Introduction

Lexicalization, grammaticalization and constructionalization of the verb give across languages

This cognitive contrastive study across ten languages (Chinese, Dalabon, English, French, Spanish, Romanian, Kurdish, Khmer, Polish, Tibetan) focuses on the verb give and its syntactic-semantic interface based on six main points, namely argument structure, lexical semantics and event structure, role marking in the three-argument construction and in other constructions, lexicalization, grammaticalization and constructionalization of the verb from a cognitive construction grammar point of view (the lexicon-grammar continuum). Transfer of possession is a basic concept in human experience; we hypothesize (a) that basic semantic features motivate the meaning and grammatical extensions of the verb give inside a single system and (b) that a similar set of core semantic dimensions represent the meaning of the form across languages, and motivate a variety of meaning extensions across time. We propose, following Brinton and Traugott 2005, Croft 2001, and Ruppenhofer and Michaelis 2001, that a continuum approach to grammar and lexicon is needed to describe the typological and historical facts. We argue that there is a concrete and abstract transfer, a ‘cluster model’ involving coverage of lexical and grammatical extension or bleaching phenomena and that the semantic extensions (metaphorical and otherwise) exploit various portions of this schema. This book proposes analyses of various phenomena illustrating and proving the grammar to lexicon continuum, in synchrony and diachrony: language innovations, grammaticalization chains, constructionalization analysis, and an invariant hypothesis of the verb give as a basic verb in human cognition. This introduction chapter illustrates the general hypothesis of the book and explains in particular the syntax-semantics interface of give constructions partly through a cognitive frame and constructions principle. The present book studies give across ten languages, looking at constructions through the concept of an image schema of TRANSFER (Source/Causation/Direction/Goal Location) which cognitively motivates the different give forms and functions across languages, in particular its polyfunctionality throughout language innovation processes (as 1. a full verb (in all the languages) as 2. a directional preposition (e.g. in Chinese) or as 3. a causative in “serial verbs”/complex predicates/verbal periphrases (e.g. Kurdish, French, Romanian) or as 4. a support/light verb (e.g. Khmer, Tibetan, Kurdish)) showing a universal grammaticalization path such as go or similarly to have as a commonly and frequently used verb. Each language throughout the volume, however, shows its own specifications in meaning, grammar and culture of the giving events: e,g. comitative in Dalabon for concrete/abstract transfer constructions or e.g. honorific gnang/humilific phul give verbs in Tibetan, alternations such as e.g. perfective/imperfective give forms in Polish dać/dawać or the learning of give transitive/intransitive constructions by children in English through the acquisition of giving-event scenarios.