更新时间：10-11 （梦溪）提供原创文章
Abstract:In analyzing the meaning of idioms, Chomsky’s TG theory runs into trouble because its explanation of meaning from deep structure can not work. Thus, based on the analysis of idioms, Cognitive Linguistics gradually comes into being. Along with its maturity, there appears a new method of studying syntax, saying, Construction Grammar. When Construction Grammar comes into being, it has largely challenged the position of TG School. In analyzing all aspects of language, Construction Grammar acts as a much more economical and terse approach compared with previously dominant Transformational-generative grammar. Besides, it conforms to the human’s cognitive style of language. Specifically, when it comes to the interaction between construction and verb, Construction Coercion plays an important role and has been widely used when conflicts between construction and verb emerge. It is due to its efficiency that many researchers have put their most, if not all, attention on construction. However, it seems that these researchers are moving to another extreme, that is to say, they nearly ignore the meaning of verbs. It is quite sure that a construct consists of words, and these words also have their own meanings. Thus, under certain circumstances, some words could inflict effects on construction, and this approach is called Lexicon Coercion, in which case the meaning of words takes precedence over that of construction. Based on Construction Coercion and Lexicon Coercion, Integrative Coercion is put forward. In particular, ditransitive construction is targeted and analyzed to prove that Integrative Coercion is a better tool to explain specific language cases owing to its embodiment, mutual-compensation, and polysemy.
Key words: Cognitive Linguistics; Construction; Ditransitive Construction; Construction Coercion; Lexicon Coercion
Contents
Abstract
摘要
1 Introduction-5
2 literature review-7
2.1 Cognitive Linguistics-7
2.2 Construction Grammar-7
2.3 Construction Coercion-9
2.4 Lexicon Coercion-11
2.5 Summary-13
3 Theoretical Basis: Integrative Coercion-14
3.1 Motivation of Integrative Coercion-15
3.2 Characteristics of Integrative Coercion-15
3.2.1 Embodiment-15
3.2.2 Mutual-compensation-16
3.2.3 Polysemy-17
3.3 Mechanism of Integrative Coercion-18
3.4 Summary-19
4 Integrative Coercion in Ditransitive Construction-20
4.1 Introduction of Ditransitive Construction-20
4.2 Prototypical meaning of ditransitive construction-20
4.3 Lexicon Coercion in ditransitive construction-22
4.3.1 Motivation of Lexicon Coercion-22
4.3.2 Classification of ditransitive verbs-23
4.4 Integrative Coercion in ditransitive construction-24
4.4.1 Verbs of Group A-25
4.4.2 Verbs of Group B-25
4.4.3 Verbs of Group C-26
4.4.4 Verbs of Group D-27
4.4.5 Verbs of Group E-27
4.4.6 Verbs of Group F-28
4.4.7 Verbs of “Reverse Transfer”-29
4.5 Summary-30
5 Conclusions-31
References-32
Acknowledgment-33