Taking Construction Grammar One Step Further: Families, Clusters, and Networks of Evaluative Constructions in Russian

Frontiers in Psychology 11 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We present a case study of grammatical constructions and how their function in a single language can be captured through semantic and syntactic classification. Since 2016 an on-going joint project of UiT The Arctic University of Norway and the National Research University Higher School of Economics in Moscow has been collecting and analyzing multiword grammatical constructions of Russian. The main product is the Russian Constructicon, which, with over two thousand two hundred constructions, is arguably the largest openly available constructicon resource for any language. The combination of this large size with depth of analysis, containing both syntactic and semantic tags, makes it possible to view the interrelation of constructions as families and to discover trends in their behavior. Our annotation includes 53 semantic tags of varying frequency, with three tags that are by far more frequent than all the rest, accounting for 30% of the entire inventory of the Russian Constructicon. These three semantic types are Assessment, Attitude, and Intensity, all of which convey a speaker’s evaluation of a topic, in contrast to most of the other tags. Assessment and Attitude constructions are investigated in greater detail in this article. Secondary semantic tags reveal that negative evaluation among these two semantic types is more than twice as frequent as positive evaluation. Examples of negative evaluations are: for Assessment VP tak sebe, as in Na pianino ja igraju tak sebe “I play the piano so-so [lit. thus self]”; for Attitude s PronPers-Gen xvatit/xvatilo, as in S menja xvatit “I’m fed up [lit. from me enough].” In terms of syntax, the most frequent syntactic types of constructions in the Russian Constructicon are clausal constructions [constituting an independent clause like s PronPers-Gen xvatit/xvatilo ] and constructions with the anchor in the role of adverbial modifier. Our semantic and syntactic classification of this large body of Russian constructions makes it possible to postulate patterns of grammatical constructions constituting a radial category with central and peripheral types. Classification of large numbers of constructions reveals systematic relations that structure the grammar of a language.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,907

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Grammatical Constructions as Relational Categories.Micah B. Goldwater - 2017 - Topics in Cognitive Science 9 (3):776-799.
Multiword Constructions in the Grammar.Peter W. Culicover, Ray Jackendoff & Jenny Audring - 2017 - Topics in Cognitive Science 9 (3):552-568.
A formal treatment of the causative constructions in chinese.Chongli Zou & Nianxi Xia - 2008 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (2):307-316.
Constructions.Pavel Tichy - 1986 - Philosophy of Science 53 (4):514-534.
Applicative Constructions.David A. Peterson - 2006 - Oxford University Press UK.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-12-22

Downloads
15 (#971,048)

6 months
9 (#352,506)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations