La construcción con objetos de reacción: Un caso de contaminación construccional
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_misc/mj.20226826Palabras clave:
Gramática de Construcciones Diacrónica, construcción con objetos de reacción, diversidad léxica, contaminación construccional, construcción de herencia múltiple, transitivizaciónResumen
Este artículo aborda un caso de contaminación construccional (Pijpops y Van de Velde 2016; Pijpops et al. 2018), un fenómeno que describe la relación entre dos o más construcciones en las que la frecuencia de uso de una de ellas ejerce una influencia en los patrones de variación de otra (Hilpert y Flach 2022). Más concretamente, se investiga el efecto de estructuras inglesas del tipo she gave a nod of intelligence o she nodded with satisfaction sobre la variación que muestra la posición del objeto en la denominada construcción con objetos de reacción inglesa (ROC, Levin 1993; e.g. she nodded intelligence, she nodded satisfaction). A través de un corpus de novelas sentimentales británicas (Ruano San Segundo y Bouso 2019) y varios análisis colostruccionales (Gries y Stefanowitsch 2004; Hilpert 2006, 2014), se argumenta que estructuras frecuentes superficialmente similares a la construcción con objetos de reacción explican en gran medida la diversidad léxica que manifiesta la ROC a lo largo del siglo XIX (Bouso 2020b). Los resultados obtenidos corroboran la persistencia del fenómeno de la contaminación construccional, confirman el tratamiento de la ROC como un caso de construcción de herencia múltiple (Bouso 2021), y arrojan nuevas luces al proceso de transitivización que ha caracterizado a la lengua inglesa desde el periodo del inglés antiguo.
Descargas
Citas
Bouso, Tamara. 2017. “Muttering Contempt and Smiling Appreciation: Disentangling the History of the Reaction Object Construction in English”. English Studies 98 (2): 194-215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0013838X.2016.1210358
Bouso, Tamara. 2020a. “The Growth of the Transitivising Reaction Object Construction”. Constructions and Frames 12 (2): 239-271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00041.bou
Bouso, Tamara. 2020b. “The Shaping of the Late Modern English Reaction Object Construction”. In López Ropero, Lourdes, Sara Prieto García-Cañedo and José Antonio Sánchez Fajardo (eds.) Thresholds and Ways forward in English Studies. Alicante: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alicante: 179-191.
Bouso, Tamara. 2021. Changes in Argument Structure. The Transitivizing Reaction Object Construction. Bern: Peter Lang.
Bouso, Tamara and Pablo Ruano San Segundo. 2021a. “Another Turn of the Screw on the History of the Reaction Object Construction”. Functions of Language 28 (2): 208-231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.20026.bou
Bouso, Tamara and Pablo Ruano San Segundo. 2021b. “The British Sentimental Novel Corpus (BSNC) and the ROC-DDC Alternation at the Level of the Individual”. Nordic Journal of English Studies 20 (1): 215-257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.659
Boyd, Jeremy K. and Adele E. Goldberg. 2011. “Learning What Not to Say: The Role of Statistical Preemption and Categorization in A-adjective Production”. Language 1 (87): 55-83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2011.0012
Davies, Mark. 2008. “The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA)”. <http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/>. Accessed May 28, 2021.
Davies, Mark. 2010. “The Corpus of Historical American English (COHA)”. <https://www.english-corpora.org/coha/>. Accessed May 28, 2021.
De Smet, Hendrik, Frauke D’hoedt, Lauren Fonteyn and Kristel Van Goethem. 2018. “The Changing Functions of Competing Forms: Attraction and Differentiation”. Cognitive Linguistics 29 (2) 197-234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0025
De Smet, Hendrik, Lobke Ghesquière and Freek Van de Velde. (eds.) 2013. On Multiple Source Constructions in Language Change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
do Rosário, Ivo da Costa. 2019. “Interview with Graeme Trousdale / Entrevista com Graeme Trousdale”. Soletras 37 (19): 10-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12957/soletras.2019.36451
Felser, Claudia and Anja Wanner. 2001. “The Syntax of Cognate and Other Unselected Objects”. In Dehé, Nicole and Anja Wanner (eds.) Structural Aspects of Semantically Complex Verbs. Bern: Peter Lang: 105-130.
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford U.P.
Goldberg, Adele E. 2019. Explain me This: Creativity, Competition, and the Partial Productivity of Constructions. Princeton: Princeton U.P.
Gries, Stefan Th. 2014. “Coll.analysis 3.5. A Script for R to Compute Perform Collostructional Analyses”. <http://www.stgries.info/teaching/groningen/index.html>. Accessed May 28, 2021.
Gries, Stefan Th. and Anatol Stefanowitsch. 2004. “Extending Collostructional Analysis: A Corpus-based Perspective on Alternations”. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 1 (9): 97-129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06gri
Hilpert, Martin. 2006. “Distinctive Collexeme Analysis and Diachrony”. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 2 (2): 243-256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CLLT.2006.012
Hilpert, Martin. 2014. “Collostructional Analysis: Measuring Associations between Constructions and Lexical Elements”. In Glynn, Dylan and Justyna A. Robinson (eds.) Corpus Methods for Semantics: Quantitative Studies in Polysemy and Synonymy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 391-404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.43.15hil
Hilpert, Martin. 2018. “Three Open Questions in Diachronic Construction Grammar”. In Coussé, Evie and Joel Olofsson (eds.) Grammaticalization Meets Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 21-39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.21.c2
Hilpert, Martin. (2014) 2019. Construction Grammar and its Application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh U.P.
Hilpert, Martin. 2021. “Variable Adverb Placement in the English Passive: It has to be Analyzed Carefully / Carefully Analysed”. VI Setmana del Postgrau, Palma de Mallorca (online), Universitat de les Illes Balears, April 23.
Hilpert, Martin and Holger Diessel. 2017. “Entrenchment in Construction Grammar”. In Schmid, Hans-Jörg (ed.) Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How We Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton: 57-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/15969-004
Hilpert, Martin and Susanne Flach. 2022. “A Case of Constructional Contamination in English: Modified Noun Phrases Influence Adverb Placement in the Passive”. In Grygiel, Marcin (ed.) Contrast and Analogy in Language: Perspectives from Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 1-24.
Kogusuri, Tetsuya. 2009. “The Syntax and Semantics of Reaction Object Constructions in English”. Tsukuba English Studies 28: 33-53.
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford U.P.
Levin, Beth. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Luiz Wiedemer, Marcos, Marcia Machado Vieira and Maria Maura Cezario. 2019. “A Discussion on the Relationship between Variation and Change in Construction Grammar: Interview with Martin Hilpert”. Diadorim 21 (2): 30-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12957/cadsem.2018.36724
Martínez-Vázquez, Montserrat. 2010. “Reaction Object Constructions in English: A Corpus-based Study”. In Moskowich, Isabel, Begoña Crespo-García and Inés Lareo (eds.) Language Windowing through Corpora. A Coruña: SP da Universidade de A Coruña: 551-556.
Martínez-Vázquez, Montserrat. 2014. “Reaction Object Constructions in English and Spanish”. ES. Revista de Filología Inglesa 3: 193-217.
Martínez-Vázquez, Montserrat. 2015. “Nominalized Expressive Acts in English”. Verbum 37 (1): 147-170.
Martínez-Vázquez, Montserrat. 2016. “La construcción llorar las penas: Un nuevo caso de tipología germánica en una lengua romance”. Verba. Anuario Galego de Filoloxía 43: 107-128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15304/verba.43.2051
Martínez-Vázquez, Montserrat. 2020. “Trump tuiteó su malestar: English Argument Structure Borrowing in Spanish”. Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada 19 (2): 126-144.
Mirto, Ignazio Mauro. 2007. “Dream a Little Dream of Me: Cognate Predicates in English”. 26th International Conference on Lexis and Grammar, Bonifacio, France, October 2-6. <http://infolingu.univ-mlv.fr/Colloques/Bonifacio/proceedings/mirto.pdf>. Accessed May 28, 2021.
Mondorf, Britta. 2016. “Snake Legs It to Freedom: Dummy It as Pseudo-object”. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1 (12): 73-102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2015-0071
Mondorf, Britta and Ulrike Schneider. 2016. “Detransitivisation as a Support Strategy for Causative Bring”. English Language and Linguistics 3 (20): 439-462. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674316000290
Perek, Florent. 2020. “Productivity and Schematicity in Constructional Change”. In Sommerer, Lotte and Elena Smirnova (eds.) Nodes and Networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 142-166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.04per
Pijpops, Dirk, Isabeau De Smet and Freek Van de Velde. 2018. “Constructional Contamination in Morphology and Syntax: Four Case Studies”. Constructions and Frames 2 (10): 269-305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00021.pij
Pijpops, Dirk, Isabeau De Smet and Freek Van de Velde. 2021. “Attraction through Formal Resemblance. Five Case Studies on Constructional Contamination”. 5th Usage-based Linguistic Conference, Tel Aviv (online), Israel, July 5-7. <https://limo.libis.be/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=LIRIAS3480390&context=L&vid=Lirias&search_scope=Lirias&tab=default_tab&lang=en_US&fromSitemap=1>. Accessed September 28, 2021.
Pijpops, Dirk and Freek Van de Velde. 2016. “Constructional Contamination: How Does it Work and how do we Measure it?” Folia Linguistica 2 (50): 543-581. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00021.pij
Ross, John Robert. 1970. “On Declarative Sentences”. In Jacobs, Roderick A. and Peter S. Rosenbaum (eds.) Readings in English Transformational Grammar. Waltham, MA: Ginn and Company: 222-277.
Rowland, Ann. 2008. “Sentimental Fiction”. In Maxwell, Richard and Katie Trumpener (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to Fiction in the Romantic Period. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P.: 191-206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL9780521862523.012
Ruano San Segundo, Pablo and Tamara Bouso. 2019. British Sentimental Novel Corpus (BSNC). Cáceres: Departamento de Filología Inglesa, Universidad de Extremadura.
Sommerer, Lotte and Elena Smirnova. (eds.) 2020. Nodes and Networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27
Torrent, Tiago Timponi. 2015. “On the Relation between Inheritance and Change: The Constructional Convergence and the Construction Network Reconfiguration Hypotheses”. In Barðdal, Jòhanna, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer and Spike Gildea (eds.) Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 173-212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.18.06tor
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2018. “Modeling Language Change with Constructional Networks”. In Pons Bordería, Salvador and Óscar Loureda Lamas (eds.) Beyond Grammaticalization and Discourse Makers. Leiden: E.J. Brill: 17-50.
Traugott, Elizabeth C. and Graeme Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford U.P. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
Van de Velde, Freek. 2014. “Degeneracy: The Maintenance of Constructional Networks”. In Boogaart, Ronny, Timothy Colleman and Gijsbert Rutten (eds.) Extending the Scope of Construction Grammar. Berlin: De Gruyter: 141-180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110366273.141
Visser, Frederikus T. 1963-1973. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. Volume I: Syntactical Units with One Verb. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Zwicky, Arnold M. 1971. “In a Manner of Speaking”. Linguistic Inquiry 2 (2): 223-233.
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2022 Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
