic Analysis ◽  
Underlying Structure ◽  
Canadian English ◽  
Syntactic Theory ◽  
Fixed Material ◽  
Grammar Analysis ◽  
Generative Approach ◽  
Surface Realization

This article offers a syntactic analysis of the construction [be doneNP], e.g.I am done dinner, I am finished my homework, as found in Canadian English and some US dialects. After situating this construction in the context of a productive transitivebeperfect in Scots/English dialects, [be doneNP] will be distinguished from a set of its conceptual and structural relatives, and ultimately be shown not to be reducible to a surface realization of another underlying structure. From the perspective of syntactic theory, the article problematizes the parsimony of the mainstream generative approach (most recently in MacFadden & Alexiadou 2010) in accounting for the facts of [be doneNP] on strictly compositional grounds, as well as the mainstream view of lexical items as projecting theta grids and subcategorization frames (as e.g. in Grimshaw 1979; Emonds 2000). Following Fillmoreet al.(1988), Goldberg (1995, 2005) and others, what will be suggested instead is a construction grammar approach to [be doneNP], under which a construction holistically licenses its argument structure. Along these lines [be doneNP] will be characterized as an abstract construction with some fixed material.

Argument structure satisfaction via unselected adjuncts

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seiko Fujii ◽  
Russell Lee-Goldman
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Speech Act ◽  
Construction Grammar ◽  
Main Clause ◽  
Semantic Approach ◽  
The Core ◽  
Frame Element

Abstract This paper presents a frame-based constructional approach to argument structure satisfaction via unselected adjuncts, by focusing on one such case in Japanese. It points out an intriguing constructional phenomenon whereby causal adjunct clauses marked with node ‘because’, as used with main-clause predicates that evoke communication frames (such as Telling and Warning), serve to satisfy main-clause argument structure. The node clause precedes the main-clause speech act of telling/warning, and can be interpreted as a speech-act causal (Sweetser 1990). The node clause at the same time conveys the content of informing or warning, i.e., the core Frame Element message, which is absent as a main-clause complement. This analysis of argument structure satisfaction via unselected adjuncts provides evidence for a Frame Semantic approach to argument structure that incorporates Construction Grammar.

Scope Marking at the Syntax-Semantics Interface

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veneeta Dayal ◽  
Deepak Alok
Keyword(s):  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Semantic Interpretation ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Ongoing Research ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Embedded Clauses ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Semantic Properties

Natural language allows questioning into embedded clauses. One strategy for doing so involves structures like the following: [CP-1 whi [TP DP V [CP-2 … ti …]]], where a wh-phrase that thematically belongs to the embedded clause appears in the matrix scope position. A possible answer to such a question must specify values for the fronted wh-phrase. This is the extraction strategy seen in languages like English. An alternative strategy involves a structure in which there is a distinct wh-phrase in the matrix clause. It is manifested in two types of structures. One is a close analog of extraction, but for the extra wh-phrase: [CP-1 whi [TP DP V [CP-2 whj [TP…t­j­…]]]]. The other simply juxtaposes two questions, rather than syntactically subordinating the second one: [CP-3 [CP-1 whi [TP…]] [CP-2 whj [TP…]]]. In both versions of the second strategy, the wh-phrase in CP-1 is invariant, typically corresponding to the wh-phrase used to question propositional arguments. There is no restriction on the type or number of wh-phrases in CP-2. Possible answers must specify values for all the wh-phrases in CP-2. This strategy is variously known as scope marking, partial wh movement or expletive wh questions. Both strategies can occur in the same language. German, for example, instantiates all three possibilities: extraction, subordinated, as well as sequential scope marking. The scope marking strategy is also manifested in in-situ languages. Scope marking has been subjected to 30 years of research and much is known at this time about its syntactic and semantic properties. Its pragmatics properties, however, are relatively under-studied. The acquisition of scope marking, in relation to extraction, is another area of ongoing research. One of the reasons why scope marking has intrigued linguists is because it seems to defy central tenets about the nature of wh scope taking. For example, it presents an apparent mismatch between the number of wh expressions in the question and the number of expressions whose values are specified in the answer. It poses a challenge for our understanding of how syntactic structure feeds semantic interpretation and how alternative strategies with similar functions relate to each other.

Supplemental relative clauses: Internal and external syntax

2012 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 573-608 ◽  
Author(s):  
RUSSELL LEE-GOLDMAN
Keyword(s):  
Internal Structure ◽  
Linear Order ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Construction Grammar ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Order Constraints ◽  
Syntactic Constraints ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses

The internal syntactic structures of restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses are largely identical. This paper argues that despite a uniform internal structure, the external distributions – specifically, linearization with respect to the head – of non-restrictive relative clauses are subject to several conditions. In particular, sentential non-restrictive relative clauses with which and what can appear to the left of their heads in limited (and distinct) syntactic contexts. These lexical and syntactic constraints are represented within the framework of Sign-based Construction Grammar. In light of these observations, the paper revisits claims about the internal structure of parenthetical as-clauses. Prior claims that as cannot be a relativizer are shown to be unfounded, and new data are presented in favor of treating them as relative clauses with the external distribution of sentential adverbials. This is possible given the ability to state separately specifications of construction-internal syntactic structure and construction-external linear-order constraints.

Cognitive vs. generative construction grammar: The case of coercion and argument structure

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 613-632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Remi van Trijp
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Argument Structure ◽  
Construction Grammar ◽  
Alternative Solution ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
Competence Model ◽  
Problem Solving Model

AbstractOne of the most salient hallmarks of construction grammar is its approach to argument structure and coercion: rather than positing many different verb senses in the lexicon, the same lexical construction may freely interact with multiple argument structure constructions. This view has however been criticized from within the construction grammar movement for leading to overgeneration. This paper argues that this criticism falls flat for two reasons: (1) lexicalism, which is the alternative solution proposed by the critics, has already been proven to overgenerate itself, and (2) the argument of overgeneration becomes void if grammar is implemented as a problem-solving model rather than as a generative competence model; a claim that the paper substantiates through a computational operationalization of argument structure and coercion in Fluid Construction Grammar. The paper thus shows that the current debate on argument structure is hiding a much more fundamental rift between practitioners of construction grammar that touches upon the role of grammar itself.

Grammaticalisation through constructions

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 159-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Debra Ziegeler
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Construction Grammar ◽  
Frequency Of Use ◽  
Gradual Development ◽  
Repeated Use ◽  
Verb Meaning ◽  
Diachronic Development ◽  
Over Time

Recent arguments by Langacker (2003) on the nature of verb meanings in constructions claim that such meanings are created by entrenchment and frequency of use, and only with repeated use can they become conventionalised and acceptable. Such a position raises the need for a diachronic perspective on Construction Grammar. The present paper investigates the evolution of constructions through the example of thehave-causative in English, which appears to have had its origins as a transfer verb in telic argument structure constructions. When the construction contains a transfer verb, construction meaning reinforces verb meaning and periphrastic causatives may grammaticalise as output; this is a gradual development over time. In one way, then, the verbhavegrammaticalises across a succession of constructions, but in another, the telic argument structure construction itself is seen to have a progressive diachronic development.

scholarly journals Working out multiword verbs within an Applied Cognitive Construction Grammar framework

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-86
Author(s):  
Sergio Torres-Martínez
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Construction Grammar ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Linguistic Knowledge ◽  
Cognitive Mechanisms ◽  
Focus On Form ◽  
Working Out ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Cognitive Construction Grammar

AbstractThis article presents a constructionist approach to the teaching of multiword verbs. To that end, I outline a pedagogical model, Applied Cognitive Construction Grammar (ACCxG), which is deemed to provide insight into a novel classification of multiword verbs as constructions (form-function pairings). The ACCxG framework integrates four cognitively-driven rationales, namely Focus on Form, Task-based Language Teaching, Data-driven Learning, and Paper-based Data-Driven Learning. It is argued that the syntax-semantics of multiword verbs can be better understood through recourse to their relation with syntactic constructions (Argument Structure Constructions). Endorsing this rationale entails, among other things, the recognition that the same general cognitive mechanisms intervening in the construction of our experience of the world are at play during the construction of linguistic knowledge.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document