Chapter 3
Collocations in a functional and cognitive framework
Article outline
- 3.1What is ‘cognitive’ and what is ‘functional’ about language?
- 3.2Methodological issues
- 3.2.1Corpus studies, frequency, and prototypicality
- 3.2.2Linguistic evidence of cognitive routines
- 3.2.3Synchronic evidence of diachronic processes
- 3.3Introduction to the empirical part
- 3.3.1Research questions and motivation
- 3.3.2Design of case study
- 3.3.3A general presentation of the data
- 3.4Case study: Break an appointment
- 3.4.1How to approach the analysis of a complex category
- 3.4.1.1How many meanings does a word have?
- 3.4.1.2Domains, image schemas, and construction types
- 3.4.2The internal structure of break
- 3.4.2.1Abstract domains and referential range
- 3.4.2.2Image schemas and event-structure
- 3.4.2.3Construction types
- 3.4.2.4How many meanings does break have?
- 3.4.3The internal structure of appointment
- 3.4.3.1Abstract domains and referential range
- 3.4.3.2Lexical sets, basic-level categories, and domains of variation
- 3.4.3.3Image schemas and event-structure
- 3.4.3.4Construction types
- 3.4.3.5How many meanings does appointment have?
- 3.4.4The integration of break and appointment
- 3.4.4.1Break an appointment as a composite structure
- 3.4.4.2Evidence of entrenchment
- 3.4.4.3Can a support-verb function be posited for break?
- 3.4.4.4Is break as a support verb grammaticalized?
- 3.5Summary of findings related to research questions
- 3.5.1To what extent are conventional and entrenched collocations like other composite structures?
- 3.5.2In what respects are conventional and entrenched collocations special?
- 3.5.3Can conventional and entrenched collocations be characterized in terms of salience?
- 3.5.4Do verbs in conventional and entrenched collocations function as support verbs, and does this imply
grammaticalization?
- 3.5.5Concluding remarks on research questions
-
Notes