Argumentstrukturmuster als Konstruktionen? Identität – Verwandtschaft – Idiosynkrasien

Abstract

Abstract

Argument structure and text genre: cross-corpus evaluation of the distributional characteristics of argument structure realizations

“…On a theoretical level, the project aims at a critical evaluation of (valency-based) projectionist language theories versus construction-based theories. The quantitative and qualitative corpus-based investigations currently being carried out point to a net of fi ne-grained argument structure patterns connected by Wittgenstein-type family relationships that interacts with a high number of idiosyncratic lexical specifi cations (Engelberg et al 2011). While gathering quantitative data for this investigation, we noticed that some of the quantitative results obtained for some verbs depended on the textual nature of the main corpus which consists mainly of newspaper texts.…”

“…e.g., Boas 2011), and the attraction between lexical elements fi lling different slots in argument structure constructions (e.g. Engelberg et al 2011).…”

“…Schulte im Walde 2003Walde , 2009.With respect to the ongoing debate about the relationship between the concepts of valency and construction (cf. Jacobs 2009, Welke 2009, Boas 2010, Stefanowitsch 2011, Engelberg et al 2011, quantitative data on argument structures might prove particularly interesting.…”

The argument structure of psych-verbs: A quantitative corpus study on cognitive entrenchment

“…Other issues that have been addressed are the mechanisms underlying the extension of a construction to new lexical items (cf., e.g., Boas 2011), the productivity of constructions (e.g., Barddal 2008), the diachronic development of valencies (Kohler 2005), the distribution of valency frames within the lexicon (Steiner 2011;Duwaerts and Ullmann 2013), the role of frequency in argument structure acquisition (Tomasello 2003;Behrens 2011), and the attraction between lexical elements that fill different slots in argument structure patterns (e.g., Engelberg et al 2011). Schulte im Walde (2003, 2009 employed frequency data in order to automatically induce verb classes from the distribution of valency frames.…”

Why Construction Grammar Catches the Worm and Corpus Data can Drive you Crazy: Accounting for Idiomatic and Non-Idiomatic Idiomaticity

“…What one has to bear in mind is that the categories employed by traditional valency grammar (such as complement inventories) are abstractions over instances of language use, which is why a description of these phenomena seems perfectly compatible with a construction grammar approach. Indeed, the emergence of constructionist theories, in particular Adele Goldberg's theory of argument structure constructions, has given rise to different attempts of combining the two approaches (Welke, 2011;Engelberg et al, 2011;Stefanowitsch, 2011bHerbst, 2011b;2014a;2014b). In fact, there can be no doubt that valency relations can be captured in terms of constructions; in fact they could almost be seen as representing a prototype of item-based constructions as defined by MacWhinney (2005: Of course, these item-specific valency constructions can be related to the more general argument structure constructions of the Goldberg (2006) type.…”