Expanding Construction Grammar and Frame Semantics
Expanding Construction Grammar and Frame Semantics Expanding Construction Grammar and Frame Semantics
Minimalism (Chomsky 1995) • X-bar theory replaced by Bare Phrase Structure (BPS) • Elimination of D-structure/S-structure distinction • Elimination of empty categories • No language- or construction-specific syntax • Focus on larger theoretical questions: (a) To what extent is language optimally “designed” according to minimalist design specifications? (b) What are minimal design specifications? What is optimal? 10
Minimalism • Lexicon • Operations (merge, agree, procrastinate, etc.) • Derivations The key is that everything is motivated by basic principles of minimal design: “UG provides a fixed system of principles and a finite array of finitely valued parameters. The language-particular rules reduce to choice of values for these parameters. The notion of grammatical construction is eliminated, and with it, construction-particular rules.” (Chomsky 1993: 4) 11
- Page 1 and 2: Expanding Construction Grammar and
- Page 3 and 4: Chomsky’s Principles and Paramete
- Page 5 and 6: Chomsky’s Principles and Paramete
- Page 7 and 8: Chomsky (1981) (c) Organization of
- Page 9: • Movement is “structure preser
- Page 13 and 14: Differences between frameworks Chom
- Page 15 and 16: Symbolic link between form and func
- Page 17 and 18: Another difference Although most of
- Page 19 and 20: Uniform representation of all gramm
- Page 21 and 22: wanna-contraction (Boas 2004) 21
- Page 24 and 25: All levels of grammatical analysis
- Page 26 and 27: Organization of constructional know
- Page 28 and 29: Taxonomic relations allow us to dis
- Page 30 and 31: Combination of different constructi
- Page 32 and 33: Interaction between constructions a
- Page 34 and 35: Frame Semantics •A “frame” is
- Page 36 and 37: Sample Event Frame: Commercial Tran
- Page 38 and 39: Different Perspectives Lexical Unit
- Page 40 and 41: Frame Description 40
- Page 42 and 43: Lexical Entry Report 42
- Page 44 and 45: What’s Frame Semantic Information
- Page 46 and 47: Polysemy at different levels: argum
- Page 48 and 49: Constructional Polysemy of Caused M
- Page 50 and 51: Distribution of AHTY (class I verbs
- Page 52 and 53: Can we analyze AHTY as a sub- type
- Page 54 and 55: Verb classes • But not all of Lev
- Page 56 and 57: The AHTY Construction (decoding) 56
- Page 58 and 59: Proposal • Conventionalized meani
Minimalism<br />
• Lexicon<br />
• Operations (merge, agree, procrastinate, etc.)<br />
• Derivations<br />
The key is that everything is motivated by basic<br />
principles of minimal design:<br />
“UG provides a fixed system of principles <strong>and</strong> a<br />
finite array of finitely valued parameters. The<br />
language-particular rules reduce to choice of<br />
values for these parameters. The notion of<br />
grammatical construction is eliminated, <strong>and</strong> with<br />
it, construction-particular rules.” (Chomsky 1993: 4)<br />
11
Change language