Usage-based models of language: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 02:42, 26 May 2021

Revision as of 14:38, 12 June 2021

Line 25:

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 |page=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|grammarian]] 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 |page=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 |page=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.

*It drives me crazy.