Volume 34, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0774-5141
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9676
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This squib discusses the question whether Construction Grammar can account for the assumption of universal grammatical categories (Bybee, Perkins, and Pagliuca 1994) that are prone to language change, e.g. tense. Most publications in Construction Grammar tackle individual constructions, such as the -construction (Jackendoff 1990). But it remains unclear how grammatical categories as a universal phenomenon can be described in constructionist terms. We propose that there is a way to (a) describe grammatical categories, which per definition are encoded paradigmatically, as constructions themselves and (b) to thereby strengthen the assumption of a set of universal grammatical categories.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Ackerman, Farrell , James P. Blevins , and Robert Malouf
    2009 “Parts and Wholes: Implicative Patterns in Inflectional Paradigms.” InAnalogy in Grammar: Form and Acquisition, ed. by James P. Blevins , and Juliette Blevins , 54–82. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547548.003.0003
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547548.003.0003 [Google Scholar]
  2. Blevins, James P.
    2016Word and Paradigm Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593545.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593545.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  3. Boas, Hans C.
    2008 “Determining the Structure of Lexical Entries and Grammatical Constructions in Construction Grammar.” Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics6: 113–144. 10.1075/arcl.6.06boa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.6.06boa [Google Scholar]
  4. 2014 “Zur Architektur einer konstruktionsbasierten Grammatik des Deutschen.” InGrammatik als Netzwerk von Konstruktionen. Sprachwissen im Fokus der Konstruktionsgrammatik, ed. by Alexander Lasch , and Alexander Ziem , 37–63. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110353693.37
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110353693.37 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bühler, Karl
    1989 [1934]Sprachtheorie: Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Stuttgart: UTB.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bybee, Joan L. , Revere D. Perkins and William Pagliuca
    1994The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Croft, William
    2001Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  8. Diessel, Holger
    2019The Grammar Network: How Linguistic Structure is Shaped by Language Use. New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108671040
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108671040 [Google Scholar]
  9. Diewald, Gabriele
    1991Deixis und Textsorten im Deutschen. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783111376400
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111376400 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2009 “Konstruktionen und Paradigmen”. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik37 (3): 445–468. 10.1515/ZGL.2009.031
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ZGL.2009.031 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2020 “Paradigms Lost – Paradigms Regained: Paradigms as Hyper-Constructions”. InNodes and networks in diachronic construction grammar, ed. by Lotte Sommerer , and Elena Smirnova , 278–315. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27.08die
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.08die [Google Scholar]
  12. Dryer, Matthew S. , and Martin Haspelmath
    (eds.) 2013The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online atwals.info, last accessed on2020-08-18.)
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fried, Mirjam , and Jan-Ola Östman
    2004 “Construction Grammar: A Thumbnail Sketch”. InConstruction Grammar in a Cross-Language Perspective, ed. by Jan-Ola Östman , and Mirjam Fried , 11–86. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.2.02fri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.2.02fri [Google Scholar]
  14. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 2006Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Hippisley, Andrew
    2016 “Network Morphology”. InThe Cambridge Handbook of Morphology, ed. by Andrew Hippisley , and Gregory Stump , 482–509. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781139814720.018
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139814720.018 [Google Scholar]
  17. Jackendoff, Ray
    1990Semantic Structures. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Jakobson, Roman
    1971 [1957] “Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb”. InSelected Writings: Vol. II: Word and language, ed. by Roman Jakobson , 130–147. The Hague/Paris: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Jakobson, Roman and Krystyna Pomorska
    1982Poesie und Grammatik: Dialoge. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Langacker, Ronald W.
    1985 “Observations and Speculations on Subjectivity.” InIconicity in Syntax. Proceedings of a Symposium on Iconicity in Syntax, Stanford, June 24–26, 1983, ed. by John Haiman , 109–150. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.6.07lan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.6.07lan [Google Scholar]
  21. 2002 “Deixis and Subjectivity.” InGrounding: The epistemic footing of deixis and reference, ed. by Frank Brisard , 1–28. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110899801.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110899801.1 [Google Scholar]
  22. Lehmann, Christian
    2015 [1982]Thoughts on grammaticalization. Third edition. Language Science Press. 10.26530/OAPEN_603353
    https://doi.org/10.26530/OAPEN_603353 [Google Scholar]
  23. Leiss, Elisabeth
    1992Die Verbalkategorien des Deutschen: Ein Beitrag zur Theorie der sprachlichen Kategorisierung. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110883541
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110883541 [Google Scholar]
  24. Nielsen, Peter Juul
    2016Functional Structure in Morphology and the Case of Nonfinite Verbs. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004321830
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004321830 [Google Scholar]
  25. Nørgård-Sørensen, Jens , Lars Heltoft , and Lene Schøsler
    2011Connecting Grammaticalisation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sfsl.65
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sfsl.65 [Google Scholar]
  26. Plank, Frans
    (ed.) 1991Paradigms: The Economy of Inflection. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110889109
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110889109 [Google Scholar]
  27. Politt, Katja
    2019 “Verbale Konstruktionen in grammatischen Paradigmen”. InVarianz in der konstruktionalen Schematizität, ed. by Dániel Czicza , Volodymyr Dekalo , and Gabriele Diewald , 217–236. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. . to appear. Parts and wholes – Formen und Funktionen von Paradigmen. PhD Dissertation, Leibniz Universität Hannover.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Plungian, Vladimir A.
    1998 Грамматические категории, их аналоги и заместители [Grammatical categories, their analogs and alternatives]. Habilitation dissertation, Lomonosov Moscow State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Traugott, Elizabeth C. , and Graeme Trousdale
    2013Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): constructions; grammar; grammatical categories; paradigms
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error