1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Language, Context and Text
  4. Volume 5, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 5, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2589-7233
  • E-ISSN: 2589-7241
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study aims to illustrate a systemic functional framework for analysing the change of constructions which are inherently form-meaning correspondences. The study first discusses the value of systemic functional linguistics (hereafter SFL) to solving the perceived problems arising from the theoretical model of grammaticalisation. The dominance of grammaticalisation theory in historical linguistics has led some to equate grammaticalisation with language change. However, a systematic exploration of the semantic change is frequently lost in the literature on grammaticalisation. SFL, since its beginning in the early 1980s, has become a leading linguistics school in dealing with semantic and lexicogrammatical changes and the mapping between meaning and form. This study proposes a framework in which SFL theories allow us to address the critical issues in construction change, hence providing mechanisms for the diachronic analysis of both semantic and lexicogrammatical changes. On the basis of the framework, this study focuses its analysis on the change of resultative constructions (hereafter RCs) in Old Chinese and Old English. The diachronic analysis shows that new constructions emerge through a cycle of language change in which the interaction of semantics and lexicogrammar plays a central role. In addition, semantic condensing and compacting are critical steps in the creation of new constructions.

© 2023 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/langct.00043.yan
2023-05-26
2025-04-22

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/langct.00043.yan
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bergs, Alexander & Gabriele Diewald
    2008 (eds.). Constructions and language change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110211757
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110211757 [Google Scholar]
  2. Boas, Hans C.
    2003 Constructional approach to resultatives. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Broccias, Critiano
    2008 Towards a history of English resultative constructions: The case of adjectival resultative constructions. English Language and Linguistics12(1). 27–54. 10.1017/S1360674307002493
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674307002493 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bybee, Joan L.
    1985 Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.9
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.9 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bybee, Joan L., Revere D. Perkins & William Pagliuca
    1994 The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Campbell, Lyle & Richard D. Janda
    2001 Introduction: Conceptions of grammaticalization and their problems. Language Sciences23(2–3). 93–112. 10.1016/S0388‑0001(00)00018‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0388-0001(00)00018-8 [Google Scholar]
  7. Comrie, Bernard
    1976 Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. DeVriend, Hubert J.
    1984 (ed.). The Old English Herbarium and Medicina de Quadrupedibus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Diewald, Gabriele
    2002 A model for relevant types of contexts in grammaticalization. InI. Wischer & G. Diewald (eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization, 103–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.49.09die
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.49.09die [Google Scholar]
  10. Feng, Shengli
    1998 Prosodic structure and compound words in Classical Chinese. InJerome Packard (ed.), New approaches to Chinese word formation, 197–260. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyer. 10.1515/9783110809084.197
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110809084.197 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fillmore, Charles J.
    1982 Frame semantics. InThe Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm, 111–137. Seoul: Hanshin.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Geuder, Wilhelm
    2000 Oriented adverbs: Issues in the lexical semantics of event adverbs. PhD dissertation. Universitat Tubingen, Germany.
  13. Givón, Talmy
    1979 On understanding grammar. New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995 Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 2006 Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Halliday, M. A. K.
    1967 Notes on transitivity and Theme in English (Part 1). Journal of Linguistics31. 37–81. 10.1017/S0022226700012949
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700012949 [Google Scholar]
  17. 1988 On the language of physical science. InMohsen Ghadessy (ed.), Registers of written English, 162–177. London: Pinter Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. 1993 Some grammatical problems in scientific English. InM. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin. Writing science: Literacy and discursive power, 69–85. London: Falmer
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 1994 An introduction to functional grammar (2nd edition). London: Edward Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. 2008 Complementarities in language. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    1999 Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. London: Cassell.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Halliday, M. A. K. with Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    2014 Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th edition). London & New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203783771
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771 [Google Scholar]
  23. Harris, Alice C. & Lyle Campbell
    1995 Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620553
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620553 [Google Scholar]
  24. Heine, Bernd
    1992 Grammaticalization chains. Studies in Language161. 335–68. 10.1075/sl.16.2.05hei
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.16.2.05hei [Google Scholar]
  25. Hollmann, Willem B.
    2003 Synchrony and diachrony of English periphrastic causatives: A cognitive perspective. PhD dissertation. The University of Manchester, England.
  26. Langacker, Ronald W.
    1977 Syntactic reanalysis. InC. N. Li (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change, 57–139. Austin: University of Texas Press. 10.7560/750357‑005
     https://doi.org/10.7560/750357-005 [Google Scholar]
  27. Lehmann, Christian
    1995 Thoughts on grammaticalization. Munchen: LINCOM EUROPA.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 2015 Thoughts on grammaticalization (3rd edition). Berlin: Language Science Press. 10.26530/OAPEN_603353
     https://doi.org/10.26530/OAPEN_603353 [Google Scholar]
  29. Li, Charles N. & Sandra A. Thompson
    1981 Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Lightfoot, David W.
    1979 Principles of diachronic syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. 1991 How to set parameters: Arguments from language change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Mair, Christian
    2004 Corpus linguistics and grammaticalization theory: Statistics, frequencies, and beyond. InH. Lindquist & C. Mair (eds.), Corpus approaches to grammaticalization in English, 121–150. (Studies in corpus linguistics, 13). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.13.07mai
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.13.07mai [Google Scholar]
  33. Mitchell, Bruce
    1985 Old English syntax, volume 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198119357.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198119357.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  34. Nedjalkov, Vladimir P.
    1988 Typology of resultative constructions. (Translated from the original Russian edition). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.12
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.12 [Google Scholar]
  35. Noël, Dirk
    2007 Diachronic construction grammar and grammaticalization theory. Functions of Language14 (2). 177–202. 10.1075/fol.14.2.04noe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.14.2.04noe [Google Scholar]
  36. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
    1985 A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Harlow: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Rissanen, Matti
    1999 Syntax. InRoger Lass (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, volume 3: 1476 – 1776, 187–331. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Saussure, Ferdinand de
    1916 Cours de linguistique generale. Lausanne: Payot
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Shi, Yuzhi
    2015 The evolution of Chinese grammar. Nanchang: Jiangxi Education Publishing House.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Sybesma, Rint
    1999 The Mandarin VP. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑015‑9163‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9163-8 [Google Scholar]
  41. Tham, Shiao Wei
    2015 Resultative verb compounds in Mandarin. InWilliam S-Y. Wang & Sun Chaofen (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics, 306–321. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Timberlake, Alan
    1977 Reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change. InC. Li (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change, 141–177. Austin, Texas: University of Texas. 10.7560/750357‑006
     https://doi.org/10.7560/750357-006 [Google Scholar]
  43. Visser, Fredericicus T.
    1963 An historical syntax of the English language, volume 1. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Wang, Li
    1980 Hanyu shigao. (An outline of Chinese language history). Beijing: China Book Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Yang, Yanning
    2019 The change of constructions in Old Chinese and Old English: A study from the perspective of non-compositionality. Foreign Language and Literature Studies51. 451–464.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Zoe Wu, Xiu-Zhi
    2004 Grammaticalization and language change in Chinese: A formal view. (Routledge Curzon Asian Linguistics Series). London: Taylor & Francis.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Zou, Ke
    1994 Resultative V-V compounds in Chinese. InHeidi Harley & Colin Phillips (eds.), The morphology-syntax connection: MIT working papers in linguistics221, 271–290. Cambridge: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/langct.00043.yan
Loading
The diachronic analysis of resultative constructions
Language, Context and Text 5, 80 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1075/langct.00043.yan
/content/journals/10.1075/langct.00043.yan
/content/journals/10.1075/langct.00043.yan
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): construction change; Old Chinese; Old English; resultative constructions; systemic functional linguistics

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