Construction Grammar has reached a stage of maturity where many researchers are looking for an explicit formal grounding of their work. Recently, there have been exciting developments to cater for this demand, most notably in Sign-Based Construction Grammar (SBCG) and Fluid Construction Grammar (FCG). Unfortunately, like playing a music instrument, the formalisms used by SBCG and FCG take time and effort to master, and linguists who are unfamiliar with them may not always appreciate the far-reaching theoretical consequences of adopting this or that approach. This paper undresses SBCG and FCG to their bare essentials, and offers a linguist-friendly comparison that looks at how both approaches define constructions, linguistic knowledge and language processing.
2023. The lexical constructional model meets syntax: guidelines of the formalized lexical-constructional model (FL_CxG ). Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 18 ► pp. 49 ff.
van Trijp, Remi, Katrien Beuls, Paul Van Eecke & Andrew Kehler
2022. The FCG Editor: An innovative environment for engineering computational construction grammars. PLOS ONE 17:6 ► pp. e0269708 ff.
Boas, Hans C.
2020. Constructions in English Grammar. In The Handbook of English Linguistics, ► pp. 277 ff.
2016. 2016 International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics (ICMLC), ► pp. 123 ff.
Luzondo-Oyón, Alba & Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza-Ibáñez
2015. Argument structure constructions in a Natural Language Processing environment. Language Sciences 48 ► pp. 70 ff.
Coussé, Evie
2014. Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (Oxford Handbooks). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Pp. xxii + 586.. Journal of Linguistics 50:2 ► pp. 521 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 january 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.