Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Do we need summary and sequential scanning in (Cognitive) grammar

Bibliographic Data

ID12197319
AuthorsCristiano Broccias (0000-0002-8077-0624, corresponding author), Willem B Hollmann (0000-0001-6647-6915)
Year2007
Volume18
Issue4
Publication date2007-01-20
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueCognitive Linguistics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0936-5907 • E-ISSN: 1613-3641
PublisherDe Gruyter Mouton (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1515/cog.2007.026
OpenAlexW2133597724
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited47

Cognitive Grammar postulates two modes of cognitive processing for the structuring of complex scenes, summary scanning and sequential scanning. Generally speaking, the theory is committed to basing grammatical concepts upon more general cognitive principles. In the case of summary and sequential scanning, independent evidence is lacking, but Langacker argues that the distinction should nonetheless be accepted as it buys us considerable theory-internal explanatory power. For example, dynamic prepositions, to-infinitives and participles (e.g., into, to enter, entered ) are distinguished from finite and bare verbs in terms of summary vs. sequential scanning. In this paper, we try to show that various theory-internal and theory-external arguments do not seem to support the two scanning modes. In particular, we offer a detailed examination of causatives (e.g., get, make ) and argue that their complementation patterns are difficult to reconcile with differences in scanning. We conclude that the status of, and need for, summary and sequential scanning in (Cognitive) grammar is doubtful, especially if grammar is approached from the viewpoint of the language learner/user. It follows also that the parcelling of some form-function mappings may prove less clear-cut than previously assumed

Cognition · Cognitive grammar · Cognitive science · Emergent grammar · Function (biology · Grammar · Linguistics · Structuring · Computer Science · Natural Language Processing Techniques · Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism · Philosophy · Psychology · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

  • Smashing new results on aspectual framing

    Teenie Matlock, David L Sparks et al.•Studies in Language•2012

  • Revising Talmy’s typological classification of complex event constructions

    William Croft, Jóhanna Barðdal et al.•Contrastive studies in…•2010

  • The Oxford Handbook of English Grammar

    Bas Aarts, Jill Bowie et al.•Oxford Handbook of English Grammar•2019

  • The grammar and meaning of atemporal complement clauses in Assamese

    Open Access•Bisalakshi Sawarni, Gautam K Borah•Himalayan Linguistics•2024

  • Sequential and summary scanning

    Open Access•Ronald W Langacker•Cognitive Linguistics•2008

  • Lexical Categories

    Mark C Baker, William Croft•Annual Review of Linguistics•2016

  • Desculpa, não! Desculpe! Um caso de conflito na interação entre brasileiros e portugueses em Portugal

    Open Access•Janderson Luiz Lemos De Souza, Hanna Batoréo•DELTA Documentação de Estudos em…•2025

  • Grammar and Conceptualization

    Ronald W Langacker•Grammar and Conceptualization•1999

  • Toward a Cognitive Semantics

    Léonard Talmy•Toward a cognitive semantics•2000

  • Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure

    Pa Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure Pittsburgh, Joan Bybee…•Frequency and the Emergence of…•2001

  • Fictive motion as cognitive simulation

    Open Access•Teenie Matlock•Memory & Cognition•2004

  • How Language Structures Space

    Open Access•Léonard Talmy•Spatial Orientation•1983

  • A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production.

    Gary S Dell•Psychological Review•1986

  • The Analysis of Sentence Production

    Merrill F Garrett•The Psychology of learning and…•1975

  • A theory of reading

    Marcel Adam Just, Patricia A Carpenter•Psychological Review•1980

  • Semantic Interpretation In Generative Grammar

    Ray S Jackendoff•Semantic Interpretation In…•1974

  • The grammaticalisation of infinitival to in English compared with German and Dutch

    Olga Fischer•Language History and Linguistic…•1997

  • Subjectification

    Angelikē Athanasiadu, Angeliki Athanasiadou et al.•Subjectification•2006

  • Studies in Middle English Linguistics

    Jacek Fisiak•Studies in Middle English…•1997

  • The Cambridge History of the English Language

    Open Access•R Hogg, Robert W Burchfield et al.•The Cambridge history of the…•1992

  • The Distinction Between To and Bare Infinitival Complements in Late Middle English

    Olga Fischer•Diachronica•1995

  • Quantity, Causality and Temporality in Change Constructions

    Open Access•Cristiano Broccias•Proceedings of the Annual Meeting…•2003

  • Two perspectives on the grammar of possession

    Open Access•Elaine J Francis•Language Sciences•2000

  • Linguistic evidence and mental representations

    Open Access•William Croft•Cognitive Linguistics•1998

  • Network analyses of prepositional meaning

    Open Access•Dominiek Sandra, Sally Rice•Cognitive Linguistics•1995

  • Using the Web to Obtain Frequencies for Unseen Bigrams

    Open Access•Frank Keller, Mirella Lapata•Computational Linguistics•2003

  • Semantics of natural language

    Open Access•Donald Davidson, Gilbert Harman•Synthese•1970

  • A cognitive approach to English adverbs

    Open Access•WATARU NAKAMURA•Linguistics•1997

  • On the distribution of bare infinitive complements in English

    Open Access•Anita Mittwoch•Journal of Linguistics•1990

  • An Historical Syntax

    Jessica Thonn A, F Th Visser•American Speech•1974

  • Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume 1. Theoretical prerequisites

    Open Access•Richard Hudson•Lingua•1990

  • The Binding Hierarchy and the Typology of Complements

    T Givón•Studies in Language•1980

  • Force Dynamics in Language and Cognition

    Open Access•Léonard Talmy•Cognitive Science•1988

  • Collostructions

    Anatol Stefanowitsch, Stefan Th Grie•International Journal of Corpus…•2003

  • Radical Construction Grammar

    William Croft•Radical Construction Grammar•2001

  • Deflexion as a counterdirectional factor in grammatical change

    Open Access•Muriel Norde•Language Sciences•2000

  • Interaction and causation

    Open Access•Arie Verhagen, Suzanne Kemmer•Journal of Pragmatics•1997

  • Thoughts on degrammaticalization

    Open Access•Paolo Ramat•Linguistics•1992

  • The effect of usage on degrees of constituency

    Open Access•Joan Bybee, Joanne Scheibman•Linguistics•1999

  • Idioms

    Geoffrey Nunberg, Ivan A Sag et al.•Language•1994

  • Language History and Linguistic Modelling

    Gonzalo Rubio, Raymond Hickey et al.•Language•1999

  • The Non-Anomalous Nature of Anomalous Utterances

    Victoria A Fromkin•Language•1971

  • The English Infinitive

    W Nelson Francis, Patrick J Duffley et al.•Language•1993

  • The Iconicity of Grammar

    John Haiman•Language•1980

  • Syntax

    Talmy Givón•Syntax•1984

Unique citing works7
Citations per year0,39
Citation span2008 - 2025 (18)
Citation velocityrecent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 6
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae