原来不是省略号吗?从基于用法的构式语法看简化构式

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Eva-Maria Bauer, Thomas Hoffmann
{"title":"原来不是省略号吗?从基于用法的构式语法看简化构式","authors":"Eva-Maria Bauer, Thomas Hoffmann","doi":"10.1080/03740463.2020.1777036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In many theoretical approaches, structures such as Turns out , I was wrong are seen as originally being the result of ellipsis, i.e., the deletion of underlying syntactic material (cf. It turns out , I was wrong.). In contrast to this, Usage-based Construction Grammar advocates a surface-oriented view of syntax and, consequently, eschews the postulation of unexpressed, covert syntactic information. In this paper, we will provide a usage-based explanation as to how such reduced constructions can arise in the first place, namely as online constructs in the working memory. Once reduced structures appear in the input, most approaches concede that they can become conventionalized. In the second part of the paper, we test whether there is any empirical evidence for the conventionalization of the constructions at hand. For this, we draw on one of the largest corpora of spoken English (the UCLA NewsScape Library of International Television News corpus), which yields more than 28,000 relevant tokens. Analysing these data for their distributional frequency, syntactic environment as well as their emotive content (using automatic sentiment analysis), we will show that there is synchronic evidence to suggest that the two structures are two individual, yet taxonomically related constructions.","PeriodicalId":35105,"journal":{"name":"Acta Linguistica Hafniensia","volume":"116 6 1","pages":"240 - 259"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Turns out is not ellipsis? A usage-based construction grammar view on reduced constructions\",\"authors\":\"Eva-Maria Bauer, Thomas Hoffmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03740463.2020.1777036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In many theoretical approaches, structures such as Turns out , I was wrong are seen as originally being the result of ellipsis, i.e., the deletion of underlying syntactic material (cf. It turns out , I was wrong.). In contrast to this, Usage-based Construction Grammar advocates a surface-oriented view of syntax and, consequently, eschews the postulation of unexpressed, covert syntactic information. In this paper, we will provide a usage-based explanation as to how such reduced constructions can arise in the first place, namely as online constructs in the working memory. Once reduced structures appear in the input, most approaches concede that they can become conventionalized. In the second part of the paper, we test whether there is any empirical evidence for the conventionalization of the constructions at hand. For this, we draw on one of the largest corpora of spoken English (the UCLA NewsScape Library of International Television News corpus), which yields more than 28,000 relevant tokens. Analysing these data for their distributional frequency, syntactic environment as well as their emotive content (using automatic sentiment analysis), we will show that there is synchronic evidence to suggest that the two structures are two individual, yet taxonomically related constructions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35105,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Linguistica Hafniensia\",\"volume\":\"116 6 1\",\"pages\":\"240 - 259\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Linguistica Hafniensia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.2020.1777036\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Linguistica Hafniensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.2020.1777036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在许多理论方法中,像“原来是我错了”这样的结构被认为是省略的结果,即删除了潜在的句法材料(参见“原来是我错了”)。与此相反,基于用法的结构语法提倡一种面向表面的语法观点,因此,避免了对未表达的、隐蔽的句法信息的假设。在本文中,我们将提供一种基于用法的解释,说明这种简化结构是如何首先出现的,即工作记忆中的在线结构。一旦简化结构出现在输入中,大多数方法都承认它们可以变得约定俗成。在论文的第二部分,我们检验了是否有任何经验证据来证明现有结构的约定俗成。为此,我们利用了最大的英语口语语料库之一(UCLA NewsScape国际电视新闻语料库),它产生了超过28,000个相关的代币。分析这些数据的分布频率、句法环境以及情感内容(使用自动情感分析),我们将显示有共时性证据表明这两个结构是两个独立的,但在分类上相关的结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Turns out is not ellipsis? A usage-based construction grammar view on reduced constructions
ABSTRACT In many theoretical approaches, structures such as Turns out , I was wrong are seen as originally being the result of ellipsis, i.e., the deletion of underlying syntactic material (cf. It turns out , I was wrong.). In contrast to this, Usage-based Construction Grammar advocates a surface-oriented view of syntax and, consequently, eschews the postulation of unexpressed, covert syntactic information. In this paper, we will provide a usage-based explanation as to how such reduced constructions can arise in the first place, namely as online constructs in the working memory. Once reduced structures appear in the input, most approaches concede that they can become conventionalized. In the second part of the paper, we test whether there is any empirical evidence for the conventionalization of the constructions at hand. For this, we draw on one of the largest corpora of spoken English (the UCLA NewsScape Library of International Television News corpus), which yields more than 28,000 relevant tokens. Analysing these data for their distributional frequency, syntactic environment as well as their emotive content (using automatic sentiment analysis), we will show that there is synchronic evidence to suggest that the two structures are two individual, yet taxonomically related constructions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Linguistica Hafniensia
Acta Linguistica Hafniensia Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信