1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Constructions and Frames
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Scaffolding the sentential Ultimate construction into a word
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a model that accounts for the change in the grammatical status of the members of the Hebrew Ultimate construction family, the only sentences in Hebrew to undergo lexicalization, from extra-sentential elements to full-fledged words, specifically, flexible modifiers. We propose a specific type of contextual construction — the Anaphoric degree-adverb exclamative — and argue that it is this construction that enables both the grammatical change and the categorial flexibility of the newly evolved words by incorporating the members of the construction family as subordinate clauses. Our analysis emphasizes the critical role of network links between the (various) constructions involved in this lexicalization process.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/cf.22028.bec
2025-04-08
2025-04-30

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/cf.22028.bec
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Audring, J., & Booij, G.
    (2016) Cooperation and coercion. Linguistics, (), –. 10.1515/ling‑2016‑0012
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2016-0012 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bardenstein, R., & Ariel, M.
    (2022) The missing link between truth and intensification. Studies in Language, (), –. 10.1075/sl.20076.bar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.20076.bar [Google Scholar]
  3. Bauer, L.
    (1983) English word-formation. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165846
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165846 [Google Scholar]
  4. Becker, I.
    (2023) It’s all about the sentential construction: Lexicalization of complete mono-clausal sentences into words — Evidence from Hebrew. Studies in Language, (), –. 10.1075/sl.21006.bec
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.21006.bec [Google Scholar]
  5. (2024a) Constructions “on the move”: From independent-sentential to lexical constructions. [Doctoral dissertation]. Tel Aviv University.
  6. (2024b) Let my speakers talk: Metalinguistic activity can indicate semantic change. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, (), –. 10.1515/cllt‑2023‑0022
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2023-0022 [Google Scholar]
  7. Beltrama, A., & Bochnak, M. R.
    (2015) Intensification without degrees cross-linguistically. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, (), –. 10.1007/s11049‑015‑9294‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-015-9294-8 [Google Scholar]
  8. Berg, T.
    (2014) Competition as a unifying concept for the study of language. Mental Lexicon, (), –. 10.1075/ml.9.2.08ber
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.9.2.08ber [Google Scholar]
  9. Blank, A.
    (2001) Pathways of lexicalization. InW. Raible, M. Haspelmath, E. König, & W. Oesterreicher (Eds.), Language universals and language typology (pp.–). De Gruyter Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Blank, G., & Reisdorf, B. C.
    (2012) The participatory web: A user perspective on Web 2.0. Information, Communication & Society, (), –. 10.1080/1369118X.2012.665935
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.665935 [Google Scholar]
  11. Booij, G.
    (2009) Lexical integrity as a formal universal: A constructionist view. InS. Scalise, E. Magni, & A. Bisetto (Eds.), Universals of language today (pp.–). Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑8825‑4_5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8825-4_5 [Google Scholar]
  12. Booij, G., & Audring, J.
    (2018) Category change in construction morphology. InK. Van Goethem, M. Norde, E. Coussé, & G. Vanderbauwhede (Eds.), Category change from a constructional perspective (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.20.08boo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.20.08boo [Google Scholar]
  13. Börjars, K., Vincent, N., & Walkden, G.
    (2015) On constructing a theory of grammatical change. Transactions of the Philological Society, (), –. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12068
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12068 [Google Scholar]
  14. Brinton, L. J., & Traugott, E. C.
    (2005) Lexicalization and language change. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615962
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615962 [Google Scholar]
  15. Bybee, J. L.
    (2006) From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, (), –. 10.1353/lan.2006.0186
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186 [Google Scholar]
  16. Cappelle, B.
    (2006) Particle placement and the case for ‘allostructions’. Constructions, special volume 1: Constructions all over: Case studies and theoretical implications. Retrieved fromhttps://hal.science/hal-01495786
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Croft, W.
    (2001) Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  18. Culperer, J., & Kytö, M.
    (2010) Early Modern English dialogues: Spoken interaction as writing. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Danet, B.
    (2001) Cyberpl@y: Communicating online. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. De Smet, H., D’hoedt, F., Fonteyn, L., & Van Goethem, K.
    (2018) The changing functions of competing forms: Attraction and differentiation. Cognitive Linguistics, (), –. 10.1515/cog‑2016‑0025
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0025 [Google Scholar]
  21. Diessel, H.
    (2020) A dynamic network approach to the study of syntax. Frontiers in Psychology, . Retrieved fromhttps://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.604853. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.604853
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.604853 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2023) The Constructicon: Taxonomies and networks. Elements in Construction Grammar, Retrieved fromhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/constructicon/ECD7CC294373BC24CF5C2D97068F1F82. 10.1017/9781009327848
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009327848 [Google Scholar]
  23. Diewald, G.
    (2006) Context types in Grammaticalization as constructions. Constructions, special volume 1: Constructions all over: Case studies and theoretical implications. Retrieved fromhttps://constructions.journals.hhu.de/article/view/443
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Dixon, R. M. W., & Aikhenvald, A. Y.
    (2002) Word: A typological framework. InR. M. W. Dixon & A. Y. Aikhenvald (Eds.), Word: A cross-linguistic typology (pp.–). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Evans, N., & Wilkins, D.
    (2000) In the mind’s ear: The semantic extensions of perception verbs in Australian languages. Language, (), –. 10.2307/417135
     https://doi.org/10.2307/417135 [Google Scholar]
  26. Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C.
    (1988) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language, (), –. 10.2307/414531
     https://doi.org/10.2307/414531 [Google Scholar]
  27. Flach, S.
    (2020) Constructionalization and the Sorites Paradox: The emergence of the into-causative. InL. Sommerer & E. Smirnova (Eds.), Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27.01fla
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.01fla [Google Scholar]
  28. (2021) From movement into action to manner of causation: Changes in argument mapping in the into-causative. Linguistics, (), –. 10.1515/ling‑2020‑0269
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2020-0269 [Google Scholar]
  29. Glinert, L.
    (1989) The grammar of Modern Hebrew. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Goldberg, A. E.
    (1995) Constructions : A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. (2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Haspelmath, M.
    (2011) The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax. Folia Linguistica, (), –. 10.1515/flin.2011.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2011.002 [Google Scholar]
  33. (2019) What is the difference between a clause and a sentence?Retrieved fromDiversity Linguistics Comment: Language structures throughout the world: https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1725
  34. (2022) Two senses of “lexicon”: The inventorium and the lexemicon. Retrieved fromDiversity Linguistics Comment: Language structures throughout the world: https://dlc.hypotheses.org/2720
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Heaney, S.
    (1966) Death of a naturalist. Faber & Faber.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Heine, B.
    (2002) On the role of context in Grammaticalization. InI. Wischer & G. Diewald (Eds.), New reflections on Grammaticalization (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.49.08hei
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.49.08hei [Google Scholar]
  37. Henkin, R.
    (1994) kinuyey remez mašvim ve-šimušam le-derug [Comparative demonstratives as superlatives in Modern Hebrew]. Lĕšonénu: A Journal for the Study of the Hebrew Language and Cognate Subjects, (), –. [in Hebrew].
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Hetterle, K.
    (2015) Adverbial clauses in cross-linguistic perspective. De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110409857
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110409857 [Google Scholar]
  39. Hilpert, M.
    (2013) Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139004206
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139004206 [Google Scholar]
  40. (2018) Three open questions in Diachronic Construction Grammar. InE. Coussé, P. Andersson, & J. Olofsson (Eds.), Grammaticalization meets Construction Grammar (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.21.c2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.21.c2 [Google Scholar]
  41. Hopper, P. J.
    (1991) On some principles of Grammaticalization. InE. C. Traugott & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization: Theoretical and methodological issues (Vol., pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop [Google Scholar]
  42. Hopper, P. J., & Traugott, E. C.
    (2003 [1993]) Grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165525
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
  43. Irwin, P.
    (2015) Expressive meaning in an AAE attributive construction. Language Sciences, , –. 10.1016/j.langsci.2015.01.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2015.01.002 [Google Scholar]
  44. Klein, H.
    (1998) Adverbs of degree in Dutch and related languages. John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.21
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.21 [Google Scholar]
  45. Kuzar, R.
    (1992) psukiot nominalizacia ba-ʕivrit ha-isreʔelit [Nominal clauses in Israeli hebrew]. balšanut ʕivrit [Hebrew Linguistics: A Journal for Hebrew Descriptive, Computational and Applied Linguistics], , –. [in Hebrew].
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Langacker, R. W.
    (2008) Cognitive Grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  47. Lehmann, C.
    (1988) Towards a typology of clause linkage. InJ. Haiman & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Clause combining in grammar and discourse. (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.18.09leh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.18.09leh [Google Scholar]
  48. Lipka, L.
    (1992) An outline of English lexicology: Lexical structure, word semantics, and word-formation. Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. McNabb, Y.
    (2012) Cross-categorial modification of properties in Hebrew and English. Semantics and Linguistic Theory, , –. 10.3765/salt.v22i0.3159
     https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v22i0.3159 [Google Scholar]
  50. Méndez-Naya, B.
    (2003) On intensifiers and grammaticalization: The case of SWIÞE. English Studies, (), –. 10.1076/enst.84.4.372.17388
     https://doi.org/10.1076/enst.84.4.372.17388 [Google Scholar]
  51. Meyer, D., Zeileis, A., & Hornik, K.
    (2008) Visualizing contingency tables. InC.-h. Chen, W. Härdle, & A. Unwin (Eds.), Handbook of data visualization (pp.–). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑540‑33037‑0_23
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-33037-0_23 [Google Scholar]
  52. Michaelis, L. A.
    (2001) Exclamative constructions. InW. Raible, M. Haspelmath, E. König, & W. Oesterreicher (Eds.), Language universals and language typology (pp.–). Walter De Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. (2004) Type shifting in construction grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion. Cognitive Linguistics, (), –. 10.1515/cogl.2004.001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2004.001 [Google Scholar]
  54. Michaelis, L. A., & Lambrecht, K.
    (1996) The exclamative sentence type in English. InA. E. Goldberg (Ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse and language (pp.–). CSLI Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Neuman, Y.
    (2017) psukit zika ʕacmaʔit bli šin ha-zika ba-ʕivrit ha-xadaša [Independent relative clause lacking relative that in modern Hebrew]. Paper presented atThe 44th Conference of the Israel Association of Applied Linguistics, Achva Academic College, Israel. [in Hebrew].
     [Google Scholar]
  56. O’Reilly, T., & Battelle, J.
    (2009) Web squared: Web 2.0 five years on. Retrieved fromdgroups.org/file2.axd/45127812-6239-4448-8bb6-508dc1b1e204/web2009_websquared-whitepaper.pdf
  57. Perek, F.
    (2012) Alternation-based generalizations are stored in the mental grammar: Evidence from a sorting task experiment. Cognitive Linguistics, (), –. 10.1515/cog‑2012‑0018
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2012-0018 [Google Scholar]
  58. Ramat, P.
    (2016) What’s in a word?SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Rubinstein, A.
    (2019) Historical corpora meet the digital humanities: The Jerusalem Corpus of Emergent Modern Hebrew. Language Resources and Evaluation, (), –. 10.1007/s10579‑019‑09458‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-019-09458-4 [Google Scholar]
  60. Salazar-García, V.
    (2010) Degree words, intensification, and word class distinctions in Romance languages. InU. Ansaldo, J. Don, & R. Pfau (Eds.), Parts of Speech: Empirical and theoretical advances (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.25.10sal
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.25.10sal [Google Scholar]
  61. Schmid, H.-J.
    (2020) The Dynamics of the linguistic system: Usage, conventionalization, and entrenchment. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  62. Shaviv, T.
    (2018) legamrey – gilgulu šel maʕacim [The evolution of an Intensifier]. Helkat Lašon — A Journal for Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, , –. [in Hebrew].
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Smirnova, E., Mailhammer, R., & Flach, S.
    (2019) The role of atypical constellations in the grammaticalization of German and English passives. Diachronica, (), –. 10.1075/dia.16033.smi
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.16033.smi [Google Scholar]
  64. Smirnova, E., & Sommerer, L.
    (2020) The nature of the node and the network — Open questions in Diachronic Construction Grammar. InL. Sommerer & E. Smirnova (Eds.), Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27.int
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.int [Google Scholar]
  65. Sommerer, L.
    (2020) Constructionalization, constructional competition and constructional death: Investigating the demise of Old English POSS DEM constructions. InL. Sommerer & E. Smirnova (Eds.), Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27.02som
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.02som [Google Scholar]
  66. Svensson, M. H.
    (2008) A very complex criterion of fixedness: Non-compositionality. InF. Meunier & S. Granger (Eds.), Phraseology : An interdisciplinary perspective (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.139.10sve
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.139.10sve [Google Scholar]
  67. Traugott, E. C., & Trousdale, G.
    (2013) Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  68. Ungerer, T.
    (2021) Using structural priming to test links between constructions: English caused-motion and resultative sentences inhibit each other. Cognitive Linguistics, (), –. 10.1515/cog‑2020‑0016
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2020-0016 [Google Scholar]
  69. (2024) Vertical and horizontal links in constructional networks: Two sides of the same coin?Constructions and Frames, (), –. 10.1075/cf.22011.ung
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.22011.ung [Google Scholar]
  70. Vaisman, C., & Gonen, I.
    (2011) ʕivrit ʔinternetit [Hebrew on-line]. Keter Publishing House. [in Hebrew].
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Van de Velde, F.
    (2014) Degeneracy: The maintenance of constructional networks. InR. Boogaart, T. Colleman, & G. Rutten (Eds.), Extending the Scope of Construction Grammar (pp.–). De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110366273.141
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110366273.141 [Google Scholar]
  72. Van Goethem, K., Vanderbauwhede, G., & De Smet, H.
    (2018) The emergence of a new adverbial downtoner: Constructional change and constructionalization of Dutch [ver van X] and [verre van X] ‘far from X’. InK. Van Goethem, M. Norde, E. Coussé, & G. Vanderbauwhede (Eds.), Category change from a constructional perspective (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.20.07goe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.20.07goe [Google Scholar]
  73. Zehentner, E., & Traugott, E. C.
    (2020) Constructional networks and the development of benefactive ditransitives in English. InL. Sommerer & E. Smirnova (Eds.), Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27.05zeh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.05zeh [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/cf.22028.bec
Loading
Scaffolding the sentential Ultimate construction into a word
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.22028.bec
/content/journals/10.1075/cf.22028.bec
/content/journals/10.1075/cf.22028.bec
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: Diachronic Construction Grammar ; Hebrew ; amplifiers ; ultimate construction ; exclamative sentence construction ; lexicalization ; sentence-level constructions

Most Cited

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