Edited by Mark Kaunisto, Mikko Höglund and Paul Rickman
[Studies in Language Companion Series 195] 2018
► pp. 15–30
Talk into vs convince to
Talking as a cause leading to containment, convincing as a cause leading to a result
This paper explores the causative constructions ‘talk NP into + ‑ing’ vs ‘convince NP to + infinitive’ by means of a collection of attested occurrences. It shows the connection between the characteristics described by Wierzbicka (1998), Gries & Stefanowitsch (2004) and Rudanko (2006) and the linguistically-signified semantic content involved in these structures. Wierzbicka’s account and the related Construction Grammar approach are shown to be wanting on both the descriptive and explanatory levels due to a distancing from the level on which a stable relation exists between meaning and linguistic form. An explanation of the distribution and semantics of the two constructions is proposed based on Langacker’s (1987) semiological principle, i.e. on the semantic content associated with each of the linguistic signs involved in these sequences.
- 2.Refining the observation of the empirical data
- 3.Explanations anyone?
- 4.Construction grammar, embodied cognition and the basic design architecture of human language
Cited by 2 other publications
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 08 october 2022. 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.