{"title":"构式语法中的语义与语用","authors":"Benoît Leclercq","doi":"10.1075/BJL.00048.LEC","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This squib provides a theoretical discussion on the use of the terms semantics and\n pragmatics in Construction Grammar. In the literature, the difference between semantics and pragmatics is often\n conceptualized either in terms of conventionality or in terms of truth-conditionality (Huang\n 2014, 299). It will be shown that, even though constructionists claim that there is no semantics–pragmatics distinction, both these\n underlying concepts are central to the study of constructions. Therefore, the aim is twofold. First, in keeping with Cappelle (2017), it will be argued that constructionists should make more explicit the distinction between the two\n types of (encoded) meaning. Second, it will be shown that constructionists need to be more terminologically consistent and agree on how to\n use the terms semantics and pragmatics. Following Depraetere\n (2019), I will argue that the terms semantics and pragmatics are most explanatory when defined in\n truth-conditional terms. In this way, finer-grained understanding of the meaning of constructions can be achieved.","PeriodicalId":414884,"journal":{"name":"Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Volume 34 (2020)","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Semantics and pragmatics in Construction Grammar\",\"authors\":\"Benoît Leclercq\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/BJL.00048.LEC\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This squib provides a theoretical discussion on the use of the terms semantics and\\n pragmatics in Construction Grammar. In the literature, the difference between semantics and pragmatics is often\\n conceptualized either in terms of conventionality or in terms of truth-conditionality (Huang\\n 2014, 299). It will be shown that, even though constructionists claim that there is no semantics–pragmatics distinction, both these\\n underlying concepts are central to the study of constructions. Therefore, the aim is twofold. First, in keeping with Cappelle (2017), it will be argued that constructionists should make more explicit the distinction between the two\\n types of (encoded) meaning. Second, it will be shown that constructionists need to be more terminologically consistent and agree on how to\\n use the terms semantics and pragmatics. Following Depraetere\\n (2019), I will argue that the terms semantics and pragmatics are most explanatory when defined in\\n truth-conditional terms. In this way, finer-grained understanding of the meaning of constructions can be achieved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":414884,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Volume 34 (2020)\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Volume 34 (2020)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/BJL.00048.LEC\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Volume 34 (2020)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/BJL.00048.LEC","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
This squib provides a theoretical discussion on the use of the terms semantics and
pragmatics in Construction Grammar. In the literature, the difference between semantics and pragmatics is often
conceptualized either in terms of conventionality or in terms of truth-conditionality (Huang
2014, 299). It will be shown that, even though constructionists claim that there is no semantics–pragmatics distinction, both these
underlying concepts are central to the study of constructions. Therefore, the aim is twofold. First, in keeping with Cappelle (2017), it will be argued that constructionists should make more explicit the distinction between the two
types of (encoded) meaning. Second, it will be shown that constructionists need to be more terminologically consistent and agree on how to
use the terms semantics and pragmatics. Following Depraetere
(2019), I will argue that the terms semantics and pragmatics are most explanatory when defined in
truth-conditional terms. In this way, finer-grained understanding of the meaning of constructions can be achieved.