Chap.19 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)

Chap. 19: Motivating a construction grammar

Counstructions versus words and rules 构式vs词语和规则

The standard generative model views pragmatic knowledge as peripheral to linguistic knowledge. This model of speaker knowledge only accounts fot what is regular in language, and leaves aside idiomatic units.
标准的生成语法模型认为语用知识是语言知识的附属。这种说话者知识模型只解释语言中有规律/常规的用法，不关注习语等语言单位(idiomatic units)。
Cognitive Grammar, according to Fillmore et al., proposes a model of language that accounts for idiomatic constructions not as an exception to the norm, but as a central feature of human language. Furthermore, Fillmore et al. propose that the same theoritical mechinery should be held to account for both regular and idiomatic grammatical units.
而认知语法，提出了一套解释俗语构式的语言理论模型，不再把俗语当作标准的例外，而是当作人类语言的核心特征。此外，Fillmore等提出了一套可以同时用于解释常规语言单位和习语语言单位(idiomatic grammatical units)的理论机制。、

Exploring idiomatic expressions 探索习语表达

Typology of idiomatic expressions 习语表达的类别

Idiomatic expressions are those that a speaker cannot work out simply by knowing the grammar and the vocabulary of a languages. This is why idiomatic expressions are described as non-compositional. A speaker has to learn them whole, rather like individual lexical items.
习语表达指的是说话者根据词汇和语法知识无法得到的语言表达。也因此，习语表达被认为是“非组构性(non-compositional)”的。说话者必须完整地学习该表达，而不能通过学习单个词语。
Fillmore. et al develop a typology of idiomatic expressions based on four main parameters: (1) decoding and encoding items, (2) grammatical versus extragrammatical idioms, (3) substantive versus formal idioms, and (4) idioms with and without pragmatic point.
Fillmore等提出了习语分类的四个参数：（1）编码习语和解码习语，（2）语法习语和超语法习语，（3）实义习语和形式习语，以及（4）语用因素习语和无语用因素习语。
Decoding and encoding idioms 解码习语和编码习语
-Decoding idioms have to be decoded or learnt whole in the sense that the meaning of the expression cannot be worked out on first hearing. In contrast, encoding idioms may be understood on the first hearing.
解码习语必须被整个处理，第一次听到该习语时往往无法得出其意义。而编码习语首次听到时能够得出其意义。
-However, the speaker would not be able to predict the conventionality of the encoding expression. In other words, there is nothing in the rules of English that enables a speaker to predict the existence of this expression.
但是，说话者无法推测出编码习语的常用性。换句话说，英语中没有语法规则能够使说话者推测出该习语的存在。
-Encoding idioms also include expressions that are perfectly regular but just happen to represent the conventional way of saying something.
编码习语也包括那些本来很常见、但偶然用来指称某些事物的语言单位。
-Since encoding items are expressions that the speaker cannot predict the conventionality of, it follows that decoding idioms are also encoding idioms.
因为编码习语是说话者无法推测出其常用性的语言单位，从这个角度来看，解码习语也属于编码习语。
Grammatical versus extragrammatical idioms语法习语和超语法习语
-Grammatical idioms are expressions that obey the usual rules of grammar. In contrast, extragrammatical idioms do not obey the usual rules of grammar.
语法习语遵循普遍语法规则，而超语法习语则不一定遵守普遍语法规则。
Substantive versus formal idiomas 实义习语和形式习语
-Substantive idioms are lexically filled, which means that they have fixed lexical items as part of their composition. Like kick the bucket and spill the beans, most or all of the substantive or content expressions involved are intrinsic to the idiom.
实义习语在语义方面是“被填充的(filled)”，因为在实习习语中一般已经存在固定的实义词项作为其组成部分。就像kick the bucket 和 spill the beans，实义词项的大部分或全部已经存在于习语中。
-In contrast, formal idioms provide syntactic frames into which different lexical items can be inserted. Like let alone, the frame provided by this construction can be filled with all sorts of lexical items. In other words, this type of idiom is productive.
而与之相对，形式习语只提供了句法框架，不同的实义词项可以被插入。比如let alone，该构式提供了一个句法框架，可以有各种不同的词项被插入进来。这种习语被也被视为是能产的(productive)。
Idioms with and without pragmatic point 语用因素习语和无语用因素习语
-Some idiomatic expressions have a very clear pragmatic function, such as greeting (How do you do?) or expressing a particular attitude (What’s your car doing in my parking space?). In contrast, other idiomatic expressions appear to be pragmatically neutral, in the sense that they can be used in any pragmatic context.
有些习语表达有很明显的语用功能，比如用来打招呼，用来表达某种态度。但其它习语表达在语用上是“中立的(neutral)”，因为它们可以用在所有语用情境中。
The table below summarises these four distinctions.
In addition to setting out the distinctions summarised above, Fillmore et al. provide a typology of idiomatic expressions. According to this typology, idioms can consist of either familiar or unfamiliar linguistic expressions. These expressions can be arranged in either familiar (regular) or unfamiliar (irregular) grammatical patterns.
除了上文总结出的区别以外，Fillmore等还提出了习语表达的分类。根据这个分类标准，习语可以由熟悉表达或不熟悉表达组成，这些表达可以通过熟悉的语法模式或不熟悉的语法模式联系排列。
（1）Familiar pieces familiarly arranged 熟悉的表达通过熟悉的语法方式排列
In this case, lexical items that are commonly used outside the idiom are arranged in a way that reflects the regular grammatical patterns of the language. It follows that such expressions will have a literal as well as an idiomatic meaning. What makes expressions like this idiomatic is that one meaning of the expression cannot be predicted from the principle of compositionality.
在这种情况下，习语以外的词汇项被通过常规语法方式排列使用。这也就是说，这种语言表达方式既有字面含义，又有习语含义。是什么使这种类型的语言表达具有了习语化的含义呢？是因为该语言表达的某个意义无法通过组构性原则解释。
（2）Familiar pieces unfamiliar arranged 熟悉的表达通过不熟悉的语法方式排列
In idioms of this kind, familiar words are arranged in ways that do no conform to the regular grammatical patterns in the language. Such as all of a sudden.
对于这种习语，熟悉的表达通过不合乎常规的语法方式排列组合。例如，all of a sudden。
（3）Unfamiliar pieces familiarly arranged 不熟悉的表达通过熟悉的语法方式排列
In this category, we might place expressions that show regular syntax but that contain expressions that do not occur outside the idiom. Examples include take umbrage at. The expression umbrage is not found outside the idiom, yet their syntax is not restricted to these idioms. By definition, members of this category are substantive idioms, because a formal or lexically unfilled idiom is productive as a result of being filled by familiar expressions.
在该范畴下，熟悉的语法方式排列了那些只出现在该构式中的表达。比如take umbrage at。umbrage这个词项只出现在该习语中，但其遵从的语法排列形式并不是仅限于该习语。根据定义，该范畴下的习语都是实义习语，因为那些能够被熟悉的语言表达填充的习语都是形式习语，具有能产性。
（4）Unfamiliar pieces unfamiliarly arranged 不熟悉的表达通过不熟悉的语法方式排列
Idioms of this kind consist of expressions not found outside the idiom arranged in syntactic patterns that are also not found outside the idiom.This category is by definition restricted to substantive idioms. 该范畴下的习语由仅限于该习语的表达和仅限于该习语的语法模式组成。同上一个范畴类似，该范畴下的习语也是实义习语。
As the discussion above suggests, the category “idiom” subsumes a wide range of expressions, not all of which are straightforwardly classified. In spite of this, a relatively stable empirical generalisation is the distinction between substantive and formal idioms.
从上面的讨论我们可以看出，“习语”一词包括很多语言表达，并不是所有的都可以被明确分类。但搁置争议，被广泛接受的一点是，实义习语和形式习语之间的区分。

Case study I: the let alone construction 案例1：let alone构式

Fillmore et al. are particularly interested in accounting for formal idioms. Formal idioms pose a particularly interesting challenge to the “words and rules” model of grammar: they are productive and therefore rule-based (systematic), yet often defy the usual rules of grammar.
Fillmore等人对形式习语的解释更感兴趣。形式习语给“单词-规则”语法模型提出了挑战：形式习语是能产的，也具有自己的规则，但不遵从传统的语法规则。
According to Fillmore et al., the let alone construction can be described in terms of its structural, semantic and pragmatic properties, some of which are regular and some of which are idiosyncratic.
按照Fillmore等人的观点，let alone这一构式可以从结构、语义和语用性质等方面来描述，有些性质是常规的，有些是不常规的/异质的。
The let alone construction displays regular syntactic properties, and is characterised by the presence of the coordinating conjunction let alone, which coordinates two prosodically prominent (stressed) expressions.
let alone构式的句法性质是常规的，作为并列连接词出现，连接两个显著表达。下面是一个例子。
(1) George doesn’s understand maths, let alone rocket science.
In semantic terms, the construction has the idiosyncratic property that the coordinated expressions are interpreted as contrasted points on a scale, where the second conjunct (rocket science) has greater emphatic force than the first (maths). Closely related to this property of the construction is the fact that let alone can be described as a negative polarity item, which means that it can only occur in negative contexts.
在语义层面，该构式具有非常规的性质。其连接的两个表达被理解为一个尺度上的两点，第二个连接成分比第一个连接成分更被强调。与词性质紧密相关的是，let alone被称为否定极项(negative polarity item)，也就是说，它只能出现在否定语境中。
The let alone construction has pragmatic point. Not only does the construction reject a particular proposition, but it does so by providing additional relevant information. The relevant information relates to the first conjunct and establishes an implicational scale between the expressions conjoined by let alone. The pragmatic impact of this construction is that by first rejecting a weaker proposition, the proposition that our attention is focused upon is more forcefully rejected than it would otherwise been.
let alone构式也具有语用性质。该构式不仅否定了某特定命题，它通过提供额外相关信息来否定了该命题。额外的相关信息与第一个连接项有关，通过let alone构建了连接两个表达的尺度。该构式的语用效果就是，通过首先否定一个较弱命题，我们注意力所集中的第二个名词被更强烈的否定了。
In light of the findings concerning the let alone construction, Fillmore et al. argue against the words and rules view, namely a modular view of the language system. Instead, they argue that speakers have access to constructions.
通过以上分析，Fillmore等反驳了“单词-规则”的观点，也就是语言的模块化观点。与之相对，他们认为说话者的语言知识是关于构式的知识。
Different senses of the term construction construction 的不同含义
-In traditional grammar, this term refers to a clause type, such as the passive construction or the cleft construction.
在传统语法中，construction 指句子类型，比如被动句，分裂句等。
-Most generative linguist use the term construction as a shorthand for descrbing certain types of syntactic structures that have certain identifiable properties. But they are not of central importance in that they are the output of the words and rules model.
大多数生成语言学家用construction来表示一组有相同性质的句法结构。但它们在生成语法中并不具有重要作用，因为它们是单词和规则产生的，不具有中心地位。
-Fillmore et al. proposes a very different view of how language should be modelled. The constructional model proposes that all the information concerning syntactic, semantic, phonological and pragmatic knowledge is represented in a single unified representation, which is the construction.
Fillmore等人则提出了完全不同的语言模型观点。构式模型认为构式涵盖了所有的语言知识，包括句法、语义、语音和语用知识。

Case study II: the what’s X doing Y construction

Kay and Fillmore discussed the what’s X doing Y construction, which they abbreviated to WXDY construction. This construction is illustrated by the examples in (8). As these examples illustrate, the Y part of the construction is particularly flexible.
Kay和Fillmore探讨了what’s X doing Y 构式，也被简称为WXDY构式。这个构式可以有以下例示。通过这些例子我们可以看出来，Y部分的填充成分相当灵活可变。
Kay and Fillmore motivate the existence of this idiomatic construction with a discussion of the familiar “fly in the soup joke”.
Kay和Fillmore从“汤里有苍蝇笑话(fly in the soup joke)”总结了该习语构式的存在。
This joke turns on the fact that there are two possible interpretations of the diner’s question. One is that it is a straightforward information question, while the other is that it is an expression of what Kay and Fillmore call the incongruity of the situation described. The latter reading identifies the WXDY construction.
这个笑话也表明了，关于这个问题有两种可能的理解。一是这是一个直接的问题，第二种则是Kay和Fillmore所称的，关于情境的不协调不一致。
Like the let alone construction, the WXDY construction is a productive formal idiom. What is special about the WXDY construction in pragmatics terms is the incongruity judgement it gives rise to.
同let alone构式一样，WXDY构式也是具有能产性的形式习语。WXDY构式的特别之处在于其语用特征，能够产生不协调不一致的判断。
In structural terms, the WXDY construction is characterised by certain idiosyncratic grammatical properties. To begin with, Kay and Fillmore demonstrate that in order to achieve the incongruity reading, the construction must contain the verb do. Secondly, the WXDY construction requires the verb do to appear in the progessive participle form. Thirdly, the construction does not allow either be or do to be negated.
在结构层面，WXDY构式也有一系列特殊语法性质。

Construction Grammar 构式语法

In this section, we will try to give a sense of how this model, Construction Grammar, departs from the words and rules approach. The Construction Grammar Commitment is to provide an intergrated account of both the regular and the idiomatic properties of language.
在这一部分，我们主要讲述构式语法与传统的单词-规则语法模式的不同。构式语法的目标是构建一套能够描述常规和习语语言性质的理论。

The Construction Grammar model 构式语法模型

Kay and Fillmore’s Grammra model is monostratal. This means that it contains only one level of syntactic representation rather than a sequence of structures linked by transformations. The representations in Construction Grammar contain not only syntactic information, but also semantic information.
Kay and Fillmore’s Construction Grammar contains a number of generalised constructions that underlie more specific constructions like the WXDY construction. Because this is a non-derivational monostratal model, it does not have phrase structure rules that assemble words into phrases and sentences. Instead, it has constructions that represent syntactic patterns. For example, the model has a head-complement construction, a subject-predicate construction and a number of principles that ensure, for example, that categorical features of a lexical head will be shared with the constituent headed by that phrase.
The various constructions that make up Kay and Fillmore’s Construction Grammar model are linked together via an inheritance relation. This means that more specific constructions inherit the properties of more general constructions.
To illustrate these properties, we will look in detail at the Construction Grammar representation of the WXDY construction.
What is Lily doing under my bed?

-This construction is headed by the verb be and the category (“cat”) of the construction as a whole is therefore V. An abbreviation of syntx “syn” labels the construction as a whole in terms of its categorial status.
-The next set of brackets, labelled “sem”, provides information about the semantic and pragmatic properties of the construction. The term “frame” refers to the scene described by the sentence over which the pragmatic value incongruity judgement is held by a “judge”. This “judge” is labelled “prag”, which means that the identity of this judge has to be pragmatically resolved. The incongruity judgement is held by this judge with respect to a situation labelled #1.
-The largest set of curly brackets, labelled “val” (valence), provides information about the structure of the construction. The first part, [rel[gf subj]], identifies a unit with the relation (rel) of grammatical function (gf) subject (subj).
-The largest set of square brackets corresponds to the rest of the construction, headed by doing. Within these square brackets, the top brackets labelled “syn” tell us that this part of the construction is headed by doing, which has the category V. Observe that this element is marked as having a negative value for negation.
-The next set of brackets marked “sem” tells us that the semantics of this part of the construction correspond to the situation over which the incongruity judgement holds. In other words, it is the Y part of doing Y that fills in the information that the judge holds to be incongruous.
-The next set of brackets marked “rel” tells us that this part of construction, doing Y, is the complement of the verb be.
-The second largest set of curly brackets, labelled “val”, tells us about the structure of doing Y. One important aspect of the construction that this model needs to account for is how the main clause subject comes to be understood as the subject of the Y predicate. In our example, Lily is understood not only as the subject of the verb be, but also as the subject of under my bed. This means that both instances of [gf subj] have to be linked in the construction. In Kay and Fillmore’s model, this linking is done by an independent construction that they call the coinstantiation construction.
-A further point of interest relating to this part of construction concerns the element what, which is not yet accounted for. What is part of a wh-dependency relation. The term dependency relates to the idea that two positions in a structure are related. Construction Grammar model accounts for the wh-dependency by means of a filler-gap analysis. This means that the construction simutaneously represents the wh-phrase (filler) in its clause-initial position and the position in which the wh-phrase is interpreted (gap), and links the two together.

Construction Grammar: a broadly generative model

In this section, Construction Grammar is compared with Universal Grammar and HPSG.

Comparing Construction Grammar with Cognitive Grammar 构式语法与认知语法理论对比

It is clear that the two theories share a number of important assumptions. Firstly, both approaches agree that idiomatic expressions should have central rather than peripheral status in a model of grammar. Secondly, both approaches agree that the most explanatory model of language is one that assumes constructions. This means that both approaches subscribe to the symbolic thesis as construed by cognitive linguists. Thirdly, an important similarity is that they take an inventory approach to the psychological representation of grammar. This type of approach assumes that the language system does not work predominantly by building structure, but by storing it in a complex network of interlinked constructions.
Despite these important points of agreement, there is an important different between the two approaches. The Construction Grammar model developed by Kay and Fillmore rests upon broadly generative assumptions and therefore assumes a Universal Grammar as a working hypothesis. In contrast, Cognitive Grammar is a usage-based theory, which argues instead that knowledge of language emerges from language use.

The Generalisation Commitment 概括性承诺

Chap.19 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)相关推荐

Chap.10 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)
Chap.10: Word meaning and radial categories This chapter is to develop the approach taken to word me ...
Chap.17 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)
Chap. 17: Cognitive Grammar: constructions 认知语法:构式 Phrase structure 词组结构 In Cognitive Grammar a comp ...
Chap.15 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)
Chap. 15: The conceptual basis of grammar 语法系统的概念基础 Here we uses the term "grammar" to ref ...
Chap.20 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)
Chap. 20: The architecture of construction grammars Goldberg's construction grammar Goldberg的构式语法理论 ...
Chap.18 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)
Chap. 18: Cognitive Grammar: tense, aspect, mood and voice English verbs: form and function 英语动词: 形式 ...
Chap.6 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)
Chap. 6: Embodiment and conceptual structure This chapter explores in more detail two of the central ...
Chap.12 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)
Chap. 12: Conceptual blending 概念整合 This approach, which we call Blending Theory, derives from two tr ...
Chap.8 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)
Chap.8: Categorisation and idealised cognitive methods Categorisation: our ability to identify perce ...
Chap.7 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)
Chap.7: The encyclopaedic view of meaning The thesis that meaning is encyclopaedic in nature has two ...

Chap.19 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)

Chap. 19: Motivating a construction grammar

Counstructions versus words and rules 构式vs词语和规则

Exploring idiomatic expressions 探索习语表达

Typology of idiomatic expressions 习语表达的类别

Case study I: the let alone construction 案例1：let alone构式

Case study II: the what’s X doing Y construction

Construction Grammar 构式语法

The Construction Grammar model 构式语法模型

Construction Grammar: a broadly generative model

Comparing Construction Grammar with Cognitive Grammar 构式语法与认知语法理论对比

The Generalisation Commitment 概括性承诺

Chap.19 总结《CL: An Introduction》 (Vyvyan Evans)相关推荐

最新文章

热门文章