In a lexeme based syntactic theory (e. g., valency theory) fusion of constructions and heads (e. g., verbs) is licensed by the head of the construction. In construction grammar fusion is regarded as a process from the perspective of the construction. An important argument for this view is the existence of constructions that are not licensed by the lexical entry of the verb. Types of constructions motivating this approach are constructions with free datives in German and resultative constructions (constructions with directives or predicatives). The occurrence of this kind of constructions demands an expansion and a revision of current assumptions in valency theory and lexeme based theories in general. (1) It is necessary to add processes of coercion by means of pragmatic implicatures. (2) These coercions take place on the basis of existing constructional patterns built with verbs already fitting these constructions. (3) The non-licensed free datives, directives, and object predicatives are arguments. As arguments they are not captured by the valency criteria of complements versus adjuncts (arguments versus modifiers). The widespread postulate of invariance has to be abandoned in favour of a dynamic kind of prototypicality.
In constructions of copula + participle II, often called “Zustandspassiv”, we find many unclear restrictions. Maienborn (2007: 83-115) explains these by pragmatics in the following way: One invariant meaning is opposed to different pragmatic readings that are gaining their existence in the pragmatic level only. We explain these restrictions in semantics itself. Restrictions in forming copula + participle II-constructions are due to conflicts between the construction meaning of copula constructions and the construction meanings of participles II. Pragmatics is mediating between the conflicting construction meanings by means of pragmatic implicatures. Due to these accommodations nearly no copula + participle construction is grammatically wrong in a strict sense, but many constructions remain restricted in their acceptability. The construction meaning of Zustandspassiv is opposed to three meaning variants of participle II. The interplay between the construction meaning of copula constructions and the three meaning variants of participles II results in different accomodations between copula-constructions and participle meanings. In some cases participle meanings adapt to copula construction meanings, in other cases the opposite process is going on. On the one hand the construction meaning of copula construction is the predication of a property to the referent of the subject. On the other hand there are a post state (target state) meaning, a present state meaning and a past time meaning of particples II. The interplay with the construction meaning of the copula construction results in four meaning variants of Zustandspassiv: post state (target state) as a property, present state as a property, past time of an event as a property, and past time meaning only. The meaning ‘past time of an event as a property’ is grammaticalizing to a past
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.