Article published In:
Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Volume 6Edited by Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
[Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 6] 2008
► pp. 113–144
Edited by Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
[Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 6] 2008
► pp. 113–144
Determining the structure of lexical entries and grammatical constructions in Construction Grammar
Research in Construction Grammar assumes no strict separation between syntax and the lexicon. However, recent work by Goldberg (1995, 2006) shows that there is indeed a separation between lexical entries and grammatical constructions, including constraints regulating the fusion of grammatical constructions with verbs. This paper argues that Goldberg’s characterization of the interactions between lexical entries and grammatical constructions faces some of the same difficulties as the interactions between lexical entries and transformational rules in the Chomskyan framework (Chomsky, 1965, 1981, 1995). Drawing on a variety of corpus data this paper presents specific proposals that should be considered in order to arrive at a solution that overcomes difficulties inherent to Goldberg’s approach. Based on a discussion of the concepts of analogy, collocational restrictions, frequency, and productivity this paper proposes to encode different types of semantic, pragmatic, and syntactic information in such a way that it is possible to account for a given utterance from a comprehension perspective, as well as a production perspective.
Cited by
Cited by 45 other publications
Baeskow, Heike
2022. Experiencing the Conceptual Wealth of Non‐Derived Denominal Verbs: A Multi‐Level, Simulation‐Based Approach*. Studia Linguistica 76:2 ► pp. 591 ff. 
Boas, Hans C.
2011. Coercion and leaking argument structures in Construction Grammar. Linguistics 49:6
Boas, Hans C. & Francisco Gonzálvez-García
2014. Chapter 1. Applying constructional concepts to Romance languages. In Romance Perspectives on Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 15], ► pp. 1 ff.
Boas, Hans C. & Steffen Höder
2018. Construction Grammar and language contact. In Constructions in Contact [Constructional Approaches to Language, 24], ► pp. 5 ff.
Boas, Hans C. & Alexander Ziem
2018. Chapter 7. Constructing a constructicon for German. In Constructicography [Constructional Approaches to Language, 22], ► pp. 183 ff.
Cappelle, Bert
2024. Can Construction Grammar Be Proven Wrong?,
Cervel, Ma Sandra Peña
2009. Constraints on subsumption in the caused-motion construction. Language Sciences 31:6 ► pp. 740 ff.
Diessel, Holger
2019. The Grammar Network,
Diessel, Holger
2020. A Dynamic Network Approach to the Study of Syntax. Frontiers in Psychology 11
Diewald, Gabriele & Katja Politt
2020. Grammatical categories as paradigms in Construction Grammar. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 34 ► pp. 42 ff.
Enger, Hans-Olav
2022. Type frequency is not the only factor that determines productivity, so the Tolerance Principle is not enough. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 144:2 ► pp. 161 ff.
Franceschi, Daniele
2014. Licensing and blocking factors in the use of BEGIN verbs. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 12:2 ► pp. 304 ff.
Franceschi, Daniele
2024. From the Reflexive to the Middle Construction: What is ‘In-Between’? a Comparison Between English and Italian. In Constructional and Cognitive Explorations of Contrastive Linguistics, ► pp. 71 ff.
Gonzálvez-García, Francisco
2014. Chapter 6. Bringing together fragments and constructions. In Romance Perspectives on Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 15], ► pp. 181 ff.
Guerrero Medina, Pilar
2017. Chapter 9. The English conative as a family of constructions. In Constructing Families of Constructions [Human Cognitive Processing, 58], ► pp. 277 ff.
Haugen, Tor Arne
2014. Adjectival predicators and approaches to complement realisation. Lingua 140 ► pp. 83 ff.
Haugen, Tor Arne
2015. Polyvalent adjectives: A challenge for theory-driven approaches to valency. Lingua 156 ► pp. 70 ff.
Luzondo Oyón, Alba
2014. Constraining factors on the family of resultative constructions. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 12:1 ► pp. 30 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.
Lyngfelt, Benjamin, Tiago Timponi Torrent, Adrieli Laviola, Linnéa Bäckström, Anna Helga Hannesdóttir & Ely Edison da Silva Matos
2018. Chapter 9. Aligning constructicons across languages. In Constructicography [Constructional Approaches to Language, 22], ► pp. 255 ff.
Mairal-Usón, Ricardo
2015. Constructional meaning representation within a knowledge engineering framework. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 13:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Marttinen Larsson, Matti & Miriam Bouzouita
2022. Feminine morphology in possessive complements of adverbial constructions in Andalusian varieties. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 91 ► pp. 157 ff.
Masegosa, Alicia Galera & Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
2012. Lexical class and perspectivization constraints on subsumption in the Lexical Constructional Model: the case of say verbs in English. Language Sciences 34:1 ► pp. 54 ff.
Nir, Bracha
NISBET, TIM
2020. Meaning, metaphor, and argument structure. Journal of Linguistics 56:3 ► pp. 629 ff.
PEREK, FLORENT
2023. Construction Grammar and Usage‐Based Theory. In The Handbook of Usage‐Based Linguistics, ► pp. 215 ff.
Perek, Florent & Maarten Lemmens
2010. Getting at the meaning of the English at-construction: the case of a constructional split. CogniTextes 5:Volume 5
Perek, Florent & Amanda L. Patten
2019. Towards an English Constructicon using patterns and frames. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 24:3 ► pp. 354 ff.
Peña Cervel, María Sandra
2017. Chapter 6. Revisiting the English resultative family of constructions. In Constructing Families of Constructions [Human Cognitive Processing, 58], ► pp. 175 ff.
Pijpops, Dirk & Dirk Speelman
2017. Alternating argument constructions of Dutch psychological verbs: A theory-driven corpus investigation. Folia Linguistica 51:1
RUIZ DE MENDOZA-IBÁÑEZ, FRANCISCO & ALBA LUZONDO-OYÓN
2016. Figurative and non-figurative motion in the expression of result in English. Language and Cognition 8:1 ► pp. 32 ff.
Taremaa, Piia, Helen Hint, Maria Reile & Renate Pajusalu
2021. Constructional variation in Estonian: Demonstrative pronouns and adverbs as determiners in noun phrases. Lingua 254 ► pp. 103030 ff.
Torre, Enrico
2018. Concerning the radial network view of argument structure: The case of the English caused-motion pattern. Language Sciences 66 ► pp. 199 ff.
van Lier, Eva & Maria Messerschmidt
2022. Lexical restrictions on grammatical relations in voice and valency constructions. STUF - Language Typology and Universals 75:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
van Trijp, Remi
2015. Cognitive vs. generative construction grammar: The case of coercion and argument structure. Cognitive Linguistics 26:4 ► pp. 613 ff.
Vartiainen, Turo
2016. A Constructionist Approach to Category Change. Journal of English Linguistics 44:1 ► pp. 34 ff.
Wasserscheidt, Philipp
Wasserscheidt, Philipp
2019. Construction Grammar: Basic Principles and Concepts. Ukrainian Linguistics :49 ► pp. 94 ff.
Yoon, Jiyoung
2014. Chapter 2. The role of constructional meanings in novel verb-noun compounds in Spanish. In Romance Perspectives on Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 15], ► pp. 37 ff.
Zhan, Fangqiong & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
2020. A study of the development of the Chinese correlative comparative construction from the perspective of constructionalization. Diachronica 37:1 ► pp. 83 ff.
윤소연
2014. Semantic Constraints on Coercion: An Empirical Study. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics 14:3 ► pp. 469 ff.
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 march 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.