1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Published under the auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association
  4. Volume 21, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 21, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1877-9751
  • E-ISSN: 1877-976X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article reports an interview with Robert D. Van Valin, Jr., which was held on March 2, 2023, with follow-up e-mail exchanges. Robert Van Valin is the primary developer of Role and Reference Grammar (RRG), a syntactic theory whose principles and commitments intersect with those of Cognitive Linguistics (CL). The article discusses RRG vis-à-vis CL and other approaches to the study of language. It aims to raise awareness about the shared principles of RRG and CL, to enhance cross-fertilization between the two approaches and ultimately inspire new research directions in linguistic theory. The paper is organized into three main parts: (i) background information on the birth and development of RRG, (ii) general principles and commitments of RRG and CL, and (iii) specific issues in the study of language.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00166.ben
2023-11-27
2024-10-11

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00166.ben
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Asher, N.
    (1999) Discourse and the focus/background distinction. InP. Bosch & R. van der Sandt (Eds.), Focus: Linguistic, cognitive and computational perspectives (pp.247–267). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bentley, D., Mairal-Usón, R., Nakamura, W., & Van Valin, Jr., R. D.
    (Eds.) (2023) The Cambridge handbook of Role and Reference Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316418086
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316418086 [Google Scholar]
  3. Booij, G.
    (2010) Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M.
    (2009) Processing syntax and morphology: A neurocognitive perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199207817.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199207817.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  5. Brocher, A., & Van Valin, R. D., Jr.
    (2017) About full and underspecified representations of alternations in the lexicon: Evidence from sentence reading. Linguistische Berichte, 2511, 1–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Chafe, W.
    (1970) Meaning and the structure of language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Chomsky, N.
    (1965) Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass: M.I.T. Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. (1973) Conditions on transformations. InS. R. Anderson & P. Kiparsky (Eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle (pp.232–286). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Cortés-Rodríguez, F. J.
    (2023) Morphology in RRG: The layered structure of the word, inflection and derivation. InD. Bentley, R. Mairal Usón, W. Nakamura, & R. D. Van Valin, Jr. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of Role and Reference Grammar (pp.368–402). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316418086.011
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316418086.011 [Google Scholar]
  10. Croft, W.
    (2001) Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dowty, R. D.
    (1979) Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company. 10.1007/978‑94‑009‑9473‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9473-7 [Google Scholar]
  12. Evans, V.
    (2012) Cognitive linguistics. WIREs Cogn Sci. 31, 129–141. 10.1002/wcs.1163
     https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1163 [Google Scholar]
  13. Everett, D.
    (2002, July). Toward an RRG theory of morphology. Lecture delivered at the 2002 International Course and Conference on Role and Reference Grammar, University of La Rioja.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Fillmore, C. J.
    (1968) The case for case. InE. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory (pp.1–88). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Foley, W., & Van Valin, R. D. Jr.
    (1984) Functional syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Guerrero Valenzuela, L., & Belloro, V.
    (2010) On word order and information structure in Yaqui. InJ. Camacho, R. Gutiérrez-Bravo, & L. Sánchez (Eds.), Information structure in Indigenous languages of the Americas (pp.115–138). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110228533.115
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110228533.115 [Google Scholar]
  17. Harris, Z. S.
    (1954) Distributional structure. Word, 10(2–3), 146–162. 10.1080/00437956.1954.11659520
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1954.11659520 [Google Scholar]
  18. Heusinger, K. von
    (1999) Intonation and information structure. Habilitation thesis, University of Konstanz.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Johnson, M.
    (1987) A new approach to clause structure in Role and Reference Grammar. Davis Working Papers in Linguistics, 11, 55–59. Davis: University of California.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Kallmeyer, L., & Osswald, R.
    (2023) Formalization of RRG syntax. InD. Bentley, R. Mairal Usón, W. Nakamura, & R. D. Van Valin, Jr. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of Role and Reference Grammar (pp.737–784). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316418086.025
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316418086.025 [Google Scholar]
  21. Kamp, H., & Reyle, U.
    (1993) From discourse to logic. Hingham, MA: Kluwer.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Lambrecht, K.
    (1994) Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620607
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620607 [Google Scholar]
  23. Martín Arista, J.
    (2008) Unification and separation in a functional theory of morphology. InR. D. Van Valin, Jr. (Ed.), Investigations of the syntax-semantics-pragmatics interface (pp.119–145). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.105.12mar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.105.12mar [Google Scholar]
  24. O’Connor, R.
    (2008) A prosodic projection for Role and Reference Grammar. InR. D. Van Valin, Jr. (Ed.), Investigations of the syntax-semantics-pragmatics interface (pp.227–244). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.105.18oc
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.105.18oc [Google Scholar]
  25. Pavey, E.
    (2010) The structure of language: An introduction to grammatical analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511777929
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511777929 [Google Scholar]
  26. Perlmutter, D. M.
    (Ed.) (1983) Studies in relational grammar11. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Perlmutter, D. M., & Rosen, C.
    (Eds.) (1984) Studies in relational grammar21. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Postal, P. M., & Joseph, B. D.
    (1990) Studies in relational grammar31. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Pustejovsky, J.
    (1995) The generative lexicon. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Rispoli, M.
    (1989) Encounters with Japanese verbs: Caregiver sentences and the categorization of transitive and intransitive action verbs. First Language, 91, 57–80. 10.1177/014272378900902506
     https://doi.org/10.1177/014272378900902506 [Google Scholar]
  31. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Mairal Usón, R.
    (2007) Levels of semantic representation: where lexicon and grammar meet. Interlingüística, 171, 26–47.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Schachter, P.
    (1976) The subject in Philippine languages: Topic, actor, actor-topic, or none of the above?InC. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp.491–518). New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. (1977) Reference-related and role-related properties of subjects. InP. Cole & J. M. Sadock (Eds.), Grammatical relations (pp.279–306). The Netherlands: Brill. 10.1163/9789004368866_012
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368866_012 [Google Scholar]
  34. Talmy, L.
    (1985) Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. InT. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and lexical description, Vol. III, Grammatical categories and the lexicon (pp.36–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. (2000) Toward a cognitive semantics, Vol. II: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Van Valin, R. D., Jr.
    (1977) Ergativity and the universality of subjects. Chicago Linguistic Society, 131, 689–705.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. (1980) Meaning and interpretation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 213–231. 10.1016/0378‑2166(80)90037‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(80)90037-5 [Google Scholar]
  38. (1985) Case marking and the structure of the Lakota clause. InJ. Nichols & A. C. Woodbury (Eds.), Grammar inside and outside the clause: Some approaches to theory from the field (pp.363–413). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. (1986) An empty category as the subject of a tensed S in English. Linguistic Inquiry, 17(3), 581–586. www.jstor.org/stable/4178506
     [Google Scholar]
  40. (1987) The role of government in the grammar of head-marking languages. IJAL, 531, 371–397. 10.1086/466065
     https://doi.org/10.1086/466065 [Google Scholar]
  41. (1990) Semantic parameters of split intransitivity. Language, 661, 221–260. 10.2307/414886
     https://doi.org/10.2307/414886 [Google Scholar]
  42. (1992) Incorporation in Universal Grammar: A case study in theoretical reductionism [Review ofIncorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing, byM. C. Baker]. Journal of Linguistics, 28(1), 199–220. www.jstor.org/stable/4176153
     [Google Scholar]
  43. (1994) Extraction restrictions, competing theories and the argument from the poverty of the stimulus. InR. Corrigan, G. Iverson & S. Lima (Eds.), The reality of linguistic rules (pp.243–259). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.26.17van
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.26.17van [Google Scholar]
  44. (1998) The acquisition of WH-questions and the mechanisms of language acquisition. InM. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure (pp.221–249). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. (2001) An introduction to syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139164320
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139164320 [Google Scholar]
  46. (2003) Minimalism and explanation. InJ. Moore & M. Polinsky (Eds.), The nature of explanation in linguistic theory (pp.281–297). Stanford: CSLI.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. (2005) Exploring the syntax-semantics interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511610578
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610578 [Google Scholar]
  48. (2008) RPs and the nature of lexical and syntactic categories in RRG. InR. D. Van Valin, Jr. (Ed.), Investigations of the syntax-semantics-pragmatics interface (pp.161–178). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.105.14van
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.105.14van [Google Scholar]
  49. (2009) Linguistics past and present: A view from the Rhine. InZ. Estrada Fernández, A. Álvarez González & M. Belén Carpio (Eds.), Ser lingüista: Un oficio diverso y polifacético. Diez años de una Maestría en Lingüística [Being a linguist, a diverse and multifaceted profession. Ten years of a Master’s degree in linguistics] (pp.155–64). Hermosillo, MX: Editorial Unison. (Available on RRG website.)
     [Google Scholar]
  50. (2023a) Principles of Role and Reference Grammar. InD. Bentley, R. Mairal Usón, W. Nakamura & R. D. Van Valin, Jr. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of Role and Reference Grammar (pp.17–177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316418086.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316418086.003 [Google Scholar]
  51. (2023b) Grammatical aspects of language processing in the brain: A Role and Reference Grammar perspective. InD. Bentley, R. Mairal Usón, W. Nakamura & R. D. Van Valin, Jr. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of Role and Reference Grammar (pp.693–736). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316418086.024
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316418086.024 [Google Scholar]
  52. Van Valin, R. D., Jr., & LaPolla, R.
    (1997) Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139166799
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166799 [Google Scholar]
  53. Van Valin, R. D. Jr., & Wilkins, D. P.
    (1996) The case for ‘Effector’: Case roles, agents and agency revisited. InM. Shibatani & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning (pp.289–322). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198235392.003.0011
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198235392.003.0011 [Google Scholar]
  54. Vendler, Z.
    (1967) Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. (Original work published 1957). 10.7591/9781501743726
     https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501743726 [Google Scholar]
  55. Weist, R. M.
    (1990) Neutralization and the concept of subject in child Polish. Linguistics, 281, 1331–1349. 10.1515/ling.1990.28.6.1331
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1990.28.6.1331 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00166.ben
Loading
  • Article Type: Discussion
Keyword(s): Cognitive Linguistics; Computational Linguistics; linguistic constructions; Role and Reference Grammar; syntactic theory; the lexicon

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