Is Cognitive Grammar a Usage-Based Model? Towards a Realistic Account of English Sentential Complements
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_misc/mj.200410394Keywords:
Cognitive Grammar, usage-based, sentential complementation, empirical support, iconicityAbstract
Cognitive Grammar (Langacker FCG1, FCG2) is commonly described as a usagebased model, a label applied to grammatical approaches which purport to give “substantial importance to the actual use of the linguistic system and a speaker’s knowledge of this use” (Langacker FCG1: 494). This paper examines this claim in the light of the Cognitive Grammar research on English sentential complements, and confronts its findings with empirical data on complementation retrieved from several computerized corpora of Present-day British and American English.
Downloads
References
ACHARD, Michel. 1998. Representation of Cognitive Structures. Syntax and Semantics of French Sentential Complements. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
BIBER, Douglas, Stig JOHANSSON, Geoffrey LEECH, Susan CONRAD and Edward FINEGAN. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow, Essex: Longman/Pearson.
CUYKENS, Hubert. 2004. “Competing variants —A diachronic perspective on the variation between gerunds and infinitives as verbal complements”. Paper presented at the Thirteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (13 ICEHL), University of Vienna, 23-29 August 2004.
CUYKENS, Hubert and Hendrik DE SMET. 2004. “Entrenchment as a factor in syntactic change”. Paper presented at the conference Current Trends in Cognitive Linguistics, University of Hamburg, 10-11 December 2004.
DEIGNAN, Alice. 1999. “Metaphorical polysemy and paradigmatic relations: a corpus study”. Word 50: 319-338.
DE SMET, Hendrik. 2005. “For... to-infinitives as verbal complements in Late Modern and Present-day English: between motivation and change”. Preprints van het Departement Linguistiek (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven) 225.
DIESSEL, Holger and Michael TOMASELLO. 2001. “The acquisition of finite complement clauses in English: a corpus-based analysis”. Cognitive Linguistics 12: 97-141.
DIRVEN, René. 1989. “A cognitive perspective on complementation”. In Jaspers, Dany, Wim Klooster, Yvan Putseys and Pieter Seuren. (eds.). Sentential Complementation and the Lexicon. Dordrecht: Foris: 113-139.
DIXON, Robert M.W. 1991. A New English Grammar, on SemanticPrinciples. Oxford: Oxford U. P.
—. 1995. “Complement clauses and complementation strategies”. In Palmer, Frank R. (ed.). Grammar and Meaning. Essays in Honour of Sir John Lyons. Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.: 175-220.
DUFFLEY, Patrick J. 1992. The English Infinitive. London: Longman.
—. 1999. “The use of the infinitive and the -ing after verbs denoting the beginning, middle and end of an event”. Folia Linguistica 33: 295-331.
—. 2000. “Gerund versus infinitive as complement of transitive verbs in English: the problems of ‘tense’ and ‘control’”. Journal of English Linguistics 28: 221-248.
—. 2003. “The gerund and the to-infinitive as subject”. Journal of English Linguistics 31: 324-352.
EGAN, Thomas. 2003. Distance and Direction: A Usage-Based Study of Infinitive and -ing Complement Clauses in English. Oslo: Unipub AS.
FANEGO, Teresa. 1996a. “The development of gerunds as objects of subject-control verbs in English (1400-1760)”. Diachronica 13: 29-62.
—. 1996b. “On the historical development of English retrospective verbs”. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 97: 71-79.
—. 2004a. “On reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change: the rise and development of English verbal gerunds”. Diachronica 21: 5-55.
—. 2004b. “Some strategies for coding sentential subjects in English: from exaptation to grammaticalization”. Studies in Language 28: 321-361.
—. Forthcoming. “‘I propose changing the type of clause’: developments in finite and nonfinite sentential complements in British and American English from 1700 to the present day”. In González-Álvarez, Dolores and Javier Pérez-Guerra. (eds.). Papers from the Second International Conference on the English language in the Late Modern Period 1700-1900, Vigo 25-27 November 2004.
FISCHER, Olga. 1992. “Syntax”. In Blake, Norman. (ed.). The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. II: 1066-1476. Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.: 207-408.
GIVÓN, Talmy. 1980. “The binding hierarchy and the typology of complements”. Studies in Language 4: 333-377.
—. 1993. English Grammar. A Function-based Introduction. Vol. II. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
HAIMAN, John. 1985. Natural Syntax: Iconicity and Erosion. Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.
HAMAWAND, Zeki. 2002. Atemporal Complement Clauses in English. A Cognitive Grammar Analysis. München: Lincom Europa.
—. 2003a. “The construal of atemporalisation in complement clauses in English”. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 1: 59-85.
—. 2003b. “For-to complement clauses in English: a Cognitive Grammar analysis”. Studia Linguistica 57/3: 171-192.
HEYVAERT, Liesbet. 2000. “Gerundive Nominalization: From Type Specification to Grounded Instance”. In Foolen, Ad and Frederike van der Leek. (eds.). Constructions in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins: 103-121.
—. 2003. A Cognitive-Functional Approach to Nominalization in English. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
HOFLAND, Knut, Anne LINDEBJERG and Jørn THUNESTVEDT. (eds.). 1999. ICAME COLLECTION of English Language Corpora, second edition. University of Bergen: The HIT Centre.
HORIE, Kaoru. (ed.). 2000. Complementation. Cognitive and Functional Perspectives. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
HORIE, Kaoru and Bernard COMRIE. 2000. “Introduction”. In Horie, Kaoru. (ed.): 1-10.
HUDDLESTON, Rodney. 1984. Introduction to the Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.
HUDDLESTON, Rodney and Geoffrey K. PULLUM. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.
HUNDT, Marianne and Christian MAIR. 1999. “‘Agile’ and ‘uptight’ genres: the corpus-based approach to language change in progress”. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4/2: 221-242.
JOHNSON, Mark. 1987. The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
KARTTUNEN, Lauri. 1971. “Implicative verbs”. Language 41: 340-358.
LAKOFF, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
LANGACKER, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, Cal.: Stanford U. P. [Cited as FCG1.]
LANGACKER, Ronald W. 1988a. “An overview of cognitive grammar”. In Rudzka-Ostyn, Brygida. (ed.): 3-48.
—. 1988b. “A view of linguistic semantics”. In Rudzka-Ostyn, Brygida. (ed.): 49-90.
—. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. II: Descriptive Application. Stanford, Cal.: Stanford U. P. [Cited as FCG2.]
—. 1992. “Prepositions as grammatical(izing) elements”. Leuvense Bijdragen 81: 287-309.
—. 1999. Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
MAIR, Christian. 1990. Infinitival Complement Clauses in English. A Study of Syntax in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.
—. 2002. “Three changing patterns of verb complementation in Late Modern English: a real-time study based on matching text corpora”. English Language and Linguistics 6: 105-131.
—. 2003. “Gerundial complements after begin and start: Grammatical and sociolinguistic factors, and how they work against each other”. In Rohdenburg, Günter and Britta Mondorf. (eds.): 329-345.
MAIR, Christian and Geoffrey LEECH. Forthcoming. “Current changes in English syntax”. In Aarts, Bas and April McMahon. (eds.). The Handbook of English Linguistics. Malden, Mass. and Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
MILLER, D. Gary. 2002. Nonfinite Structures in Theory and Change. Oxford: Oxford U. P.
NEWMEYER, Frederick J. 2003. “Grammar is grammar and usage is usage”. Language 79/4: 682-707.
NOËL, Dirk. 2003. “Is there semantics in all syntax? The case of accusative and infinitive constructions vs. that-clauses”. In Rohdenburg, Günter and Britta Mondorf. (eds.): 347-377.
NOONAN, Michael. 1985. “Complementation”. In Shopen, Timothy. (ed.). Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. II: Complex Constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge U. P: 42-140.
PALMER, Frank R. 1965. A Linguistic Study of the English Verb. London: Longman.
PEÑA, Sandra. 2003. Topology and Cognition: What Image-Schemas Reveal about the Metaphorical Language of Emotions. Muenchen: Lincom Europa.
QUIRK, Randolph, Sidney GREENBAUM, Geoffrey LEECH and Jan SVARTVIK. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London and New York: Longman.
ROHDENBURG, Günter and Britta MONDORF. (eds.). 2003. Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
ROSCH, Eleanor. 1977. “Human categorization”. In Warren, Neil. (ed.). Studies in Cross-cultural Psychology, Vol. I. London: Academic Press: 1-49.
RUDANKO, Juhani. 1998. Change and Continuity in the English Language. Studies on Complementation over the Past Three Hundred Years. Lanham, New York and Oxford: University Press of America.
RUDZKA-OSTYN, Brygida. (ed.). 1988. Topics in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
RUIZ DE MENDOZA, Francisco José. 2004. “Exploiting corpus-based analysis in Cognitive Linguistics: advantages and limitations”. Paper presented at the Fourth Conference of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association (AELCO/SCOLA), Zaragoza, 13-15 May.
SMITH, Michael B. and Joyce ESCOBEDO. 2001. “The semantics of to-infinitival vs. -ing verb complement constructions in English”. In Andronis, Mary, Christopher Ball, Heidi Helston and Sylvain Neuvel. (eds.). The Proceedings from the Main Session of the Chicago Linguistic Society’s Thirty-seventh Meeting. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society: 549-563.
TAYLOR, John R. 1996. Possessives in English. Oxford: Oxford U. P.
—. 2002. Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford U. P.
THOMPSON, Sandra A. 2002. “‘Object complements’ and conversation: towards a realistic account”. Studies in Language 26: 125-164.
TRAUGOTT, Elizabeth Closs. 1992. “Syntax”. In Hogg, Richard M. (ed.). The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. I: The Beginnings to 1066. Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.: 168-289.
VERSPOOR, Marjolijn. 1990. Semantic Criteria in English Complement Selection. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Leiden.
VERSPOOR, Marjolijn. 1996. “The story of -ing: a subjective perspective”. In Pütz, Martin and René Dirven. (eds.). The Construal of Space in Language and Thought. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter: 417-454.
VERSPOOR, Marjolijn. 2000. “Iconicity in English complement constructions: conceptual distance and cognitive processing levels”. In Horie, Kaoru. (ed.): 199-225.
VISSER, Frederikus Theodorus. 1963-1973. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. 3 parts in 4 vols. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
WIERZBICKA, Anna. 1988. The Semantics of Grammar. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2004 Teresa Fanego
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
