1887
Volume 4, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Adopting the Cognitive Linguistic (CL) framework, this study focuses on the particle placement phenomenon of English transitive particle verbs and its relationship with idiomaticity. Construal is argued to play a key role in determining which order a transitive particle verb should take. When a caused motion event or state change event is construed sequentially, the discontinuous order is taken to emphasize the final resultant state of the object. When the holistic construal is taken to view the same situation, the continuous order is adopted to profile the object or the interaction between the subject and the object. The holistic construal requires two conditions. First, the particle has a dynamic sense. It can designate both the process and the endpoint of motion. Second, the final state denoted by the particle is directly caused by the action denoted by the verb. In contrast, the sequential construal is allowed as long as a causal link can be established between the two participants under discussion or between the verb and the state change of one participant. In addition, the present study argues that the particle placement of idiomatic particle verbs depends on the processes in which the particle verb has developed its idiomaticity. If the idiomatic meaning develops from the inference associated with the sequential construal, the discontinuous order is preferred. On the other hand, if the idiomatic meaning is based on the holistic construal, the continuous order is then preferred. Moreover, item-by-item analyses of particle verbs that only allow one order listed in the provide corpus-based support to the CL view of the relationship between construal, particle placement, and idiomaticity proposed in this study.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00008.luo
2018-03-16
2019-08-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bolinger, D.
    (1971) The phrasal verb in English. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Chen, P.
    (1986) Discourse and particle movement in English. Studies in Language, 10, 79–95.10.1075/sl.10.1.05che
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.10.1.05che [Google Scholar]
  3. Croft, W. , & Cruse, D. A.
    (2004) Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511803864
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864 [Google Scholar]
  4. Darwin, C. M. , & Gray, L. S.
    (1999) Going after the particle verbs: An alternative approach to classification. TESOL Quarterly, 33(1), 65–83.10.2307/3588191
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588191 [Google Scholar]
  5. Dehé, N.
    (Ed.) (2002) Particle verbs in English: Syntax, information structure and intonation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamnins.10.1075/la.59
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.59 [Google Scholar]
  6. Den Dikken, M.
    (1995) Particles: On the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Dewell, R.
    (2011) The meaning of particle/ prefix constructions in German. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.34
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.34 [Google Scholar]
  8. Dirven, R.
    (2001) English particle verbs: Theory and didactic application. In M. Pütz & S. Niemeier (Eds.). Applied Cognitive Linguistics II: Language Pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110866254.3
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110866254.3 [Google Scholar]
  9. Evans, V. , & Green, M.
    (2006) Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fauconnier, G.
    (1997) Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139174220
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174220 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fraser, B.
    (1976) The verb-particle combination in English. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Gardner, D. , & Davies, M.
    (2007) Pointing out frequent phrasal verbs: A corpus-based analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 339–359.10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2007.tb00062.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00062.x [Google Scholar]
  13. Gibbs, R. W.
    (1990) Psycholinguistic studies on the conceptual basis of idiomaticity. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(4), 417–451.10.1515/cogl.1990.1.4.417
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.4.417 [Google Scholar]
  14. Goldberg, A. E.
    (2016) Tuning in to the verb-particle construction in English. In L. Nash & P. Samvelian (Eds.), Approaches to complex predicates (pp.110–141). Boston: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gries, S. T.
    (1999) Particle movement: A cognitive and functional approachCognitive Linguistics, 10 (2), 105–145.10.1515/cogl.1999.005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1999.005 [Google Scholar]
  16. (2002) The influence of processing on syntactic variation: particle placement in English. In N. Dehe , R. Jackendoff , A. McIntyre , & S. Urban (Eds.), Verb particle explorations (pp.269–288). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110902341.269
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110902341.269 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2003) Multifactorial analysis in corpus linguistics: A study of particle placement. London/New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Jackendoff, R.
    (2002) English particle constructions, the lexicon, and the autonomy of syntax. In N. Dehe , R. Jackendoff , A. McIntyre , & S. Urban (Eds.), Verb particle explorations (pp.67–94). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110902341.67
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110902341.67 [Google Scholar]
  19. Lakoff, G.
    (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  20. Langacker, R.
    (1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar, volume 1. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. (1990) Concept, image and symbol. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Morgan, P. S.
    (1997) Figuring out figure out: Metaphor and the semantics of the English verb-particle construction. Cognitive Linguistics, 8 (4), 327–357.10.1515/cogl.1997.8.4.327
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1997.8.4.327 [Google Scholar]
  23. Olsen, S.
    (1996) Partikelverben im Deautsch-Englischen Vergleich. In E. Lang & G. Zifonun (Eds.). Deutsch-typologisch (pp.261–288). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Quirk, R. , Greenbaum, S. , Leech, G. , & Svartvik, J.
    (1985) A comprehensive grammar of the English language. New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Sinclair, J. , Moon, R. , et al.
    (1989) Collins COBUID dictionary of particle verbs. London: Harper Collins Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Svenonius, P.
    (1996) The optionality of particle shift. Working papers in Scandinavian syntax, 57, 47–75.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Talmy, L.
    (2000) Toward a cognitive semantics, volumes II. Cambridge: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Thim, S.
    (2012) Phrasal verbs: the English verb-particle construction and its history. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110257038
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110257038 [Google Scholar]
  29. Van Dongen, V. A. Sr.
    (1919) He puts on his hat and he puts his hat on. Neophililogus, 4, 322–353.10.1007/BF01508864
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01508864 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00008.luo
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): cognitive linguistics , construal , idiomaticity , particle placement and particle verbs
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