There’s grammar and there’s grammar just as there’s usage and there’s usage
Usage-based grammars have become increasingly prominent in recent years. In these theories usage is construed quantitatively and serves as a circumstance for the emergence and development of grammar. This paper argues that usage can go deeper than this, and may become a component of the semiotic resources of a language and a part of grammar. However, this semioticisation is restricted to interpersonal grammar, those semiotic resources of grammar that construe interpersonal meaning. Three apparently unrelated grammatical phenomena – optionality of grammatical markers, insubordination, and a range of repetition-based constructions – are shown to be unified by the notions of grammaticalised usage and interpersonal grammar. This has implications for the nature of interpersonal grammar: it represents the codification of the triadic actional frame, the basis of which is the idea that action on an interlocutor is effected via action on linguistic units.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Three domains of grammar where usage may be fundamental
- 2.1Optionality of grammatical markers
- 2.2Insubordination
- 2.3Repetition-based constructions
- 3.Usage as a grammatical system
- 3.1The limitations of unit and relational descriptions
- 3.2Usage as interpersonal grammar
- 3.3The range and extent of usage in grammar
- 4.A reconsideration of interpersonal grammar
- 5.Conclusions
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (85)
References
Austin, John L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biber, Douglas & Susan Conrad. 2001. Register variation: A corpus approach. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (Blackwell Handbooks in Linguistics), Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen & Heidi E. Hamilton (eds). Malden, MA, Oxford and Carlton: Blackwell, 175–197.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1973 [1933]. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bolinger, Dwight. 1968. Entailment and the meaning of structures. Glossa 21: 119–128.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bolinger, Dwight. 1972. That’s That (Janua Lingarum Studia Memoriae Nicolai van Wijk Dedicata). The Hague and Paris: Mouton.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bolinger, Dwight. 1987. The remarkable double IS. English Today 91: 39–40. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brown, Penelope & Stephen Levinson. 1978. Universals of language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, Esther Goody (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 56–310.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Christie, Agatha. 1979 [1933]. Sad Cypress. London: Pan.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clark, Herbert H. 2016. Depicting as a method of communication. Psychological Review 123 (3): 324–347. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clark, Herbert H. & Richard J. Gerrig. 1990. Quotations as demonstrations. Language 661: 764–805. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Comrie, Bernard. 1981. The Languages of the Soviet Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Coppock, Elizabeth & Laura Staum. 2004. Origin of the English double-is construction. Unpublished manuscript, Stanford University. Available at: [URL] (Last accessed on 3 June 2017).
Coupe, Alexander R. 2011. On core case marking patterns in two Tibeto-Burman languages of Nagaland. Linguistics in the Tibeto-Burman Area 34 (2): 21–47.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cuenca, Maria Josep. 2007. Repetició consecutiva i idiomaticitat. Zeitschrift für Katalanistik 201: 189–219.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Curme, George O. 1931. A Grammar of the English Language: Syntax, Vol. 31. Boston, DC: Heath and Company.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Evans, Nicholas. 2007. Insubordination and its uses. In Finiteness: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations, Irina Nikolaeva (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 366–431.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Evans, Nicholas. 2009. Insubordination and the grammaticalisation of interactive presuppositions. Lecture given at the conference
Methodologies in Determining Morphosyntactic Change
, Osaka, March 2009.
Evans, Nicholas & Honoré Watanabe (eds). 2016b. Insubordination (Typological Studies in Language 115). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fillmore, Charles J. 1988. The mechanisms of ‘Construction Grammar’. Berkeley Linguistic Society 141: 35–55. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ghomeshi, Jila, Ray Jackendoff, Nicole Rosen & Kevin Russell. 2004. Contrastive focus reduplication in English: The salad-salad paper. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 221: 307–357. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gosden, Chris. 2003. Prehistory: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grice, H. Paul. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haiman, John. 1980. The iconicity of grammar: Isomorphism and motivation. Language 561: 515–540. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haiman, John. 1997. Repetition and identity. Lingua 1001: 57–70. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M.A.K. 1979. Modes of meaning and modes of expression: Types of grammatical structure and their determination by different semantic functions. In Function and Context in Linguistic Analysis: Essays offered to William Haas, D.J. Allerton, Edward Carney & David Holdcroft (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 57–79.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M.A.K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 1st ed. London: Arnold.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hand, David J. 2016. Measurement: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heine, Bernd, Gunther Kaltenböck & Tania Kuteva. 2016. On insubordination and cooptation. In Insubordination (Typological Studies in Language 115), Nicholas Evans & Honoré Watanabe (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 39–63. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hobson, Peter. 2004. The Cradle of Thought: Exploring the Origins of Thinking. London: Pan Books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hockett, Charles F. 1960. The origin of speech. Scientific American 2031: 88–96. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ishikawa, Minako. 1991. Iconicity in discourse: The case of repetition. Text 11 (4): 553–580. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jaeger, T. Florian. 2006. Redundancy and syntactic reduction in spontaneous speech. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.
Jaeger, T. Florian. 2010. Redundancy and reduction: Speakers manage syntactic information density. Cognitive Psychology 611: 23–62. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Johnstone, Barbara (ed.). 1994a. Repetition in Discourse: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Vol. 11 (Advances in Discourse Processes 47). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Johnstone, Barbara (ed.). 1994b. Repetition in Discourse: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Vol. 21 (Advances in Discourse Processes 48). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, Ronald W. 1990. Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar (Cognitive Linguistics Research 1). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume II: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levinson, Stephen C. 1992 [1983]. Pragmatics (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature (Language, Speech, and Communication). Cambridge, MA and London: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lilja, Niina. 2014. Partial repetitions as other-initiations of repair in second language talk: Re-establishing understanding and doing learning. Journal of Pragmatics 711: 98–116. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Massam, Diane. 1999. Thing is constructions: The thing is, is what’s the right analysis? English Language and Linguistics 3 (2): 335–352. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McConvell, Patrick. 1988. To be or double be? Current changes in the English copula. Australian Journal of Linguistics 8 (2): 287–305. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 1989. Phrase fracturing in Gooniyandi. In Configurationality: The Typology of Asymmetries, László Marácz & Pieter Muysken (eds). Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 207–222.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 1994. The grammar of reported speech and thought in Gooniyandi. Australian Journal of Linguistics 14 (1): 63–92. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 1995. Ja hear that didja?: Interrogative tags in Australian English. Te Reo 381: 3–35.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 1997. Semiotic Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 1998. “Optional” ergative marking in Gooniyandi revisited: Implications to the theory of marking. Leuvense Bijdragen 871: 491–534.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 2006a. Repetition in Gooniyandi narrative. Paper presented at Second European Workshop on Australian Languages: Narrative and Grammar, Somlószöllös, 14-16 September 2006.
McGregor, William B. 2006b. Focal and optional ergative marking in Warrwa (Kimberley, Western Australia). Lingua 116 (4): 393–423. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 2007. Ergative marking of intransitive subjects in Warrwa. Australian Journal of Linguistics 27 (2): 201–229. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 2010. Optional ergative case marking systems in a typological-semiotic perspective. Lingua 120 (7): 1610–1636. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 2013a. Optionality in grammar and language use. Linguistics 51 (6): 1147–1204. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 2013b. There are existential constructions and existential constructions: Presumption invoking existentials in English. Folia Linguistica 47 (1): 139–181. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 2013c. Some unusual clause types in Shua. Paper presented at Final KBA Meeting, Aarhus, 8-9 April 2013.
McGregor, William B. 2015a. Four counter-presumption constructions in Shua (Khoe-Kwadi, Botswana). Lingua 1581: 54–75. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McGregor, William B. 2015b. Optional accusative marking in Shua. Paper presented at Variation and asymmetries in case-marking workshop, Canberra, 31 July 2015.
Mithun, Marianne. 2008. The extension of dependency beyond the sentence. Language 841: 69–119. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Persson, Gunnar. 1974. Repetition in English. Part I: Sequential Repetition (Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia 21). Uppsala: Universitetsbiblioteket.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pike, Kenneth L. 1959. Language as particle, wave, and field. The Texas Quarterly 2 (2): 37–54.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rumsey, Alan L. 2010. ‘Optional’ ergativity and the framing of reported speech. Lingua 1201: 1652–1676. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2013. Is usage more than usage after all? The case of English not that. Linguistics 51 (1): 75–116. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shaumyan, Sebastian. 1987. A Semiotic Theory of Language. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Simon, Horst J. & Heike Wiese (eds). 2011. Expecting the Unexpected: Exceptions in Grammar (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 216). Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tannen, Deborah. 1987. Repetition in conversation: Toward a poetics of talk. Language 631: 574–605. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tannen, Deborah. 1989. Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue and Imagery in Conversational Discourse (Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 6). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thompson, Sandra A. & Anthony Mulac. 1991. The discourse conditions for the use of the complementizer that in conversational English. Journal of Pragmatics 151: 237–251. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tomasello, Michael. 1999. The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tomasello, Michael. 2003. Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tomasello, Michael. 2008. Origins of Human Communication (The Jean Nicod Lectures). Cambridge, MA and London: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tomasello, Michael. 2014. A Natural History of Human Thinking. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Torres Cacoullos, Rena & James A. Walker. 2009. On the persistence of grammar in discourse formulas: A variationist study. Linguistics 47 (1): 1–43. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van der Voort, Hein. 2003. Reduplication of person markers in Kwaza. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 351: 65–94. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1987. Boys will be boys: ‘Radical semantics’ vs. ‘radical pragmatics’. Language 631: 95–114. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wohlgemuth, Jan & Michael Cysouw (eds). 2010a. Rethinking Universals: How Rarities Affect Linguistic Theory (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 45). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wohlgemuth, Jan & Michael Cysouw (eds). 2010b. Rara & Rarissima: Documenting the Fringes of Linguistic Diversity (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 46). Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
McGregor, William B.
2019.
Reported speech as a dedicated grammatical domain – and why defenestration should not be thrown out the window.
Linguistic Typology 23:1
► pp. 207 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 july 2024. 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.