The metaphoric motivation of the caused-motion constructiona case study of perception

  1. Campo Martínez, Nuria del 1
  1. 1 Universidad de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0553yr311

Journal:
IJES: international journal of English studies

ISSN: 1578-7044,  1989-6131

Year of publication: 2013

Volume: 13

Issue: 1

Pages: 89-110

Type: Article

beta Ver similares en nube de resultados
DOI: 10.6018/IJES/2013/1/154501 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: IJES: international journal of English studies

Institutional repository: lock_openOpen access Editor

Abstract

This article addresses the caused-motion construction from the theoretical perspective of the Lexical Constructional Model (LCM). Within the LCM, the way in which lexical templates fuse with constructional templates is coerced by internal and external constraints. Internal constraints specify the conditions under which allow predicates to take part in a construction. External constraints take the form of high-level metaphoric and metonymic operations that affect lexical-constructional subsumption. This proposal makes use of the theoretical tools of the LCM with a view to exploring instantiations of the construction with verbs of perception. Apart from internal constraints, high-level metaphor will be found to play a prominent role in the construal of the examples under scrutiny. The study will suffice to point out that the semantics of the caused-motion construction needs to be understood with reference to the underlying metaphoric mappings

Bibliographic References

  • Baicchi, A. (2012). Metaphoric motivation in grammatical structure. The case of the caused-motion construction from the perspective of the Lexical-Constructional Model. In G. Radden, K.-U. Panther and P. Koch (Eds.), Motivation in Lexicon, Grammar, and Discourse. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia, John Benjamins. In press.
  • Croft, W.A. (2001). Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Dik, S.C. (1989). The Theory of Functional Grammar. The Structure of the Clause. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Dik, S.C. (1997). The Theory of Functional Grammar. Complex and Derived Constructions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Faber, P.B. & Mairal, R. 1999. Constructing a Lexicon of English Verbs. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Fillmore, C.J. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach and R.T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in Linguistic theory (pp. 1-88). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  • Goldberg, A.E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University Press.
  • Goldberg, A.E. (2006). Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic Structures. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  • Kay, P. & Fillmore, C.J. (1999). Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What’s X Doing Y construction. Language 75, 1-33.
  • Kövecses, Z. and Radden, G. (1998). Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics, 9, 37-77.
  • Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  • Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary Theory of Metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (pp. 202-251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. New York: Basic Books.
  • Langacker, R.W. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  • Langacker, R.W. (2005). Construction Grammars: Cognitive, Radical and less so. In F.J. Ruiz de Mendoza and M.S. Peña (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction (pp. 101-159). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Levin, B. (1993). English Verb Classes and Alternations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Levin, B. and Rappaport Hovav, M. (1995). Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-lexical Semantics Interface. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  • Luzondo, A. (2007). Semantic constraints on the caused-motion construction. Epos, 23, 167-180.
  • Michaelis, L. (2003). Word meaning, sentence meaning, and syntactic meaning. In H. Cuykens, R. Dirven and J.R. Taylor (Eds.), Cognitive Approaches to Lexical Semantics (pp. 93-122). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Panther, K.-U. & Thornburg, L. (2000). The EFFECT FOR CAUSE metonymy in English grammar. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads (215- 232). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Peña, M.S. (2009). Constraints on subsumption in the caused-motion construction. Language Sciences, 31, 740-765.
  • Peña, M.S. & Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. (2009). The metonymic and metaphoric grounding of two imageschema transformations. In G. Panther, L. Thornburg and A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and Metaphor in Grammar (pp. 339-361). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. (2007). High level cognitive models: In search of a unified framework for inferential and grammatical behavior.” In K. Kosecki (Ed.), Perspectives on Metonymy (pp. 11- 30). Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. (2011). Metonymy and cognitive operations. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona and F.J. Ruiz de Mendoza (Eds.), Defining Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: Towards a Consensus View (pp. 103-124). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. & Galera, A. (2012). Cognitive models and cognitive operations: Levels of representation and explanatory adequacy. Unpublished manuscript. University of La Rioja.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. & F. Gonzálvez. (2011). Illocutionary meaning revisited: Subjective-transitive constructions in the Lexical Constructional Model. In P. Stalmaszczyk (Ed.), Turning Points in the Philosophy of Language and Linguistics. (pp. 65-77). Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. & Luzondo, A. (2011). Lexical-constructional subsumption in resultative constructions in English. In M. Brdar, M. Zic Fuchs, I. Raffaelli, M.-M. Stanojevic and N. Tudjman Vukovic (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics. Between Universality and Variation (pp. 117- 136). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. & Mairal, R. (2008). High-level metaphor and metonymy in meaning construction. In G. Radden, K.M. Köpcke, T. Berg and P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects of Meaning Construction in Lexicon and Grammar (pp. 33-49). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. & Mairal, R. (2008). Levels of description and constraining factors in meaning construction: An introduction to the Lexical Constructional Model. Folia Linguistica, 42, 355- 400.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. & Mairal, R. (2011). Constraints on syntactic alternation: Lexicalconstructional subsumption in the Lexical-Constructional Model. In P. Guerrero (Ed.), Morphosyntactic Alternations in English. Functional and Cognitive Perspectives (pp. 62-82). London/Oakville: CT Equinox.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. & Peña, M.S. (2008). Grammatical metonymy within the ‘action’ frame in English and Spanish. In M.Á. Gómez-González, L. Mackenzie and E. González-Álvarez (Eds.), Current Trends in Contrastive Linguistics: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives (251-280). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. & Pérez, L. (2001) Metonymy and the grammar: motivation, constraints and interaction. Language and Communication, 21(4), 321-357.
  • Van Valin, R.D. 2005. The Syntax-Semantics-Pragmatics Interface: An Introduction to Role and Reference Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Van Valin, R.D. & LaPolla, J.R. (1997). Syntax, Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Data source: Dialnet