Usage-based models of language: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 17:55, 7 December 2023

Latest revision as of 21:56, 18 July 2025

(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Short description|Linguistics approach / theory}}

{{Linguistics}}

The '''usage-based linguistics''' is a [[linguistics]] approach within a broader [[Functional linguistics|functional]]/[[Cognitive linguistics|cognitive]] framework, that emerged since the late 1980s, and that assumes a profound relation between linguistic structure and usage.<ref name="Mengden2014">{{Cite book |doi = 10.1075/sfsl.69.01men|chapter = Introduction. The role of change in usage-based conceptions of language|title = Usage-Based Approaches to Language Change|series = Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics|year = 2014|last1 = von Mengden|first1 = Ferdinand|last2 = Coussé|first2 = Evie|volume = 69|pages = 1–20|isbn = 978-90-272-1579-6}}</ref> It challenges the dominant focus, in 20th century linguistics (and in particular conin [[Formal linguistics|formalism]]-[[generativism]]), on considering language as an isolated system removed from its use in human interaction and human cognition.<ref name="Mengden2014"/> Rather, usage-based models posit that linguistic information is expressed via context-sensitive mental processing and mental representations, which have the cognitive ability to succinctly account for the complexity of actual language use at all levels ([[phonetics]] and [[phonology]], morphology and [[syntax]], [[pragmatics]] and [[semantics]]). Broadly speaking, a usage-based model of language accounts for [[language acquisition]] and processing, synchronic and diachronic patterns, and both low-level and high-level structure in language, by looking at actual language use.

The term ''usage-based'' was coined by [[Ronald Langacker]] in 1987.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Serafima Gettys, Patricia Bayona, Rocío Rodríguez|title=From a Usage-Based Model to Usage-Based Instruction: Testing the theory|url=http://ijehd.cgrd.org/images/vol4no2/6.pdf|journal=International Journal of Education and Human Developments|volume=4|pages=50}}</ref> Usage-based models of language have become a significant new trend in linguistics since the early 2000s.<ref name="Mengden2014" /> Influential proponents of usage-based linguistics include [[Michael Tomasello]], [[Joan Bybee]] and [[Morten H. Christiansen|Morten Christiansen]].

Line 12:

West Coast cognitive functionalism (WCCF) played a major role in the creation of the usage-based enterprise.

Firstly, a crucial point in WCCF was [[Eleanor Rosch]]’s paper on semantic categories in human cognition,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Boyes-Braem |first1=P |last2=Johnson |first2=D |last3=Gray |first3=W. |last4=Mervis |first4=C.B.|last5=Rosch |first5=E. |title=Basic objects in natural categories |journal=Cognitive Psychology |date=1976}}</ref> which studied fuzzy semantic categories with central and peripheral concepts. Subsequently, [[Robin Lakoff]] (1987) applied these concepts to linguistic studies. For usage-based models of language, these discoveries legitimized interest in the peripheral phenomena and inspired the examination of the ontological status of the rules themselves.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Iverson, G.K. |last2=Corrigan, R.L. |first1=Lima, S.D. |title=The reality of linguistic rules |___location=Amsterdam |publisher=John Benjamins |date=1994}}</ref>

Secondly, WCCF focuses on the effects of social/ textual context and cognitive processes on human thought, instead of established systems and representations, which motivated the study of external sources in usage-based language research. For example, in analyzing the differences between the grammatical notions of subject vs. topic, Li and Thompson (1976), found that the repetition of certain topics by a [[speech community]] resulted in the surfacing and crystallization of formal properties into syntactic entities, namely the subject.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Givon |first1=T |chapter=From discourse to syntax: Grammar as a processing strategy |editor=T. Givón |title=Discourse and Syntax |volume=12 |pages=81–109 |___location=New York |publisher=Academic Press |date=1979b}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Givon |firstfirst1=T. |title=On understanding grammar |___location=New York |publisher=Academic Press|date=1979c}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Givon |first1=T |chapter=Modes of knowledge and modes of processing. The routinization of behavior and information|title=Mind, Code, and Context: Essays in Pragmatics |pages=237–268 |___location=Hillsdale, NJ |publisher=Erlbaum|date=1989}}</ref> This notion of syntax and morphology being an outcome of pragmatic and cognitive factors<ref>{{cite book|last1=Hopper |first1=P. J. |chapter=When 'Grammar' and Discourse Clash: The Problem of Source Conflicts |editor1=J. Bybee |editor2=J. Haiman |editor3=S. A. Thompson |title=Essays on Language Function and Language Type |pages=231–247 |___location=Amsterdam |publisher=John Benjamins|date=1997}}</ref> was influential in the development of usage-based models.

Thirdly, the WCCF methodology of [[linguistic typology]]<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Greenberg |first1=J.H. |title=A quantitative approach to the morphological typology of language |journal= International Journal of American Linguistics |volume=26 |pages=178–194|date=1960|issue=3 |doi=10.1086/464575 |s2cid=144261944 }}</ref> is similarly practised in usage-based models, in collecting data from real communicative contexts and analyzing them for typological regularities. This highlights an important aspect of usage-based research, the study of methods for the integration of synchrony and diachrony.

Line 21:

'''Bybee's Dynamic Usage-based framework'''

[[Joan Bybee|Bybee]]’s work<ref>{{cite book|last1=Bybee |first1=J. L.|title=Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form|___location=Amsterdam |publisher=John Benjamins|date=1985}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Bybee |first=J. L.|title=Phonology and language use |___location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge University Press|date=2001}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Bybee |first=J. L.|title=Frequency of use and the organization of language |___location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press|date=2006}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{cite book|last1=Bybee |first1=J. L.|last2= Perkins |first2= R.D.|last3= Pagliuca |first3=W.|title=The evolution of grammar: tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world|___location=Chicago |publisher=University of Chicago Press|date=1994}}</ref> greatly inspired the creation of usage-based models of language. Bybee’s model makes predictions about and explains synchronic, diachronic and typological patterns within languages, such as which variants will occur in which contexts, what forms they will take, and about their diachronic consequences. Using the linguistic phenomenon of splits (when a word starts to show subtle polysemy, and morphological possibilities for the originally single form ensue), Bybee proves that even irreducibly irregular word-forms are seen to be non-arbitrary when the context it occurs in is taken into consideration in the very representation of morphology. Simultaneously, she shows that even seemingly regular allomorphy is context-sensitive. Splits also aligns with the idea that linguistic forms cannot be studied as isolated entities, but rather in relation to the strength of their attachment to other entities.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Luce |firstfirst1=P.A.|last2=Pisoni |first2=D.B|last3=Goldinger |first3=S.D.|chapter=Similarity neighborhoods of spoken words |editor=G. T. M. Altmann |title=Cognitive Models of Speech Processing: Psycholinguistic and Computational Perspectives |pages=122–147 |___location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=MIT Press|date=1990}}</ref>

=== Schmid's Entrenchment-and-Conventionalization model ===

[[Hans-Jörg Schmid]]’s "Entrenchment-and-Conventionalization" Model offers a comprehensive recent summary approach to usage-based thinking.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Schmid|first=Hans-Jörg|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1139239358|title=The dynamics of the linguistic system : usage, conventionalization, and entrenchment|date=2020|isbn=978-0-19-254637-1|edition=First|___location=Oxford|oclc=1139239358}}</ref> In great detail and with reference to many sub-disciplines and concepts in linguistics he shows how usage mediates between entrenchment, the establishment of linguistic habits in individuals via repetition and associations, and conventionalization, a continuous feedback cycle which builds shared collective linguistic knowledge. All three components connect linguistic utterance types with their respective situative settings and extralinguistic associations.

== Frequency explanation ==

Line 31:

== Constructions: Form-meaning pairings<ref>{{cite web |last1=Bybee |first1=Joan L. |title=Usage-based Theory and Exemplar Representations of Constructions |url=https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199544004-e-032 |website=Oxford Handbooks Online}}</ref>==

{{Main|Construction grammar}}

Constructions have direct pairing of form to meaning without intermediate structures, making them appropriate for usage-based models. The usage-based model adopts constructions as the basic unit of form-meaning correspondence.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Filmore |first1=Charles J. |chapter=The mechanisms of Construction Grammar |title=Proceedings of the 14th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society |journal=Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society |date=1988 |volume=14 |pages=35–55|doi=10.3765/bls.v14i0.1794 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Croft |first1=William |title=Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective |___location=Oxford |publisher=Oxford University Press |date=2001}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Goldberg |first1=Adele E. |title=Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalizations in Language |___location=Oxford |publisher=Oxford University Press |date=2006}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Goldberg |first1=Adele E. |title=Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure |___location=Chicago |publisher=University of Chicago Press. |date=1995}}</ref> A construction is commonly regarded to be a conventionalized string of words. A key feature of a grammar based on constructions is that it can reflect the deeply intertwined lexical items and grammar structure.

From a [[grammar]]ian perspective, constructions are groupings of words with idiosyncratic behaviour to a certain extent. They mostly take on an unpredictable meaning or pragmatic effect, or are formally special. From a broader perspective, construction can also be seen as processing units or chunks, such as sequences of words (or [[morphemes]]) which have been used often enough to be accessed together. This implicates that common words sequences are sometimes constructions even if they do not have [[idiosyncrasies]] or form.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Goldberg |first1=Adele E. |last2=Casenhiser |first2=Devin |chapter=English Constructions |editor1=Bas Aarts |editor2=April McMahon |title=The Handbook of English Linguistics |date=2006 |___location=Malden, MA |publisher=Wiley-Blackwell |pages=343–55|doi=10.1002/9780470753002.ch15 |isbn=9780470753002 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bybee |first1=Joan L. |last2=Eddington |first2=David |title=A usage-based approach to Spanish verbs of becoming |journal=Language |date=2006 |volume=82 |issue=2 |pages=323–55|doi=10.1353/lan.2006.0081 |s2cid=145635167 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Bybee |first1=Joan L. |last2=Hopper |first2=Paul J. |title=Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure |___location=Amsterdam |publisher=John Benjamins |date=2001}}</ref> Additionally, chunks or conventionalized sequences can tend to develop special pragmatic implications that can lead to special meaning over time. They can also develop idiosyncrasies of form in a variety of ways.