219-7677 10 7500817 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 201608250437 ONIX title feed eng 01 EUR
475016786 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code BCT 82 Eb 15 9789027267085 06 10.1075/bct.82 13 2016013167 DG 002 02 01 BCT 02 1874-0081 Benjamins Current Topics 82 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Constructions across Grammars</TitleText> 01 bct.82 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/bct.82 1 B01 Martin Hilpert Hilpert, Martin Martin Hilpert Université de Neuchâtel 2 B01 Jan-Ola Östman Östman, Jan-Ola Jan-Ola Östman University of Helsinki 01 eng 211 v 206 LAN009000 v.2006 CFK 2 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.SYNTAX Syntax 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 06 01 Up to now, most research in Construction Grammar has focused on single languages, most notably English. This volume aims to broaden the scope of Construction Grammar towards issues in bi- and multilingualism, second language learning, and generalizations across different languages and language varieties. The contributions in this volume show that speakers entertain generalizations across their repertoire of languages, which holds important implications for a multilingual Construction Grammar. <br />Originally published in <i>Constructions and Frames</i> 6:2 (2014). 05 In conclusion, by focusing on phenomena occurring in multilingual contexts, the studies included in Constructions across Grammars not only contribute to Construction Grammar and linguistics in general; they also help to fill a gap often observed in linguistic models: how general models and approaches apply to situations of bilingualism and language contact. Certainly, scholars interested in the topics and phenomena addressed in this book are looking forward to the continuation of this endeavor started by Martin Hilpert and Jan-Ola Östman. Víctor Valdivia, George Washington University, on Linguist List 28.670 (03-02-2017) 05 This is a timely collection of papers about constructions in multilingual contexts. The papers in this volume present new views of grammatical constructions in heterogeneous speech communities of<br />various types and they open up a compelling new perspective on both novel issues and age-old problems of bilingualism, multilingualism, language contact, and translation. The editors have done a marvelous job in assembling a high quality set of papers showing how the principles of Construction Grammar can be fruitfully applied to linguistic phenomena that transcend homogeneous speech communities. Hans Boas, University of Texas at Austin 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/bct.82.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027242709.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027242709.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/bct.82.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/bct.82.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/bct.82.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/bct.82.hb.png 10 01 JB code bct.82.s1 Section header 1 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Introduction</TitleText> 10 01 JB code bct.82.01int 1 6 6 Article 2 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Reflections on Constructions across Grammars</TitleText> 1 A01 Martin Hilpert Hilpert, Martin Martin Hilpert 2 A01 Jan-Ola Östman Östman, Jan-Ola Jan-Ola Östman 10 01 JB code bct.82.02dog 7 33 27 Article 3 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">On the borrowability of subject pronoun constructions in Turkish&#8211;Dutch contact</TitleText> 1 A01 A. Seza Doğruöz Doğruöz, A. Seza A. Seza Doğruöz Netherlands Institute for Advanced Studies 20 constructions 20 Dutch 20 language change 20 subject pronouns 20 Turkish 20 usage-based approaches 01 Turkish spoken in the Netherlands (NL-Turkish) sounds different in comparison to Turkish spoken in Turkey (TR-Turkish) due to Dutch influence. In addition to borrowed Dutch words/phrases, Dutch influence on NL-Turkish is also observed through literally translated constructions. This study investigates the Dutch influence on NL-Turkish constructions with subject pronouns. Analyses of NL-Turkish and TR-Turkish spoken corpora do not reveal any significant differences in terms of subject pronoun frequency. However, qualitative analysis of the data reveals some unconventional cases of subject pronoun use in NL-Turkish. In these cases, subject pronouns do not lead to unconventionality on their own but as parts of larger constructions that are copied from Dutch as chunks. Following the principles of usage-based approaches, these unconventional constructions are further analyzed in terms of their level of schematicity and flexibility. 10 01 JB code bct.82.03has 35 66 32 Article 4 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">On the universality of frames</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Evidence from English-to-Japanese translation</Subtitle> 1 A01 Yoko Hasegawa Hasegawa, Yoko Yoko Hasegawa University of California, Berkeley and International Computer Science Institute 2 A01 Russell Lee-Goldman Lee-Goldman, Russell Russell Lee-Goldman 3 A01 Charles J. Fillmore Fillmore, Charles J. Charles J. Fillmore 20 causation 20 Frame Semantics 20 FrameNet 20 noun-centered vs. verb-centered typology 20 parallel-text corpora 20 rhetorical structure 20 topic-worthiness 20 transitivity 20 translation assessment 01 This paper investigates the cross-linguistic applicability of the concept of frame as developed in the Berkeley FrameNet project. We examine whether the frames created for the annotation of English texts can also function as a tool for the assessment of the accuracy of English-to-Japanese translations. If the semantic structure of a source text is analyzed in terms of the frames evoked by its constituent words and the ways in which the elements of those frames are realized, then those frames, their constituent elements, and their interconnections must somehow be present in the translation. The paper concentrates on passages involving causation, as causal relationships are considered by many to exhibit the most salient differences in rhetorical preference between the two languages. 10 01 JB code bct.82.04hod 67 96 30 Article 5 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Phonological elements and Diasystematic Construction Grammar</TitleText> 1 A01 Steffen Höder Höder, Steffen Steffen Höder Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel 20 contact-induced change 20 Diasystematic Construction Grammar 20 language contact 20 multilingualism 20 phonology 01 Usage-based CxG approaches share the central assumption that any grammar has to be acquired and organised through input-based abstraction and categorisation. Diasystematic Construction Grammar (DCxG) is based on the idea that these processes are not sensitive to language boundaries. Multilingual input thus results in multilingual grammars which are conceived of as constructicons containing language-specific as well as language-unspecific constructions. Within such systems, phonological structures play an important part in the identification of schematic constructions. However, the status of phonology in DCxG, as in CxG in general, yet remains unclear. This paper presents some arguments for including phonological elements systematically in the construction-based analysis of (multilingual) constructional systems. 10 01 JB code bct.82.05nir 97 130 34 Article 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Clause combining across grammars</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">A contrastive analysis of L1 and L2 construal of discourse organization</Subtitle> 1 A01 Bracha Nir Nir, Bracha Bracha Nir University of Haifa 20 Clause combining 20 event integration 20 Hebrew 20 narrative 20 rhetorical options 20 second language 20 syntax 01 The goal of the present study is to examine whether clause-combining rhetorical preferences that differentiate between Hebrew and English are maintained across grammars, specifically, in the context of text production in a non-native language. It examines the usage of various bi-clausal constructions marking different levels of event integration in texts written by advanced speakers of English, all native monolingual Hebrew speakers. The data analyzed consist of personal experience narratives that were collected from high-school and university-level students. These texts are compared to narratives that were collected from native speakers of both languages following the same design of study. Quantitative and qualitative analyses show differences and similarities between the three populations in terms of clause-combining strategies. They reveal that not only the constraints of the L1 but mainly those of the L2 guide non-native speakers in their choice of bi-clausal constructions, as devices expressing event integration. Results further show that event integration is reflected by constructions at different levels of the grammatical system, and that constraints on bi-clausal constructions at the more local, morpho-syntactic level are echoed by constraints at the level of discourse itself as a construction. 10 01 JB code bct.82.06per 131 168 38 Article 7 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Constructional tolerance</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Cross-linguistic differences in the acceptability of non-conventional uses of constructions</Subtitle> 1 A01 Florent Perek Perek, Florent Florent Perek Universität Basel 2 A01 Martin Hilpert Hilpert, Martin Martin Hilpert Université de Neuchâtel 20 argument structure constructions 20 creativity 20 English 20 French 20 German 20 second language 20 typology 01 The present paper investigates the question whether different languages can be categorized into &#8216;constructionally tolerant&#8217; languages, which grant speakers considerable freedom to combine syntactic constructions with lexical items in non-conventional ways, and &#8216;valency-driven&#8217; languages, which impose stronger restrictions on the way in which constructions and lexical items can be combined. The idea of such a typological distinction is sketched for instance by Rostila (2014). In order to explore possible effects of constructional tolerance, a grammaticality judgment task is administered to speakers of English and French, which are two languages that differ with regard to this phenomenon: English verbs can be used across different argument structure constructions with relative ease, French verbs are more constrained. Both populations of speakers are exposed to stimuli sentences of varying creativity in a second language, namely German. The paper advances the constructional tolerance hypothesis, which states that speakers of a constructionally tolerant language should judge non-conventional examples in an L2 with more lenience than speakers of a valency-driven language. The experimental results are in line with this hypothesis, but they also suggest that grammaticality judgments are influenced by the availability of a productive L1 construction that shows functional overlap. 10 01 JB code bct.82.07was 169 201 33 Article 8 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Constructions do not cross Languages</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">On cross-linguistic generalizations of constructions</Subtitle> 1 A01 Philipp Wasserscheidt Wasserscheidt, Philipp Philipp Wasserscheidt Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin & Freie Universität Berlin 20 bilingualism 20 code-switching 20 construction grammar 20 Finno-Ugric 20 imitation 20 Slavic 20 transfer 01 In research on bilingualism it is often assumed that linguistic structures can be shared across languages. The emphasis on generalization and categorization in construction grammar also seems to imply that speakers can develop cross-linguistic representations. This contribution argues that generalizations can occur only on the semantic level. Data from typologically distinct languages shows that generalizations over form are not likely to play a role in language processing. It is further argued that neither syntactical nor grammatical form is needed in order to explain syntactic transfer. 10 01 JB code bct.82.08ind 203 206 4 Article 9 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Index</TitleText> 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20160322 2016 John Benjamins B.V. 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027242709 01 JB 3 John Benjamins e-Platform 03 jbe-platform.com 09 WORLD 21 01 00 90.00 EUR R 01 00 76.00 GBP Z 01 gen 00 135.00 USD S 582016785 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code BCT 82 Hb 15 9789027242709 13 2016004378 BB 01 BCT 02 1874-0081 Benjamins Current Topics 82 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Constructions across Grammars</TitleText> 01 bct.82 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/bct.82 1 B01 Martin Hilpert Hilpert, Martin Martin Hilpert Université de Neuchâtel 2 B01 Jan-Ola Östman Östman, Jan-Ola Jan-Ola Östman University of Helsinki 01 eng 211 v 206 LAN009000 v.2006 CFK 2 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.SYNTAX Syntax 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 06 01 Up to now, most research in Construction Grammar has focused on single languages, most notably English. This volume aims to broaden the scope of Construction Grammar towards issues in bi- and multilingualism, second language learning, and generalizations across different languages and language varieties. The contributions in this volume show that speakers entertain generalizations across their repertoire of languages, which holds important implications for a multilingual Construction Grammar. <br />Originally published in <i>Constructions and Frames</i> 6:2 (2014). 05 In conclusion, by focusing on phenomena occurring in multilingual contexts, the studies included in Constructions across Grammars not only contribute to Construction Grammar and linguistics in general; they also help to fill a gap often observed in linguistic models: how general models and approaches apply to situations of bilingualism and language contact. Certainly, scholars interested in the topics and phenomena addressed in this book are looking forward to the continuation of this endeavor started by Martin Hilpert and Jan-Ola Östman. Víctor Valdivia, George Washington University, on Linguist List 28.670 (03-02-2017) 05 This is a timely collection of papers about constructions in multilingual contexts. The papers in this volume present new views of grammatical constructions in heterogeneous speech communities of<br />various types and they open up a compelling new perspective on both novel issues and age-old problems of bilingualism, multilingualism, language contact, and translation. The editors have done a marvelous job in assembling a high quality set of papers showing how the principles of Construction Grammar can be fruitfully applied to linguistic phenomena that transcend homogeneous speech communities. Hans Boas, University of Texas at Austin 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/bct.82.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027242709.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027242709.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/bct.82.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/bct.82.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/bct.82.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/bct.82.hb.png 10 01 JB code bct.82.s1 Section header 1 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Introduction</TitleText> 10 01 JB code bct.82.01int 1 6 6 Article 2 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Reflections on Constructions across Grammars</TitleText> 1 A01 Martin Hilpert Hilpert, Martin Martin Hilpert 2 A01 Jan-Ola Östman Östman, Jan-Ola Jan-Ola Östman 10 01 JB code bct.82.02dog 7 33 27 Article 3 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">On the borrowability of subject pronoun constructions in Turkish&#8211;Dutch contact</TitleText> 1 A01 A. Seza Doğruöz Doğruöz, A. Seza A. Seza Doğruöz Netherlands Institute for Advanced Studies 20 constructions 20 Dutch 20 language change 20 subject pronouns 20 Turkish 20 usage-based approaches 01 Turkish spoken in the Netherlands (NL-Turkish) sounds different in comparison to Turkish spoken in Turkey (TR-Turkish) due to Dutch influence. In addition to borrowed Dutch words/phrases, Dutch influence on NL-Turkish is also observed through literally translated constructions. This study investigates the Dutch influence on NL-Turkish constructions with subject pronouns. Analyses of NL-Turkish and TR-Turkish spoken corpora do not reveal any significant differences in terms of subject pronoun frequency. However, qualitative analysis of the data reveals some unconventional cases of subject pronoun use in NL-Turkish. In these cases, subject pronouns do not lead to unconventionality on their own but as parts of larger constructions that are copied from Dutch as chunks. Following the principles of usage-based approaches, these unconventional constructions are further analyzed in terms of their level of schematicity and flexibility. 10 01 JB code bct.82.03has 35 66 32 Article 4 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">On the universality of frames</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Evidence from English-to-Japanese translation</Subtitle> 1 A01 Yoko Hasegawa Hasegawa, Yoko Yoko Hasegawa University of California, Berkeley and International Computer Science Institute 2 A01 Russell Lee-Goldman Lee-Goldman, Russell Russell Lee-Goldman 3 A01 Charles J. Fillmore Fillmore, Charles J. Charles J. Fillmore 20 causation 20 Frame Semantics 20 FrameNet 20 noun-centered vs. verb-centered typology 20 parallel-text corpora 20 rhetorical structure 20 topic-worthiness 20 transitivity 20 translation assessment 01 This paper investigates the cross-linguistic applicability of the concept of frame as developed in the Berkeley FrameNet project. We examine whether the frames created for the annotation of English texts can also function as a tool for the assessment of the accuracy of English-to-Japanese translations. If the semantic structure of a source text is analyzed in terms of the frames evoked by its constituent words and the ways in which the elements of those frames are realized, then those frames, their constituent elements, and their interconnections must somehow be present in the translation. The paper concentrates on passages involving causation, as causal relationships are considered by many to exhibit the most salient differences in rhetorical preference between the two languages. 10 01 JB code bct.82.04hod 67 96 30 Article 5 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Phonological elements and Diasystematic Construction Grammar</TitleText> 1 A01 Steffen Höder Höder, Steffen Steffen Höder Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel 20 contact-induced change 20 Diasystematic Construction Grammar 20 language contact 20 multilingualism 20 phonology 01 Usage-based CxG approaches share the central assumption that any grammar has to be acquired and organised through input-based abstraction and categorisation. Diasystematic Construction Grammar (DCxG) is based on the idea that these processes are not sensitive to language boundaries. Multilingual input thus results in multilingual grammars which are conceived of as constructicons containing language-specific as well as language-unspecific constructions. Within such systems, phonological structures play an important part in the identification of schematic constructions. However, the status of phonology in DCxG, as in CxG in general, yet remains unclear. This paper presents some arguments for including phonological elements systematically in the construction-based analysis of (multilingual) constructional systems. 10 01 JB code bct.82.05nir 97 130 34 Article 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Clause combining across grammars</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">A contrastive analysis of L1 and L2 construal of discourse organization</Subtitle> 1 A01 Bracha Nir Nir, Bracha Bracha Nir University of Haifa 20 Clause combining 20 event integration 20 Hebrew 20 narrative 20 rhetorical options 20 second language 20 syntax 01 The goal of the present study is to examine whether clause-combining rhetorical preferences that differentiate between Hebrew and English are maintained across grammars, specifically, in the context of text production in a non-native language. It examines the usage of various bi-clausal constructions marking different levels of event integration in texts written by advanced speakers of English, all native monolingual Hebrew speakers. The data analyzed consist of personal experience narratives that were collected from high-school and university-level students. These texts are compared to narratives that were collected from native speakers of both languages following the same design of study. Quantitative and qualitative analyses show differences and similarities between the three populations in terms of clause-combining strategies. They reveal that not only the constraints of the L1 but mainly those of the L2 guide non-native speakers in their choice of bi-clausal constructions, as devices expressing event integration. Results further show that event integration is reflected by constructions at different levels of the grammatical system, and that constraints on bi-clausal constructions at the more local, morpho-syntactic level are echoed by constraints at the level of discourse itself as a construction. 10 01 JB code bct.82.06per 131 168 38 Article 7 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Constructional tolerance</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Cross-linguistic differences in the acceptability of non-conventional uses of constructions</Subtitle> 1 A01 Florent Perek Perek, Florent Florent Perek Universität Basel 2 A01 Martin Hilpert Hilpert, Martin Martin Hilpert Université de Neuchâtel 20 argument structure constructions 20 creativity 20 English 20 French 20 German 20 second language 20 typology 01 The present paper investigates the question whether different languages can be categorized into &#8216;constructionally tolerant&#8217; languages, which grant speakers considerable freedom to combine syntactic constructions with lexical items in non-conventional ways, and &#8216;valency-driven&#8217; languages, which impose stronger restrictions on the way in which constructions and lexical items can be combined. The idea of such a typological distinction is sketched for instance by Rostila (2014). In order to explore possible effects of constructional tolerance, a grammaticality judgment task is administered to speakers of English and French, which are two languages that differ with regard to this phenomenon: English verbs can be used across different argument structure constructions with relative ease, French verbs are more constrained. Both populations of speakers are exposed to stimuli sentences of varying creativity in a second language, namely German. The paper advances the constructional tolerance hypothesis, which states that speakers of a constructionally tolerant language should judge non-conventional examples in an L2 with more lenience than speakers of a valency-driven language. The experimental results are in line with this hypothesis, but they also suggest that grammaticality judgments are influenced by the availability of a productive L1 construction that shows functional overlap. 10 01 JB code bct.82.07was 169 201 33 Article 8 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Constructions do not cross Languages</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">On cross-linguistic generalizations of constructions</Subtitle> 1 A01 Philipp Wasserscheidt Wasserscheidt, Philipp Philipp Wasserscheidt Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin & Freie Universität Berlin 20 bilingualism 20 code-switching 20 construction grammar 20 Finno-Ugric 20 imitation 20 Slavic 20 transfer 01 In research on bilingualism it is often assumed that linguistic structures can be shared across languages. The emphasis on generalization and categorization in construction grammar also seems to imply that speakers can develop cross-linguistic representations. This contribution argues that generalizations can occur only on the semantic level. Data from typologically distinct languages shows that generalizations over form are not likely to play a role in language processing. It is further argued that neither syntactical nor grammatical form is needed in order to explain syntactic transfer. 10 01 JB code bct.82.08ind 203 206 4 Article 9 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Index</TitleText> 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20160322 2016 John Benjamins B.V. 02 WORLD 08 520 gr 01 JB 1 John Benjamins Publishing Company +31 20 6304747 +31 20 6739773 bookorder@benjamins.nl 01 https://benjamins.com 01 WORLD US CA MX 21 22 26 01 02 JB 1 00 90.00 EUR R 02 02 JB 1 00 95.40 EUR R 01 JB 10 bebc +44 1202 712 934 +44 1202 712 913 sales@bebc.co.uk 03 GB 21 26 02 02 JB 1 00 76.00 GBP Z 01 JB 2 John Benjamins North America +1 800 562-5666 +1 703 661-1501 benjamins@presswarehouse.com 01 https://benjamins.com 01 US CA MX 21 1 26 01 gen 02 JB 1 00 135.00 USD