Constructions as categories of language

Goldberg, Adele Ε.; Casenhiser, Devin M.; White, Tiffani R.

doi:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2007.02.004

Cited by 63 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This weighting explains the finding that a slot that is highly skewed towards one particular filler largely takes on the properties of that filler (Casenhiser and Goldberg 2005;Goldberg, Casenhiser, and Sethuraman, 2004;Goldberg, Casenhiser, and White, 2007). For example, the properties of the "VERB" slot in the double-object dative construction (not just semantic, but also morphophonological) are largely those of give, which accounts for the lion's share of all occurrences of this construction (Ambridge, Pine, Rowland, Freudenthal, and Chang, 2014).…”

Section: Appendix: the "Weighted Average"mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Constructivist Account of Child Language Acquisition

Ambridge

Lieven

2015

The Handbook of Language Emergence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Appendix: the "Weighted Average"mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Constructivist Account of Child Language Acquisition

Ambridge

Lieven

2015

The Handbook of Language Emergence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Because the constraints are functional, and functionality is itself context-dependent and graded, they will emerge and be used in context-dependent and graded manners. In consequence, there is no clean cut between syntax and meaning (Goldberg et al 2007). Various other kinds of functional considerations, such as processing demands and statistical properties of exposure, will be functionally relevant for what is classically taken to be in the realm of austere mathematical syntax (Diessel 2007;Hawkins 2007).…”

Section: Properties and Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The interactivist model

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A shift from a metaphysical framework of substance to one of process enables an integrated account of the emergence of normative phenomena. I show how substance assumptions block genuine ontological emergence, especially the emergence of normativity, and how a process framework permits a thermodynamic-based account of normative emergence. The focus is on two foundational forms of normativity, that of normative function and of representation as emergent in a particular kind of function. This process model of representation, called interactivism, compels changes in many related domains. The discussion ends with brief attention to three domains in which changes are induced by the representational model: perception, learning, and language.The interactivist model of representation and cognition is an action and interaction based approach-it is roughly Pragmatic in that sense. It involves fundamentally different assumptions about representation than those made in standard models in the literature, and, more deeply, a fundamentally different metaphysical framework from the substance, structure, and particle frameworks that are still dominant in most of philosophy, cognitive science, and psychology. It is based on a process metaphysical framework-also roughly Pragmatic.

show abstract

“…Prior construction learning studies (Boyd, Gottschalk, and Goldberg 2009;Casenhiser and Goldberg 2005;Goldberg and Casenhiser 2008;Goldberg, Casenhiser, and Sethuraman 2004;Goldberg, Casenhiser, and White 2007) have shown that English L1 speakers can comprehend and produce the novel construction of appearance (N 1 N 2 V), with the corresponding meaning of N 1 "appears in/on" N 2 (e.g., the spot the king moopoed) after relatively brief exposure. In contrast, construction learning studies with L2 English speakers reported greater difficulty in detecting a variety of constructions, including the appearance construction and the Samoan ergative construction (Nakamura 2012), English dative constructions (McDonough and Nekrasova-Becker 2014;Year and Gordon 2009), and Esperanto transitives (Fulga and McDonough 2014;McDonough and Fulga 2015;McDonough and Trofimovich 2013).…”

Section: Challenges In Detecting Novel Constructionsmentioning

confidence: 99%