Expanding Construction Grammar and Frame Semantics
Expanding Construction Grammar and Frame Semantics Expanding Construction Grammar and Frame Semantics
Mini-constructions capture item-specific knowledge – yet they’re still specific instantiations of a higher level schematic construction (redundancy) 62
AHTY with Class I verbs • Cannot occur with a hole as their direct object argument alone: Brian pushed a car/*Brian pushed a hole. • Class I verbs are licensed by their miniconstructions acquiring new meanings because they’re capable of unifying with the AHTY construction • Speaker employs existing grammatical resources to create novel sentences 63
- Page 11 and 12: Minimalism • Lexicon • Operatio
- 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
- Page 60 and 61: Mini-constructions: distribution of
- Page 64 and 65: Joe knocked a hole through the wall
- Page 66 and 67: Partial Productivity - Constraint 1
- Page 68 and 69: Constraint 3 • Physical propertie
- Page 70 and 71: Narrow scope of application / Produ
- Page 72 and 73: Fillmore et al. (1988): [the X-er t
- Page 74 and 75: Construction Grammar(s) • Constru
- Page 76 and 77: Different constructionist approache
- Page 78 and 79: syntax, semantics, phonology 78
- Page 80: Give-construction (Kay & Fillmore 1
AHTY with Class I verbs<br />
• Cannot occur with a hole as their direct<br />
object argument alone:<br />
Brian pushed a car/*Brian pushed a hole.<br />
• Class I verbs are licensed by their miniconstructions<br />
acquiring new meanings<br />
because they’re capable of unifying with<br />
the AHTY construction<br />
• Speaker employs existing grammatical<br />
resources to create novel sentences<br />
63
Change language