1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Constructions and Frames
  4. Volume 17, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 17, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1876-1933
  • E-ISSN: 1876-1941
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The present paper investigates the similative-pretence alternating pair in Mexican Spanish ( and constructions) based on the analysis of 1362 instances from The Corpus del Español NOW (News on the Web) corpus. We apply a revised version of distinctive collexeme analysis to our concordance data to explore the variety of different verbs that can occur in the first slot of similative and pretence constructions. Specifically, we use (i) a new measure that distinguishes the attraction that a verb lemma exerts on a construction from the attraction that a construction exerts on a verb lemma and (ii) bootstrapping on the level of files to, for the first time, provide proper confidence intervals in the context of collostructional studies. The from-verb lemma-to-construction analysis shows that there is a significant attraction of epistemic lemmas (e.g., ‘to seem’) to occur in ‘like’, and of mistaken identity lemmas (e.g., ‘to act’) to appear in ‘as if’ constructions. The from-construction-to-verb lemma analysis, on the other hand, demonstrates that ‘like’ significantly attracts epistemic perception verbs (e.g., ‘to look’), and ‘as if’ constructions significantly attract the verb lemma ‘to feel.’

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/cf.23020.olg
2025-02-28
2026-04-16

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/cf.23020.olg
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Batchelor, R. E. & Pountain, C. J.
    (2005) Using Spanish: A guide to contemporary usage. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Beckner, C., Blythe, R., Bybee, J., Christiansen, M. H., Croft, W., Ellis, N. C., Holland, J., Ke, J., Larsen-Freeman, D., & Schoenemann, T.
    (2009) Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning, 591, 1–26. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00533.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00533.x [Google Scholar]
  3. Chamoreau, C.
    (2017) Multifunctionality and polysemy of the similative marker =kan in Pesh. InY. Treis & M. Vanhove (Eds.), Similative and equative constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp.321–337). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.117.13cha
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.117.13cha [Google Scholar]
  4. Cover, T. & Thomas, J. A.
    (2006) Elements of information theory. 2nd ed.Wiley.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Croft, W. & Cruse, A.
    (2004) Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511803864
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864 [Google Scholar]
  6. Darmon, C.
    (2017) The morpheme (a)ŋa in Xamtanga: Functions and grammaticalization targets. InY. Treis & M. Vanhove (Eds.), Similative and equative constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp.359–385). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.117.15dar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.117.15dar [Google Scholar]
  7. Diessel, H.
    (2019) The grammar network. How linguistic structure is shaped by language use. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108671040
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108671040 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2020) A dynamic network approach to the study of syntax. Frontiers in Psychology, 111, Article 604853. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.604853
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.604853 [Google Scholar]
  9. Egbert, J. & Plonsky, L.
    (2020) Bootstrapping techniques. InM. Paquot & S. T. Gries (Eds.), Practical handbook of corpus linguistics (pp.593–610). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑46216‑1_24
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46216-1_24 [Google Scholar]
  10. Evert, S.
    (2009) Corpora and collocations. InA. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook, Vol.21 (pp.1212–1248). Mouton De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110213881.2.1212
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110213881.2.1212 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fillmore, C. J. & Kay, P.
    (1999) Construction Grammar. University of California.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Fortescue, M.
    (2010) Similitude: A conceptual category. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 421, 117–142. 10.1080/03740463.2010.521442
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.2010.521442 [Google Scholar]
  13. Fuchs, C.
    (2014) La comparaison et son expression en francais. Ophrys.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Goldberg, A. E.
    (1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Gries, S. T.
    (2005) Null-hypothesis significance testing of word frequencies: A follow-up on Kilgarriff. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory11, 277–294. 10.1515/cllt.2005.1.2.277
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt.2005.1.2.277 [Google Scholar]
  16. (2019) 15 years of collostructions: Some long overdue additions/corrections (to/of actually all sorts of corpus-linguistics measures). International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 241, 385–412. 10.1075/ijcl.00011.gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.00011.gri [Google Scholar]
  17. (2021) Statistics for linguistics with R. 3rd ed.Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110718256
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110718256 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gries, Stefan T.
    (2022a) What do (some of) our association measures measure (most)? Association?Journal of Second Language Studies, 51, 1–33. 10.1075/jsls.21028.gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.21028.gri [Google Scholar]
  19. (2022b) Towards more careful corpus statistics: Uncertainty estimates for frequencies, dispersions, association measures, and more. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 11, 100002. 10.1016/j.rmal.2021.100002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2021.100002 [Google Scholar]
  20. Gries, S. T.
    (2023) Overhauling collostructional analysis: Towards more descriptive simplicity and more explanatory adequacy. Cognitive Semantics. Online Publication Date: 07 Aug 2023. 10.1163/23526416‑bja10056
     https://doi.org/10.1163/23526416-bja10056 [Google Scholar]
  21. Gries, S. T. & Stefanowitsch, A.
    (2004) Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspectives on ‘alternations’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 91, 97–129. 10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06gri [Google Scholar]
  22. Harris, Z.
    (1954) Distributional structure. Word, 101, 146–162. 10.1080/00437956.1954.11659520
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1954.11659520 [Google Scholar]
  23. Haspelmath, M. & Buchholz, O.
    (1998) Equative and similative constructions in the languages of Europe. InJ. Van der Auwera (Ed.), Adverbial constructions in the languages of Europe (pp.277–334). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110802610.277
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110802610.277 [Google Scholar]
  24. Henkelmann, P.
    (2006) Constructions of equative comparison. STUF — Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 591, 370–398. 10.1524/stuf.2006.59.4.370
     https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2006.59.4.370 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hetterle, K.
    (2015) Adverbial clauses in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110409857
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110409857 [Google Scholar]
  26. 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]
  27. (2021) Ten lectures on Diachronic Construction Grammar. Brill. 10.1163/9789004446793
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004446793 [Google Scholar]
  28. Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I.
    (1999) Vision metaphors for the intellect: Are they really cross-linguistic?Atlantis, 301, 15–33.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Jiménez Juliá, T.
    (2003) Como en español actual. Verba, 301, 117–161.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M.
    (1980) Metaphors we live by. The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Olguin Martinez, J.
    (2021) Hypothetical manner constructions in world-wide perspective. Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads, 11, 2–33.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Palmer, F. R.
    (2001) Mood and modality. 2nd ed.Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139167178
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139167178 [Google Scholar]
  33. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2023) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Schulze, W.
    (2017) Toward a cognitive typology of like-expressions. InY. Treis & M. Vanhove (Eds.), Similative and equative constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp.33–78). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.117.03sch
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.117.03sch [Google Scholar]
  35. Stefanowitsch, A. & Gries, S. T.
    (2003) Collostructions: Investigating the interaction between words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 81, 209–243. 10.1075/ijcl.8.2.03ste
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.8.2.03ste [Google Scholar]
  36. Trujillo, R.
    (1990) Sobre la explicación de algunas construcciones de como. Verba, 171, 249–266.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Viberg, Å.
    (1984) The verbs of perception: A typological study. InB. Butterworth, B. Comrie, & Ö. Dahl (eds), Explanations for language universals (pp.123–162). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110868555.123
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110868555.123 [Google Scholar]
  38. Wulff, S.
    (2008) Rethinking idiomaticity: A usage-based approach. Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/cf.23020.olg
Loading
The similative-pretence alternating pair and filler-slot relations
Constructions and Frames 17, 65 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.23020.olg
/content/journals/10.1075/cf.23020.olg
/content/journals/10.1075/cf.23020.olg
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): collexeme analysis; comparative construction; filler-slot relations; similarity; Spanish

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