Review article published in:
Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Volume 2
Edited by Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
[Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 2] 2004
► pp. 321–348
Review article

Why Construction Grammar is radical

W Croft. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

| University of Otago
This article reviews some of the foundational assumptions of Croft'sRadical Construction Grammar. While constructions have featured prominently in much recent work in cognitive linguistics, Croft adopts the ‘radical’ view that constructions are the primary objects of linguistic analysis, with lexical and syntactic categories being defined with respect to the constructions in which they occur. This approach reverses the traditional view, according to which complex expressions are compositionally assembled through syntactic rules operating over items selected from the lexicon. The ubiquity of idioms, especially so-called constructional idioms, provides compelling evidence for the essential correctness of the radical constructional view. The possibility of a radical constructional approach to phonology is also discussed.
Keywords: Radical Construction Grammar, constructional idioms, compositionality
Published online: 11 January 2005
https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.2.12tay
References
Baker, M.
(2001) The atoms of language: The mind’s hidden rules of grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, L.
(1933) Language. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. & Choi, S.
(2001) Shaping meanings for language: Universal and languagespecific in the acquisition of spatial semantic categories. In M. Bowerman & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 475–511). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, P. & Tomasello, M.
(1999) Young children learn to produce passives with nonce verbs. Developmental Psychology, 351, 29–44. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(1965) Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1991) Some notes on economy of derivation and representation. In R. Freidin (Ed.), Principles and parameters in comparative grammar (pp. 417–54). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W.
(2001) Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crystal, D.
(1980) A first dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. London: Andre Deutsch.Google Scholar
Culicover, P.
(1999) Syntactic nuts: Hard cases, syntactic theory, and language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dąbrowska, E.
(2000) From formula to schema: The acquisition of English questions. Cognitive Linguistics, 111, 83–102.Google Scholar
Dieseel, H. & Tomasello, M.
(2001) The acquisition of finite complement clauses in English: A corpus-based analysis. Cognitive Linguistics, 121, 97–141.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C.
(1988) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone . Language, 641, 501–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Foley, W.
(1997) Anthropological linguistics: An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Foolen, A. & van der Leek, F.
(Eds.) (2000) Constructions in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A.
(1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R.
(1997) The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Joos, M.
(Ed.) (1957) Readings in linguistics, I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kay, P. & Fillmore, C.
(1999) Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What’s X doing Y? construction. Language, 751, 1–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
(1976) Semantic representations and the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Foundations of Language, 141, 307–57.Google Scholar
(1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(1991) Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol. 2: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(1999) A dynamic usage-based model. In R. W. Langacker, Grammar and conceptualization (pp. 91–145). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, L. & Lambrecht, K.
(1996) Towards a construction-based theory of language function: The case of nominal extraposition. Language, 721, 215–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nunberg, G., Sag, I., & Wasow, T.
(1994) Idioms. Language, 701, 491–538. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pütz, M. & Verspoor, M.
(Eds.) (2000) Explorations in linguistic relativity. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Robins, R. H.
(1964) General linguistics: An introductory survey. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Sapir, E.
(1963 [1921]) Language: An introduction to the study of speech. London: Rupert Hart-Davis.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R.
(2002) Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M.
(2000) First steps toward a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics, 111, 61–82.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. & Brooks, P.
(1998) Young children’s earliest transitive and intransitive constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 91, 379–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Well, R. S.
(1957) Immediate constituents. In Joos (1957) (pp. 186–207). First published in Language, 231(1947), 81–117.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Macis, Marijana & Norbert Schmitt
2017. Not just ‘small potatoes’: Knowledge of the idiomatic meanings of collocations. Language Teaching Research 21:3 ► pp. 321 ff. Crossref logo
Vartiainen, Turo
2016. A Constructionist Approach to Category Change. Journal of English Linguistics 44:1 ► pp. 34 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 03 april 2022. 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.