{"title":"语法创新的天衣无缝:be going to 的案例(再探)","authors":"Nadine Dietrich","doi":"10.1515/flin-2024-2004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I revisit the continued debate surrounding manner of grammatical innovation, i.e. whether it is <jats:sc>abrupt</jats:sc> or <jats:sc>gradual</jats:sc>. I show that the debate is complicated by different diagnostics for manner and argue that it is best understood in terms of <jats:sc>degree of similarity (</jats:sc>how similar the innovative use is to existing uses of a construction). However, even when adopting degree of similarity as a diagnostic, approaches differ with regards to how similar they find innovative and existing uses. The <jats:sc>gradualness</jats:sc> account argues that innovative uses are similar but distinct from existing uses, as they imply a new form-meaning pairing. A <jats:sc>seamlessness</jats:sc> account instead argues that innovative and existing uses are so similar that no new form-meaning pairing is required. I develop seamlessness into a theoretical position for semantic innovation in grammaticalization, which holds that grammatical innovations are maximally similar to existing uses i.e. they exhibit considerable conceptual overlap and the existing use is semantically underspecified. Seamlessness is empirically tested using semantic innovations in <jats:italic>be going to</jats:italic> as a case study.","PeriodicalId":45269,"journal":{"name":"Folia Linguistica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The seamlessness of grammatical innovation: the case of be going to (revisited)\",\"authors\":\"Nadine Dietrich\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/flin-2024-2004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper, I revisit the continued debate surrounding manner of grammatical innovation, i.e. whether it is <jats:sc>abrupt</jats:sc> or <jats:sc>gradual</jats:sc>. I show that the debate is complicated by different diagnostics for manner and argue that it is best understood in terms of <jats:sc>degree of similarity (</jats:sc>how similar the innovative use is to existing uses of a construction). However, even when adopting degree of similarity as a diagnostic, approaches differ with regards to how similar they find innovative and existing uses. The <jats:sc>gradualness</jats:sc> account argues that innovative uses are similar but distinct from existing uses, as they imply a new form-meaning pairing. A <jats:sc>seamlessness</jats:sc> account instead argues that innovative and existing uses are so similar that no new form-meaning pairing is required. I develop seamlessness into a theoretical position for semantic innovation in grammaticalization, which holds that grammatical innovations are maximally similar to existing uses i.e. they exhibit considerable conceptual overlap and the existing use is semantically underspecified. Seamlessness is empirically tested using semantic innovations in <jats:italic>be going to</jats:italic> as a case study.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45269,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Folia Linguistica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Folia Linguistica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2024-2004\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Folia Linguistica","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2024-2004","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The seamlessness of grammatical innovation: the case of be going to (revisited)
In this paper, I revisit the continued debate surrounding manner of grammatical innovation, i.e. whether it is abrupt or gradual. I show that the debate is complicated by different diagnostics for manner and argue that it is best understood in terms of degree of similarity (how similar the innovative use is to existing uses of a construction). However, even when adopting degree of similarity as a diagnostic, approaches differ with regards to how similar they find innovative and existing uses. The gradualness account argues that innovative uses are similar but distinct from existing uses, as they imply a new form-meaning pairing. A seamlessness account instead argues that innovative and existing uses are so similar that no new form-meaning pairing is required. I develop seamlessness into a theoretical position for semantic innovation in grammaticalization, which holds that grammatical innovations are maximally similar to existing uses i.e. they exhibit considerable conceptual overlap and the existing use is semantically underspecified. Seamlessness is empirically tested using semantic innovations in be going to as a case study.
期刊介绍:
Folia Linguistica covers all non-historical areas in the traditional disciplines of general linguistics (phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics), and also sociological, discoursal, computational and psychological aspects of language and linguistic theory. Other areas of central concern are grammaticalization and language typology. The journal consists of scientific articles presenting results of original research, review articles, overviews of research in specific areas, book reviews, and a miscellanea section carrying reports and discussion notes. In addition, proposals from prospective guest editors for occasional special issues on selected current topics are welcomed.