On constructions as a pragmatic category

Bibliographic Data

ID11113340
AuthorsBetty J Birner (corresponding author)
Year2018
Volume94
Issue2
Pagese158-e179
Publication date2018-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLanguage (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0097-8507 • E-ISSN: 1535-0665
PublisherProject MUSE (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1353/lan.2018.0031
OpenAlexW2808361547
LanguageEN
References cited16

When a language provides multiple syntactic options for conveying the same semantic content, these options generally serve distinct discourse functions. In some cases, however, they serve the same discourse function while being in complementary distribution syntactically. This article argues that in these instances, the syntactic variants constitute Alloforms of a single, more abstract construction. Pairs of such alloforms include inversion and long passives in English and two forms of postposing in Italian. Moreover, English inversion is argued to be an alloform of both preposing and postposing. This account explains the distributional difference between alloforms of a single construction and complex structures built up of multiple distinct constructions. Finally, the report considers the ramifications of this account for linguistic theory in general and the notion of a ‘construction’ in particular

Function (biology) · Inversion (geology) · Linguistics · Syntactic structure · Syntax · Computer Science · Historical Linguistics and Language Studies · Linguistics and Discourse Analysis · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub