Cover not available
Part of
Constructicography: Constructicon development across languages
Edited by Benjamin Lyngfelt, Lars Borin, Kyoko Ohara and Tiago Timponi Torrent
[Constructional Approaches to Language 22] 2018
► pp. 1–18

Chapter 1
Introduction

Constructicons and constructicography

A constructicon is on the one hand a theoretical conception of language as a structured inventory of constructions, and on the other hand a collection of construction descriptions, essentially a practical instantiation of the former concept. In this introductory chapter, we review the role of these notions in constructionist theory and practice, and relate it to the closely connected development of Frame Semantics into FrameNet. Practical constructicon development is characterized as a combination of construction grammar and lexicography, for which we introduce the term constructicography. Central issues in constructicography are introduced, setting the stage for the explorations in the following chapters.
Keywords: constructicon, construction, constructicography, construction grammar, lexicography, FrameNet
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Constructions and construction grammar
  • 3.Constructicon: language as a network of constructions
  • 4.Frame semantics and FrameNet
  • 5.Constructicography: construction grammar meets lexicography
  • 6.The chapters in this volume
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 17 July 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.22.01lyn
References
Atkins, B. T. S., & Rundell, M.
(2014) The Oxford Guide to Practical Lexicography. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bäckström, L., Lyngfelt, B., & Sköldberg, E.
(2014) Towards Interlingual Constructicography. On correspondence between constructicon resources for English and Swedish. Constructions and Frames, 6:1, 9–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergen, B., & Chang, N.
(2013) Embodied Construction Grammar. In Th. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar (pp.168–190). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Boas, H. C.
(2009a) Verb meanings at the crossroads between higher-level and lower-level constructions. Lingua, 120, 22–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(Ed.) (2009b) Multilingual FrameNets in Computational Lexicography: Methods and Applications. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(Ed.) (2010) Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booij, G.
(2010) Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2013) Morphology in Construction Grammar. In Th. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar (pp.255–273). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, J.
(2010) Language, Usage, and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(1957) Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995) The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2000) New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W.
(2001) Radical Construction Grammar. Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003) Lexical rules vs. constructions: a false dichotomy. In H. Cuyckens, Th. Berg, R. Dirven & K. -U. Panther (Eds.), Motivation in Language: Studies in honor of Günther Radden (pp.49–68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A.
(2004) Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culicover, P., & Jackendoff, R.
(1999) The view from the periphery: The English comparative correlative. Linguistic Inquiry, 30, 543–571. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feldman, J., Dodge, E., & Bryant, J.
(2010) Embodied Construction Grammar. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis (pp.111–138). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J.
(1968) The Case for Case. In E. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory (pp.1–88). London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
(1982) Frame Semantics. In Linguistics Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp.111–138). Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Co.Google Scholar
(1987) Varieties of conditional sentences. ESCOL, 3, 79–122.Google Scholar
(1988) The mechanisms of ‘Construction Grammar’. Berkeley Linguistic Society, 14, 35–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Border Conflicts: FrameNet Meets Construction Grammar. In E. Bernal, & J. DeCesaris (Eds.), Proceedings of the XIII EURALEX International Congress (pp.49–68). Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., & Baker, C. F.
(2010) A Frames Approach to Semantic Analysis. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis (pp.313–339). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., & Kay, P.
(1996) Construction Grammar Coursebook. Ms. Department of linguistics, University of California at Berkeley.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P. & O’Connor, M. C.
(1988) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions. The case of let alone . Language, 64, 501–538. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., Lee-Goldman, R., & Rhomieux, R.
(2012) The FrameNet Constructicon. In H. C. Boas & I. A. Sag (Eds.), Sign-Based Construction Grammar (pp.309–372). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
FrameNet
[URL]
Fried, M., & Östman, J. -O.
(Eds.) (2004) Construction Grammar in a cross-language perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E.
(1995) Constructions. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 219–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalizations in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2013) Constructionist approaches. In Th. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar (pp.15–31). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hilpert, M.
(2013) Constructional Change in English: Developments in Allomorphy, Word Formation, and Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Construction Grammar and its Application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
(2015) From hand-carved to computer-based: Noun-participle compounding and the upward strengthening hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 26, 113–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jurafsky, D.
(1991) An On-line Computational Model of Human Sentence Interpretation: A Theory of the Representation and Use of Linguistic Knowledge. Doctoral dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Kay, P., & Fillmore, C. J.
(1999) Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations. The What’s X doing Y? construction. Language, 75, 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1987) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
(1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(2008) Cognitive Grammar. A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laviola, A.
(2015) Frames e Construções em Contraste: uma análise comparativa português-inglês no tangente à implementação de constructicons. MA Thesis, Federal University of Juiz de Fora.Google Scholar
Lyngfelt, B., & Sköldberg, E.
(2013) Lexikon och konstruktikon – ett konstruktionsgrammatiskt perspektiv på lexikografi [‘Lexicon and constructicon – a constructionist perspective on lexicography’]. LexicoNordica, 20, 75–91.Google Scholar
Michaelis, L. A.
(2012) Making the case for Construction Grammar. H. C. Boas & I. A. Sag (Eds.) (2012), Sign-Based Construction Grammar (pp.31–67). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F., Cappelle, B., & Shtyrov, Y.
(2013) Brain Basis of Meaning, Words, Constructions, and Grammar. In Th. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar (pp.397–416). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ruppenhofer, J., Ellsworth, M., Petruck, M. R. L., Johnson, C. R., & Scheffczyk, J.
(2016) FrameNet II: extended theory and practice. Berkeley: ICSI. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar
Sag, I. A.
(2010) English filler-gap constructions. Language, 86, 486–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Sign-Based Construction Grammar: An Informal Synopsis. H. C. Boas & I. A. Sag (Eds.) (2012), Sign-Based Construction Grammar (pp.69–202). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Schmid, H. -J.
(2015) A blueprint of the Entrenchment-and-Conventionalization Model. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, 3, 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steels, L.
(2013) Fluid Construction Grammar. In Th. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar (pp.153–167). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(Ed.) (2011) Design Patterns in Fluid Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svensén, B.
(2009) A Handbook of Lexicography. The Theory and Practice of Dictionary-Making. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M.
(2003) Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
van Trijp, R., & Steels, L.
(2012) Multilevel alignment maintains language systematicity. Advances in Complex Systems, 15(3–4), 1–30.Google Scholar
Van de Velde, F.
(2012) Degeneracy: The maintenance of constructional networks. Leuven Working Papers in Linguistics, 1, 24–61.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 9 other publications

Boas, Hans C. & Steffen Höder
2018. Construction Grammar and language contact. In Constructions in Contact [Constructional Approaches to Language, 24], ► pp. 5 ff. DOI logo
Herbst, Thomas
2020. Constructions, generalizations, and the unpredictability of language. Constructions and Frames 12:1 ► pp. 56 ff. DOI logo
Herbst, Thomas
2022. Constructions, generalizations, and the unpredictability of language. In Construction Grammar across Borders [Benjamins Current Topics, 122], ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo
Martí Sánchez, Manuel
2020. Construcciones formales y tradiciones discursivas en cuatro textos médicos novatores fundamentales. Revista de Filología Española 100:1 ► pp. 161 ff. DOI logo
Ordines, Pedro Ivorra
2020. Comparisons and its variations in La plaça del Diamant from a Construction Grammar approach: between usage and creativity. Romanica Olomucensia 32:1 ► pp. 73 ff. DOI logo
Ranta, Aarne, Krasimir Angelov, Normunds Gruzitis & Prasanth Kolachina
2020. Abstract Syntax as Interlingua: Scaling Up the Grammatical Framework from Controlled Languages to Robust Pipelines. Computational Linguistics 46:2 ► pp. 425 ff. DOI logo
Willich, Alexander
2022. Elisabeth Zima. 2021. Einführung in die gebrauchsbasierte Kognitive Linguistik. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter. 352 S.. Zeitschrift für Rezensionen zur germanistischen Sprachwissenschaft 14:1-2 ► pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Zhukova, Valentina
2023. How to threaten in Russian: a constructionist approach. Russian Linguistics 47:2 ► pp. 141 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Discourse Structuring Markers in English [Constructional Approaches to Language, 33], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 september 2023. 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.