1887
Volume 34, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0774-5141
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9676
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

While the concept of extravagance, used to describe speakers’ use of imaginative and noticeable language, has seen a surge in popularity in recent constructionist work, researchers have not yet converged on a set of common criteria for identifying extravagant expressions. In this paper, we discuss a variety of existing definitions and combine them into five main characteristics of extravagant language. We then present the results of a small-scale pilot rating study in which speakers judged extravagant sentences and their non-extravagant paraphrases. Our findings suggest that different constructions vary in their degree of perceived extravagance, and that certain features (e.g. stylistic salience) apply to most extravagant examples while the role of other factors (e.g. the speaker’s emotional involvement) may be restricted to a subset of extravagant patterns. We conclude with some open questions concerning the further demarcation and operationalisation of the concept of extravagance.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00058.ung
2020-12-31
2022-05-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bryer, Jason
    2019 likert: Analysis and Visualization of Likert Items. R-script available at github.com/jbryer/likert (last checked21/10/2020)
  2. Dahl, Östen
    2001 “Inflationary Effects in Language and Elsewhere.” InFrequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure, ed. by Joan L. Bybee , and Paul J. Hopper , 471–480. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.45.24dah
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.45.24dah [Google Scholar]
  3. d’Avis, Franz , and Rita Finkbeiner
    (eds) 2019Expressivität im Deutschen. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. De Wit, Astrid , Peter Petré , and Frank Brisard
    2020 “Standing out with the Progressive.” Journal of Linguistics56 (3): 479–514. 10.1017/S0022226719000501
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226719000501 [Google Scholar]
  5. Detges, Ulrich , and Richard Waltereit
    2002 “Grammaticalization vs. Reanalysis: a Semantic-Pragmatic Account of Functional Change in Grammar.” Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft21 (2). 151–195. 10.1515/zfsw.2002.21.2.151
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsw.2002.21.2.151 [Google Scholar]
  6. Drummond, Alex D.
    2020 Ibex Farm. Available at https://spellout.net/ibexfarm (last checked21/10/2020)
  7. Eitelmann, Matthias , and Dagmar Haumann
    eds. In prep.Extravagant Morphology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Günther, Christine , Sven Kotowski , and Ingo Plag
    2020 “Phrasal Compounds Can Have Adjectival Heads: Evidence from English.” English Language and Linguistics24 (1): 75–95. 10.1017/S1360674318000229
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674318000229 [Google Scholar]
  9. Haspelmath, Martin
    1999 “Why Is Grammaticalization Irreversible?” Linguistics37 (6): 1043–1068. 10.1515/ling.37.6.1043
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.37.6.1043 [Google Scholar]
  10. Hein, Katrin
    2017 “Modeling the Properties of German Phrasal Compounds within a Usage-Based Constructional Approach.” InFurther Investigations into the Nature of Phrasal Compounding, ed. by Carola Trips , and Jaklin Kornfilt , 119–148. Berlin: Language Science Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Ishiyama, Osamu
    2014 “The Nature of Speaker Creativity in Linguistic Innovation.” InUsage-Based Approaches to Language Change, ed. by Evie Coussé , and Ferdinand von Mengden , 147–166. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sfsl.69.06ish
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sfsl.69.06ish [Google Scholar]
  12. Keller, Rudi
    1994Language Change: The Invisible Hand in Language. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kempf, Luise , and Stefan Hartmann
    2018 “Schema Unification and Morphological Productivity: A Diachronic Perspective.” InThe Construction of Words. Advances in Construction Morphology, ed. by Geert E. Booij , 441–474. Berlin: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑74394‑3_16
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74394-3_16 [Google Scholar]
  14. . forthcoming. “What’s Extravagant about be-sandaled Feet? Morphology, Semantics and Pragmatics of German Pseudo-Participles.” InExtravagant morphology ed. by Matthias Eitelmann , and Dagmar Haumann . Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Lensch, Anke
    2018 “ Fixer-Uppers. Reduplication in the Derivation of Phrasal Verbs.” InExact Repetition in Grammar and Discourse, ed. by Rita Finkbeiner , and Ulrike Freywald , 158–181. Berlin/ Boston: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110592498‑007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110592498-007 [Google Scholar]
  16. Petré, Peter
    2016 “Unidirectionality as a Cycle of Convention and Innovation: Micro-Changes in the Grammaticalization of [be going to INF].” Belgian Journal of Linguistics30: 115–146. 10.1075/bjl.30.06pet
    https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.30.06pet [Google Scholar]
  17. 2017 “The Extravagant Progressive: An Experimental Corpus Study on the History of Emphatic [be Ving].” English Language and Linguistics21 (2): 227–250. 10.1017/S1360674317000107
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674317000107 [Google Scholar]
  18. R Core Team
    R Core Team 2020R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Manual. Vienna, Austria.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Schmid, Hans-Jörg
    2020The Dynamics of the Linguistic System: Usage, Conventionalization, and Entrenchment. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  20. Schmid, Hans-Jörg , and Franziska Günther
    2016 “Toward a Unified Socio-Cognitive Framework for Salience in Language.” Frontiers in Psychology7. doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01110
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01110 [Google Scholar]
  21. Ungerer, Tobias , and Stefan Hartmann
    2020 “Attack of the Snowclones: A Corpus-Based Analysis of Extravagant Formulaic Patterns.” Paper presented at theUK Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Birmingham, July 27–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Zima, Elisabeth , and Geert Brône
    2015 “Cognitive Linguistics and Interactional Discourse: Time to Enter into Dialogue.” Language and Cognition7 (4): 485–498. 10.1017/langcog.2015.19
    https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2015.19 [Google Scholar]
  23. Zwicky, Arnold M. , and Geoffrey K. Pullum
    1987 “Plain Morphology and Expressive Morphology.” Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society13: 330–340. 10.3765/bls.v13i0.1817
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v13i0.1817 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00058.ung
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00058.ung
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): construction grammar; defining features; extravagance; rating study
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