A lexico-paradigmatic approach to English setting-constructions
In this paper I will explore the relationship between constructional and verbal
semantics in a two-participant construction exemplified by expressions like I
broke my arm (when I fell) (Talmy 2000, 518), where the Subject is described as
a mere circumstantial setting for the process (Davidse 1992, 128). Drawing on
corpus data with change-of-state verbs, I will illustrate the syntactic contexts
where this construction occurs in English, analysing how the particular uses
of these verbs interact with the semantico-pragmatic value of the construction.
Along the lines of Lemmens (2006), and building on previous work of mine
(Guerrero Medina 2010), I will adopt a lexico-paradigmatic view and argue
that the paradigmatic behaviour of a verb is actually determined by the entire
construction.
References (27)
References
Berry, Margaret. 1975.
An Introduction to Systemic Linguistics. 1 Structures and Systems
. London: B. T. Batsford Ltd.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, William. 1990. “Possible Verbs and the Structure of Events.” In
Meanings and Prototypes. Studies in Linguistic Categorisation
, ed. by Savas L. Tsohatzidis, 48–73. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davidse, Kristin. 1992. “Transitivity/Ergativity: The Janus-headed Grammar of Actions and Events.” In
Advances in Systemic Linguistics
, ed. by Martin Davies, and Louise J. Ravelli, 105–135. London: Printer Publisher.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davidse, Kristin. 1998a. “Agnates, Verb Classes and the Meaning of Construals. The Case of Ditransitivity in English.”
Leuvense Bijdragen
87: 281–313.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davidse, Kristin. 1998b. “On Transitivity and Ergativity in English, or on the Need for Dialogue between Schools.” In
English as a Human Language
, ed. by Johan van der Auwera, Frank Duriex, and Ludo Lejeune, 95–108. Lincom: München.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davies, Mark. 2008.
The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 425 million words, 1990–present
. Available online at [URL].![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dixon, Robert M. W. 2005.
A Semantic Approach to English Grammar
. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fawcett, Robin P. 1980.
Cognitive Linguistics and Social Interaction. Towards an Integrated Model of a Systemic Functional Grammar and Other Components of a Communicating Mind
. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Guerrero Medina, Pilar. 2010. “On Ergative Pseudo-effective Structures in English: The ‘Adversative’ Type.” In
Para, por y sobre Luis Quereda
, ed. by Marta Falces, Encarnación Hidalgo, Juan Santana, and Salvador Valera, 397–407. Granada: Universidad de Granada.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1967. “Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English. Part 1.”
Journal of Linguistics
3: 37–81. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1994/1985.
An Introduction to Functional Grammar.
2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, Michael A. K., and Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2004.
An Introduction to Functional Grammar
. 3rd ed. London: Hodder education.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haspelmath, Martin. 2008.
“Frequency vs. Iconicity in Explaining Grammatical Asymmetries.” Cognitive Linguistics
19 (1): 1–33.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, Ronald W. 1991.
Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol 2: Descriptive application
. Stanford: Stanford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lemmens, Marteen. 2006. “More on Objectless Transitives and Ergativisation Patterns in English.”
Constructions SV1-6/2006
. Available at [URL], urn:nbn:de:009-4-6802. Last accessed on 19 March 2012.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levin, Beth. 1993.
English Verb Classes and Alternations. A Preliminary Investigation
. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levin, Beth, and Malka Rappaport Hovav. 1994. “A Preliminary Analysis of Causative Verbs in English.
” Lingua
92: 35–77. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Maldonado, Ricardo. 2002. “Objective and Subjective Datives.”
Cognitive Linguistics
13 (1): 1–65. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Neale, Amy. 2002.
More Delicate Transitivity: Extending the Process Type System Networks for English to Include Full Semantic Classifications
. PhD Thesis. Cardiff: School of English, Communication and Philosophy, Cardiff University. Available at [URL]. Last accessed on 19 March 2012.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nishimura, Yoshiki. 1993. “Agentivity in Cognitive Grammar.” In
Conceptualisations and Mental Processing in Language
, ed. by Richard A. Geiger, and Brygida Rudka-Oystyn, 487–530. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Talmy, Leonard. 1976. “Semantic Causative Types.” In
Syntax and Semantics. Vol 6: The Grammar of Causative Constructions
, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani, 43–116. New York: Academic Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Talmy, Leonard. 2000.
Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems
. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Romain, Laurence
2022.
Putting the argument back into argument structure constructions.
Cognitive Linguistics 33:1
► pp. 35 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 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.