Time to Clarify

Cook, John

doi:10.1353/hbr.2016.0024

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Voice and Aspect1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2018

2022

Publication Types

Select...

Book1

Article1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Gen 46:20,22 This example reflects that a form with perfect aspect can be used to summarize a sequence of events, but cannot easily be integrated into such a sequence. On review by Robar (2014), the reply by Cook (2016), and most recently Gzella (2020, 342-343). Other analyses will differ in the verbal forms involved in the primary opposition and/or their identification as aspectual, temporal, or modal grams, but these analyses will by and large still agree that the s.c. and p.c.…”

Section: Voice and Aspectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voice, Discourse Prominence, and Aspect

Staps

2022

Where Is the Way to the Dwelling of Light?

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Voice and Aspectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voice, Discourse Prominence, and Aspect

Staps

2022

Where Is the Way to the Dwelling of Light?

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grammatical polysemy and grammaticalization in cognitive and generative perspectives: finding common ground in inter-generational corpora of ancient languages

Locatell

2018

SPIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive and generative approaches to linguistics have taken a different perspective on grammatical polysemy and grammaticalization. While the former see polysemy as a core characteristic of language and a necessary result of grammaticalization within idiolects, the latter see it as a less interesting phenomenon peripheral to linguistics proper. Grammaticalization is seen as a phenomenon of language acquisition which does not disturb the homogeneity of idiolects. These differing perspectives have generated much debate between the two approaches and are even in large part responsible for the different programmatic focuses of each. While the disagreement over grammatical polysemy between these two approaches to language is rooted in entrenched commitments on each side that are perhaps irreconcilable, at least some common ground does seem to be possible. Specifically, when it comes to intergenerational corpora, it seems that both cognitive and generative approaches to linguistics can agree that the universal phenomenon of grammaticalization would result in polysemy at least at the language community level. This can serve as a common ground on which both generative and cognitive linguists can join efforts in describing and explaining usage profiles of grammatically polysemous forms at the corpus level according to prototypicality, even if disagreement persists on the nature of the idiolect.

show abstract

Time to Clarify

Cited by 2 publications

References 19 publications

Voice, Discourse Prominence, and Aspect

Voice, Discourse Prominence, and Aspect

Grammatical polysemy and grammaticalization in cognitive and generative perspectives: finding common ground in inter-generational corpora of ancient languages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About