Cover not available
Article published In:
The Wealth and Breadth of Construction-Based Research
Edited by Timothy Colleman, Frank Brisard, Astrid De Wit, Renata Enghels, Nikos Koutsoukos, Tanja Mortelmans and María Sol Sansiñena
[Belgian Journal of Linguistics 34] 2020
► pp. 345–356

Delineating extravagance

Assessing speakers’ perceptions of imaginative constructional patterns

| University of Edinburgh
| University of Düsseldorf
While the concept of extravagance, used to describe speakers’ use of imaginative and noticeable language, has seen a surge in popularity in recent constructionist work, researchers have not yet converged on a set of common criteria for identifying extravagant expressions. In this paper, we discuss a variety of existing definitions and combine them into five main characteristics of extravagant language. We then present the results of a small-scale pilot rating study in which speakers judged extravagant sentences and their non-extravagant paraphrases. Our findings suggest that different constructions vary in their degree of perceived extravagance, and that certain features (e.g. stylistic salience) apply to most extravagant examples while the role of other factors (e.g. the speaker’s emotional involvement) may be restricted to a subset of extravagant patterns. We conclude with some open questions concerning the further demarcation and operationalisation of the concept of extravagance.
Keywords: extravagance, construction grammar, defining features, rating study
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Unifying previous definitions of extravagance
  • 3.Language users’ perception of extravagant constructions: A rating study
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 28 May 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.00058.ung
References
Bryer, Jason
2019 likert: Analysis and Visualization of Likert Items. R-script available at [URL] (last checked 21/10/2020)
Dahl, Östen
2001 “Inflationary Effects in Language and Elsewhere.” In Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure, ed. by Joan L. Bybee, and Paul J. Hopper, 471–480. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
d’Avis, Franz, and Rita Finkbeiner
(eds) 2019 Expressivität im Deutschen. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
De Wit, Astrid, Peter Petré, and Frank Brisard
2020 “Standing out with the Progressive.” Journal of Linguistics 56 (3): 479–514. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Detges, Ulrich, and Richard Waltereit
2002 “Grammaticalization vs. Reanalysis: a Semantic-Pragmatic Account of Functional Change in Grammar.” Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 21 (2). 151–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drummond, Alex D.
2020 Ibex Farm. Available at [URL] (last checked 21/10/2020)
Eitelmann, Matthias, and Dagmar Haumann
eds. In prep. Extravagant Morphology Amsterdam/Philadelphia John Benjamins
Günther, Christine, Sven Kotowski, and Ingo Plag
2020 “Phrasal Compounds Can Have Adjectival Heads: Evidence from English.” English Language and Linguistics 24 (1): 75–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1999 “Why Is Grammaticalization Irreversible?” Linguistics 37 (6): 1043–1068. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hein, Katrin
2017 “Modeling the Properties of German Phrasal Compounds within a Usage-Based Constructional Approach.” In Further Investigations into the Nature of Phrasal Compounding, ed. by Carola Trips, and Jaklin Kornfilt, 119–148. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Ishiyama, Osamu
2014 “The Nature of Speaker Creativity in Linguistic Innovation.” In Usage-Based Approaches to Language Change, ed. by Evie Coussé, and Ferdinand von Mengden, 147–166. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keller, Rudi
1994 Language Change: The Invisible Hand in Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kempf, Luise, and Stefan Hartmann
2018 “Schema Unification and Morphological Productivity: A Diachronic Perspective.” In The Construction of Words. Advances in Construction Morphology, ed. by Geert E. Booij, 441–474. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
forthcoming. “What’s Extravagant about be-sandaled Feet? Morphology, Semantics and Pragmatics of German Pseudo-Participles.” In Extravagant morphology ed. by Matthias Eitelmann, and Dagmar Haumann Amsterdam/ Philadelphia John Benjamins
Lensch, Anke
2018 “ Fixer-Uppers. Reduplication in the Derivation of Phrasal Verbs.” In Exact Repetition in Grammar and Discourse, ed. by Rita Finkbeiner, and Ulrike Freywald, 158–181. Berlin/ Boston: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 “The Extravagant Progressive: An Experimental Corpus Study on the History of Emphatic [be Ving].” English Language and Linguistics 21 (2): 227–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team
2020 R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Manual. Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
2020 The Dynamics of the Linguistic System: Usage, Conventionalization, and Entrenchment. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg, and Franziska Günther
2016 “Toward a Unified Socio-Cognitive Framework for Salience in Language.” Frontiers in Psychology 71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ungerer, Tobias, and Stefan Hartmann
2020 “Attack of the Snowclones: A Corpus-Based Analysis of Extravagant Formulaic Patterns.” Paper presented at the UK Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Birmingham, July 27–29.
Zima, Elisabeth, and Geert Brône
2015 “Cognitive Linguistics and Interactional Discourse: Time to Enter into Dialogue.” Language and Cognition 7 (4): 485–498. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold M., and Geoffrey K. Pullum
1987 “Plain Morphology and Expressive Morphology.” Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 131: 330–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar