{"title":"She has a stadium named after her","authors":"Berit Johannsen","doi":"10.1075/cf.00057.joh","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00057.joh","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000In English, sequences consisting of the verb have, a noun phrase and a past participle vary in meaning. This meaning variation has been discussed both in the context of grammatical description and language change, mostly based on a handful of examples. This study seeks to combine theoretical and methodological approaches from construction grammar and interactional linguistics in the description of this meaning variation. Theoretically, this implies distinguishing between abstracted meaning potential and situated meaning of linguistic elements. Methodologically, this means taking both a coarse-grained view by means of a quantitative corpus-based approach that abstracts over a number of instances and a fine-grained view by means of qualitative analysis of talk-in-interaction.","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48441856","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Verbo-Nominal Constructions with kommen ‘come’ in German","authors":"E. Smirnova, Vanessa Stöber","doi":"10.1075/cf.00060.smi","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00060.smi","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The paper presents the results of a diachronic study of the light verb constructions containing the German verb kommen ‘come’ accompanied by a prepositional phrase containing a deverbal noun and the preposition zu ‘to’. The analysis is based on the corpus data from the DTA (DeutschesTextarchiv) between 1600 and 1900. The aim of the paper is to integrate traditional grammatical descriptions of Funktionsverbgefüge with grammaticalization and lexicalization approaches as well as with more recent usage-based constructionist approaches. In doing so, the view of composite predicates as more or less grammaticalized or more or less lexicalized constructions will be challenged by offering empirical evidence in favor of a more diversified account. It will be argued that it is often a matter of the methodological perspective as to which particular status is assigned to a structure under investigation.","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46685742","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Clause linkage and degrees of grammaticalization","authors":"G. Diewald, Dániel Czicza, Volodymyr Dekalo","doi":"10.1075/cf.00061.czi","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00061.czi","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This paper deals with different types of verbal complementation of the German verb verdienen. It focuses on constructions that have been undergoing a grammaticalization process and thus express deontic modality, as in Sie verdient geliebt zu werden (ʽShe deserves to be lovedʼ) and Sie verdient zu leben (ʽShe deserves to liveʼ) (Diewald, Dekalo & Czicza 2021). These constructions are connected to parallel complementation types with passive and active infinitives containing a correlate es, as in Sie verdient es, geliebt zu werden and Sie verdient es, zu leben, as well as finite clauses with the subordinator dass with and without correlative es, as in Sie verdient, dass sie geliebt wird and Sie verdient es, dass sie geliebt wird. This paper attempts to show a close comparative investigation of these six types of constructions based on their relevant semantic and syntactic properties in terms of clause linkage (Lehmann 1988). We analyze the relevant data retrieved from the DWDS corpus of the 20th century and present an expanded grammaticalization path for verdienen-constructions. The finite complementation with dass is regarded as an example of a separate structural option called “elaboration”. Concerning the use of correlative es, it is shown that it does not have any substantial effect on the grammaticalization of modal verdienen-constructions.","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44582025","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The affactive få ‘get’ construction in Danish","authors":"P. Nielsen","doi":"10.1075/cf.00059.nie","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00059.nie","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000As in many other Germanic languages, Modern Danish combines the verb få ‘get’ and a semantic main verb in the supine form (the uninflected perfect participle). Three main types of the construction are found: an agentive type typically interpreted as expressing successful intentional action and two non-agentive types: one with a ditransitive main verb and promotion of the indirect object to subject status, and one with a non-valency-bound subject typically interpreted as a Beneficiary. Based on a functional framework, the paper presents a corpus study of the construction and an analysis unifying all three main types in a common Affactive Construction whose functional contribution is the specification of the subject as an Afficiary (Beneficiary or Maleficiary). The distinction between agentive and non-agentive interpretation is analysed as a voice distinction between active and passive.","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47467364","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Emerging into your family of constructions","authors":"F. V. Haegen, T. Bossuyt, T. Leuschner","doi":"10.1075/cf.00058.hae","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00058.hae","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Starting from the term “family of constructions”, the present article investigates lexical and syntactic variation\u0000 in a subtype of German concessive conditionals which is marked by was (‘what’) in combination with expressions of\u0000 irrelevance like egal (‘no matter’). 12,894 examples from the DeReKo corpus (Deutsches\u0000 Referenzkorpus) are analysed manually for seven variables. Both the quantitative and the qualitative results suggest\u0000 that combinations of was with an expression of irrelevance, or “[IRR was]” for short, form part\u0000 of a recently entrenched constructional schema [IRR w-] of concessive-conditional subordinators which are\u0000 emerging into the family of concessive-conditional constructions in present-day German.","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46782608","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"You don’t get to see that every day","authors":"M. Hilpert, Florent Perek","doi":"10.1075/cf.00056.hil","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00056.hil","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper contributes to the study of grammaticalization phenomena from the perspective of Construction Grammar\u0000 (Coussé et al. 2018). It is concerned with modal uses of the English verb\u0000 get that express a permitted action, as in The prisoners always get to make one phone call.\u0000 Different views exist on the contexts in which permissive get emerged. Gronemeyer (1999: 30) suggests that the permissive meaning derives from causative uses (I got him to\u0000 confess). An alternative is proposed by van der Auwera et al. (2009: 283),\u0000 who view permissive get as an extension of its acquisitive meaning (I got a present). We revisit\u0000 these claims in the light of recent historical data from American English. Specifically, we searched the COHA (Davies 2010) for forms of get followed by to and a verb\u0000 in the infinitive. Besides examples of permissive get, we retrieved examples of obligative got\u0000 to (I got to leave), causative get (Who did you get to confess?),\u0000 possessive got (What have I got to be ashamed of?), and a category that we label inchoative\u0000 get (You’re getting to be a big girl now). Drawing on distributional semantic techniques\u0000 (Perek 2016, 2018), we analyse how\u0000 permissive get and inchoative get developed semantically over time. Our results are consistent\u0000 with an account that represents an alternative to both Gronemeyer (1999) and van der Auwera et al. (2009), namely the idea that permissive get\u0000 evolved out of inchoative uses that invited the idea of a permission.","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41559165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Another look at the interaction between verbs and constructions","authors":"Seizi Iwata","doi":"10.1075/cf.21006.iwa","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.21006.iwa","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Despite the wealth of literature on English resultatives, there still remain a number of issues that have not been\u0000 squarely addressed. This paper addresses two of them through a case study of resultatives based on wipe. First,\u0000 while the existence of resultatives with objects not selected by verbs is well-known in the literature (e.g., wipe the\u0000 crumbs off the table/*wipe the crumbs), few studies have addressed the issue of exactly which entities may appear as\u0000 non-selected objects. Second, there are resultatives whose form is to be analyzed as a mixture of the verb’s lexically-specified\u0000 syntactic frame and the syntactic frame of resultatives (e.g. wipe the blade clean on his skin coat), but such\u0000 resultatives have been neglected in previous studies.\u0000 In order to find an answer to the first issue, this paper adopts a force-recipient account, according to which the\u0000 post-verbal NP of a resultative is a force-recipient (cf. Croft 1990, 1991, 1998, 2012). It is shown that non-selected objects like crumbs are indeed force-recipients in\u0000 a conceptual scene. As for the second issue, such resultatives can be accommodated by means of a constructional analysis which\u0000 holds that verbs contribute the semantics of the resulting expression, and that argument structure constructions simply enable the\u0000 verb meaning to take its form. Together, these findings indicate that verbs play a far more important role than argument structure\u0000 constructions in effecting the syntax and semantics of the resulting expression.","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43312592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"As if irony was in stock","authors":"Claudia Lehmann, Alexander T. Bergs","doi":"10.1075/cf.00053.leh","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00053.leh","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The linguistic treatment of verbal irony1 has more often than not focused on novel, ad hoc ironies. Research in the last decade, however, suggests that there is a considerable number of utterances that are either schematic or lexically filled and interpreted as ironic by convention. By analyzing three of these, i.e. Tell me about it, XP pro BE not (A Michelangelo he is not) and stand-alone insubordinate as if (As if anyone could pronounce that), the present paper will show that these expressions are best analyzed as constructions (Goldberg 1995, 2006). The paper will further show that the Viewpoint account of irony (Dancygier 2017; Tobin & Israel 2012) describes the data at hand most adequately.","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48055114","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Review of Petruck (2018): MetaNet","authors":"Lucia Busso","doi":"10.1075/cf.00054.bus","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00054.bus","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49504695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Review of Sommerer (2018): Article Emergence in Old English: A Constructionalist Perspective","authors":"William Standing","doi":"10.1075/cf.00055.sta","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00055.sta","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41743517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：