Or constructions
Code, inference and cue too
Utterance interpretation involves semantically specified codes and context-based pragmatic inferences, which
complement each other. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate the very complex relation between a subset of codes, Goldbergian
constructions, specifically ones centering around ‘alternativity’, and pragmatic inferences. I analyze a variety of
or constructions and sub-constructions, emphasizing not only the role of coded constructions on the one hand,
and of inferences, on the other hand, but also of cues, namely, linguistic forms that bias towards a specific interpretation,
although they do not encode that interpretation. The synchronic variability with respect to the relative contribution of code,
inference and cue reflects a grammaticization cycle whereby codes (here constructions) are routinely enriched by inferences, often
supported by cues, which in turn may evolve into new codes (here sub-constructions).
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Inferring alternativity
- 3.The core or construction and its inferred readings
- 4.Complex core constructions
- 5.Specialized sub-constructions
- 5.1
Or something like that
- 5.2The ascending consecutive numeral sub-construction
- 5.3Two Hamlet or sub-constructions
- 5.3.1
The Dilemma or sub-construction
- 5.3.2
The hybrid or not to be sub-construction
- 6.Constructions: Code, inference and cue too
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References
References
Anscombre, J.-C., & Ducrot, O.
(
1976)
L’argumentation dans la langue.
Langages, 421, 5–27.
Ariel, M.
(
2008)
Pragmatics and grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ariel, M.
(
2010)
Defining pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ariel, M.
(
2015)
Higher-level category or constructions: When many is one.
Studies in Pragmatics, 171, 42–60.
Ariel, M., & Mauri, C.
(
2018)
Why use or? Linguistics, 561, 939–994.
Ariel, M., & Mauri, C.
(
2019)
An ‘alternative’ core for or
.
Journal of Pragmatics, 1491, 40–59.
Barðdal, J., Smirnova, E., Sommerer, L., & Gildea, S.
Bod, R.
(
2006)
Exemplar-based syntax: How to get productivity from examples? The Linguistic Review: Special issue on exemplar-based models of language, 231, 291–320.
Bybee, J.
(
2001)
Phonology and language use [
Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 94]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J.
(
2010)
Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Croft, W.
(
2001)
Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dattner, E.
(
2015)
Mapping the Hebrew dative constructions. Ph.D. Thesis, Tel Aviv University.
Du Bois, J. W., Chafe, W. L., Meyer, C., Thompson, S. A., Englebretson, R., & Martey, N.
(
2000–2005)
Santa Barbara corpus of spoken American English,
Parts 1–4: Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.
Giora, R.
submitted).
Defaultness vs. Constructionism: The case of default constructional sarcasm and default non-constructional literalness. In
H. Colston,
G. Steen, &
T. Matlock Eds.
Metaphor in language, cognition, and communication (MiLCC) Amsterdam John Benjamins
Giora, R., Givoni, S., & Fein, O.
(
2015)
Defaultness reigns: The case of sarcasm.
Metaphor and Symbol, 301, 290–313.
Givón, T.
(
1979)
On understanding grammar. New York: Academic Press.
Goldberg, A.
(
1995)
Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, A.
(
2006)
Constructions at work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grice, H. P.
(
1989)
Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Hilpert, M.
(
2014)
Construction Grammar and its application to English. Edinburg: Edinburgh University Press.
Kuno, S.
(
1972)
Functional sentence perspective: A case study from Japanese and English.
Linguistic Inquiry, 31, 269–320.
Langacker, R. W.
(
1987)
Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Mauri, C.
(
2008)
Coordination relations in the languages of Europe and beyond. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Mauri, C., & Van der Auwera, J.
(
2012)
Connectives. In
A. Keith &
K. Jaszczolt (Eds.),
The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 377–401). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Prince, E. F.
(
1976)
The syntax and semantics of Neg-Raising, with evidence from French.
Language, 521, 404–426.
Prince, E. F.
(
1978)
A comparison of WH-clefts and IT-clefts in discourse.
Language, 541, 883–906.
Sinclair, J. M.
(
1991)
Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D.
(
1986/1995)
Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S. Th.
Thompson, S. A.
(
2002)
Constructions and conversation. Unpublished MS., UC Santa Barbara.
Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. B.
(
2002)
Regularity in semantic change [
Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 97]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Traugott, E. C., & Trousdale, G.
(
2013)
Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cited by
Cited by 2 other publications
Georgakopoulos, Thanasis, Eliese-Sophia Lincke, Kiki Nikiforidou & Anna Piata
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 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.