3
e
e
G
b
3
e
1.
e
b
e
3
e
eG
e
e
G
b
e
G
2
2
1.1
e
e
1
Chomsky 1957,
construction, Fillmore 1985b, 1988
1965
Chomsky
1981, 1992
principles and
1
parameters approach
epiphenomena
Frame Semantics, Fillmore 1977, 1982,
Reductionism
1985a
Construction
2
Grammar
)
Commercial Event
) RISK
Fillmore 1985b,
1988, Fillmore, Kay & O’Connor 1988, Fillmore & Kay 1993, Lakoff
1987, Goldberg 1991, 1992, 1995, Michaelis 1993
Goldberg
1995
Argument Structure
Construction
2
3
Enfield
Goldberg
Construction
1995
Ditransitive
2000, 2002
Lao
(1)
4
1
34
Sally baked her sister a cake.
35
3
e
e
G
3
b
Sally
Sally
Sally
(1)
‘intended transfer ’
bake
‘X intends to cause Y to receive Z by
bake
baking’
e
e
G
b
Word
tentacle, gangster, the
Word (partially filled)
Complex word
post-N, V-ing
textbook, drive-in
Idiom (filled)
like a bat out of hell
Idiom (partially filled)
Ditransitive
believe <one’s> ears/eyes
Subj V Obj 1 Obj 2 (e.g. he baked her a
muffin)
2
1
1
complex word
Lieber 1980, 1992, Selkirk 1982, Di
Sciullo & Williams 1987
610293
(
B
j
acceptable, affordable,
Form
Meaning
Subj V Obj Obj 2
X causes Y to receive Z
approachable, believable, doable
V-able
-able
applicable
applic-
apply
amenable, ineluctable
Booij 2013
[Subj V Obj Obj 2 ]
cranberry morpheme
1
kick the bucket
Anderson 1992,
pickpocket
Aronoff 1976, 2007, Booij 2013
Booij
V-able
1.2
b
e
e
e
e
5
Goldberg 1995,
Booij 2010
G
e
e
l
accept
afford
acceptable,
affordable,
approach
approachable,
believe
do
believable,
doable
(5)
45
Example
36
37
2013
3
e
e
G
3
b
e
e
G
b
Booij 2013: 256
6
[V T R i -able] A j ↔ [[CAN BE SEM i -ed] p r o p e r t y ] j
(TR
SEM
(6)
)
b
-able
e
V-able
B
V-able
Booij
[V T R i -able] A j
play
2012
debate
2
impoverished entry theory
(6)
laughable
unlistenable
1
clubbable
[N-able]
(6)
amenable, ineluctable
1
(6)
(6)
full entry theory
Jackendoff 1975
V-able
blog
(6)
blogable ‘worthy of being blogged’
2
1.3
b
Booij 2010
e
acceptable, laughable
V-able
(6)
1) agreeable
agree
apply
3
applicable
2)
3) clubbable
4) amenable, ineluctable
1
Jackendoff 2008
1
38
39
3
e
e
G
3
b
e
e
G
b
1
Croft 2003, 2012
4
verb-specific construction
-able
Booij
Langacker
1987: 29, 42
2012
motivation
Rule/List Fallacy
computer
-er
computer
‘something
computes’
Booij
2012
2
1
usage-based model, Langacker
1
1987, Bybee 1985, 2006, Barlow & Kemmer 2000, Tomasello 2003
linguistic units
categorization
schematization
2009
1
Chomsky 1970
1
Halle
1973
output
blogable,
Jackendoff 1975
lexical redundancy rule
skypable
1993: 355
Mos 2010
Jackendoff
2011b
Dowty 2003
40
41
3
e
e
G
3
b
e
e
G
b
1992: 76-77, Fillmore & Baker 2010: 314
2.
b
4
Langacker 1987
background
Goldberg 1995, 2006
Croft 2001
Langacker 1987
base
profile
2.1
2.2
F
2.1
io
G
b
Fillmore 1977,
1982
situation
Evans
background
Barsalou 2003, Yeh & Barsalou
2006, Simons et al. 2008
2009: 17
real-world knowledge
sociocultural knowledge
6
common-sense knowledge
background knowledge
Haiman 1980, Langacker 1987,
Bolinger
Bolinger 1965
alligator shoes
Fillmore 1977
buy, sell, pay, cost, charge
2010
commercial event
1965
alligator shoes
horse shoes
horse
shoes
5
Fillmore & Atkins
42
43
3
=
e
b
e
B
G
4667 92
3
b
)
buy
C
sell
C
A
D
A
D
e
G
b
))
5
buy, sell, pay, cost, charge
6
e
=
b
B
B
1
B
(A)
(B)
Y
7
(C)
(D)
2
X
3
X
4
Y
buy, sell, pay, cost,
charge
2.2
Taylor
(
buy
sell
4667 92
))
G
b
1996
run
2
Taylor
6
jog
(
1996
jog
4
run
jog
run
jog
Fillmore
run
jog
7
44
45
3
run
e
e
G
3
b
e
e
G
b
jog
(14)
(16)
walk
parade
stagger, totter, roam
14
a. Bruce ran against Phil.
b. *Bruce jogged against Phil.
stagger,
totter
walk, parade, totter, stagger, roam
Snell-Hornby 1983
2006
Levin
roam
Boas 2003: 246-249,
roam
1993
(17)
locative preposition
Walk
drop alternation, Levin 1993: 43-44
parade
walk, parade, roam
totter
Totter
17
stagger
Julia {walked/paraded/*staggered/*tottered/roamed} the town.
totter, stagger
Stagger
totter
Roam
Boas
2006
walk
*
5
Boas
2003: 169-171
conventionally expected results
15
a. Gerry {walked/paraded/staggered/tottered/roamed}.
b. Gerry {walked/paraded/staggered/tottered/roamed} down the
Washio
1997
street.
Boas 2003, 2006
2.3
16 Cathy {walked/?paraded/*staggered/*tottered/*roamed} herself to
exhaustion.
46
2
8
Goldberg 2010: 40
47
3
e
e
G
3
b
e
e
G
b
Attack
18
1
lexical entry
9
20
1)
2)
hit
lexical entry
Lexical Entry hit.v
Frame: Attack
Definition: to strike.
The Frame Elements
Petruck 1996
for
this
word
sense
hit
[W]ord
meaning
is
characterized
in
are:
Assailant,
Containing_event, Manner, Time, Victim, Weapon
terms
of
strike
attack,
assault
experience-based schematizations of the speaker ’s world.
(Petruck 1996: 3)
1
1
1
Kay 1996: 112
21 *Sybil had Sidney fall off the couch.
2
have
fall
(21)
10
2
FrameNet
Sybil
hit
Sidney
Impact
12
lexical
11
entry
frame elements, FEs
19
hit
lexical entry
Lexical Entry hit.v
Frame: Impact
Definition: (of a moving object or body) come into contact with
22
(someone or something stationary) quickly and forcefully.
1)
The Frame Elements for this word sense are: Depictive, Force,
Impactee, Impactor, Manner, Place, Result, Subregion, Time
2)
48
13
49
3
e
e
G
3
b
(
)
(
)
e
e
G
b
(
)
(
(
14
)
)
(
)
core FEs
(
peripheral FEs
4.
)
G
15
3
b
[naku] V
50
51
3
e
e
G
3
b
e
e
G
2011
Matsumoto 2012
b
1
2
3
1
2
(2)
3
4
2011
2009
4
e
I
eG
:
d
:
G
2016
1.
m
2011
Matsumoto
2012
V1
V2
1
2011,
16
2011, Matsumoto 2012
V2
(1)
1
[[
]V[
]V]V ↔ [
BY
]
BY
V1
2
V1
BY
(2)
[V i - -V j ] V ↔ [E j - C A U S . C H G
BY
Ei-AGT]
52
V2
BY
2
V1
53
V2
3
e
3
e
G
3
b
e
e
G
b
Matsumoto
d
2011
il
m
r
,
m
a.
→*
[ V i - S I M P. R E N - V j - S I M P ] V ↔ [ E j I N A R E L AT I O N X T O E j ]
*
(SUBJi=SUBJj)
b.
[ V i - V j ] V ↔ [ E i I S C A U S A L LY R E L AT E D T O E j ]
→*
[ V i - V j ] V ↔ [ E i I N A R E L AT I O N X T O E j ]
c.
(Ti
Tj)
[ V i - V j ] V ↔ [ E i I S S E M A N T I C A L LY S I M I L A R T O E j ]
→*
[Vi-Vj-INT]V ↔ [Ej-CHG BECAUSE Ei]
→*
[Vi-TR-Vj-TR]V ↔ [Ej-CAUS.CHG BY Ei-AGT]
[Vi-Vj]V ↔[Ej-CHG WITH THE BACKGROUND OF Ei]
(3)
[Vi-INT-Vj-INT]V ↔ [Ej-MOT IN A MANNER OF Ei]
17
[Vi-Vj]V ↔ [Ej WITH THE ATTENDANT CIRCUMSTANCE OF Ei]
[Vi-Vj]V ↔ [Ei AS IF Ej]
[Vi-Vj]V ↔ [Ei AND Ej]
[ V i - V j ] V ↔ [ E i I S C A U S A L LY R E L AT E D T O E j ]
(SUBJi≠SUBJj)
[Vi-TR-Vj-INT]V ↔ [EI-AGT CAUSES EJ-CHG]
1
18
BECOME
Ej-INT FROM Ei]]
(SUBJi=OBJj)
[Vi-INT-Vj-TR]V ↔ [SUBj CAUSES [SUBi Ej-INT
IN THE MANNER OF
(SIMP=
Ei-MAN]]
(SUBJi=OBJj)
, REN=
T=
, SUBJ=
, INT=
CHG=
, OBJ=
, TR=
, CAUS.CHG=
, ↔=
TO
, E=
,
, MAN=
, MOT=
[V i - S I M P. R E N -V j - S I M P ] V ↔ [E j
I N A R E L AT I O N X
Vi
Vj
1995: 58
19
Vj
Vi
Vi
Ej
Vj
3
54
,
, AGT=
)
1
Ej] (SUBJi=SUBJj)
Ei
(OBJi=SUBJj)
[Vi-INT-Vj-TR]V ↔ [SUBj CAUSES [SUBi
55
3
Vi
e
e
G
3
b
Vj
Vi
e
e
G
b
V2
Vj
4
a.
(BCCWJ
)
b.
(BCCWJ
money
Body &
)
2
V1
V2
3
3514
588
16.73%
2
20
5
2.
V1
V2
V1
E1
V2
2
E1
E2
E2
E2
E1
iconicity
V1
V2
V2
V1
V1
V2
V2
2
6
2.2
Ei
Ej
[E j
BY
1
Ei]
b
2.1
1
a
E1
V1
V2
(BCCWJ
[V i -V j - I N T ] V ↔ [E j - C H G
V1
BECAUSE Ei]
56
7 a.
E2
b.
57
)
3
e
e
G
3
b
(BCCWJ
)
e
e
G
b
2
*
V1
V2
1732
*
49.29%
8
V1
―
V2
Matsumoto
1996a: 280-281
2.3.
[V i - T R -V j - T R ] V ↔ [E j - C A U S . C H G
V1
BY
Ei-AGT]
(7)
V2
:
11
(BCCWJ
2
21
2
)
V2
V1
V1
V1
V1
(9a)
V2
(9b)
V2
12
―
9 a.
b. *
*
*
*
*
V2
10 *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
E1
E2
58
??
59
3
e
e
G
3
b
e
e
G
b
2.4
1
c
V2
V1
[V i -V j ] V ↔[E j - C H G
WITH THE BACKGROUND OF
Ei]
Vi
Vj
13 a.
(BCCWJ
)
(BCCWJ
)
b.
(13a)
V1
(13b)
2007, 2011
x i FAIL IN
V2
Event(z)
V1
LCS
V2
V1
V1
1998
V2
V1
64
V2
1.82%
V1
V2
LCS
14
15
60
V2
*
*
*
61
3
e
e
G
3
b
e
e
G
b
V1
2.5
17 a.
[V i - I N T -V j - I N T ] V ↔ [E j - M O T
MANNER OF
Ei]
V1
V2
Ei
V1
b.
IN A
V2
Ej
147
4.18%
(16)
V1
V2
(17b)
16
a.
V1
Talmy 2000
V1
(BCCWJ
)
V1
Ikegami 1991,
V2
V2
V2
b.
(BCCWJ
)
18
a.
V2
V2
V1
b.
(18a)
V1
V1
V2
V2
(19)
V1
V1
V2
19 a.
b.
V1
V2
V1
V1
V1
1
22
62
63
V2
V2
3
e
e
(18b)
(20)
G
V1
3
b
e
e
G
b
V2
23
V1
V2
V1
V2
20 a.
b.
23
V1
a.
V2
1
b.
1
3.3
2.6
(23a)
V1
V2
V1
V2
V1
V2
24 a.
[V i -V j ] V ↔ [E j
CIRCUMSTANCE OF
WITH THE ATTENDANT
Ei]
b.
126
3.59%
21 a.
(23b)
V1
(BCCWJ
V1
V2
V2
)
b.
25 a.
(BCCWJ
)
b.
V1
V1
V2
V2
V2
22
a.
b.
26 a.
64
65
3
e
e
G
3
b
e
e
[V i -V j ] V ↔ [E i
V1
AND
G
b
Ej]
V2
b.
repetitiveness
intensity
V1
Matsumoto 1996a: 198
27
24
[V1-V2] V
2
0.77%
V2
V1
[V1-V2] V
29
V2
25
V1
V1-V2
V2
2.7
1
Coordination
2
1
1998
V1
V2
27 a.
b.
(27a)
[E j
V2
AS IF
V1
(27a)
[V i -V j ] V
Ei]
V2
(27b)
[E i A S
IF
V1
V2
E j ] (27b)
V1
V1
(30)
[V i -V j ] V
V1
V2
26
V2
30 a.
(27a)
28
b.
??
??
2.8
Ei
*
??
Ej
66
67
3
e
e
G
3
b
V1
e
V1
V2
V1
2
V1
2
V2
V2
33
V1
V2
(31)
27
31
a.
(BCCWJ
)
(BCCWJ
)
b.
2.9
i
(32)
V1
V2
34
32
V1
2.11 V1
V2
V1
V1
(35)
35
V1
(32)
28
V1
2.10
V1
1
68
G
V2
2
V1
e
69
V2
b
3
e
e
G
V1
3
b
e
e
G
b
V1
V1
2.12
V2
V2
V1
V1
V2
V2
V1
V1
V2
V2
V1
V1
V1
V2
V2
2.13
V2
36
V2
g
V1V2
a.
b.
38
(36a)
V2
V1
V1
V2
[V1-V2] V
V1
(36)
V2
V2
1
V2
2
37
blogable
blogable
(6)
re a d a b l e , w r i t a b l e
-able
Boas 2003
3
70
71
mini-construction
© Copyright 2024 Paperzz
