Content uploaded by Bernd Heine
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Bernd Heine on May 22, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework
Abstract
Grammaticalization, the process of converting regular lexical items and structures into conventionally interpreted grammatical morphemes, has traditionally been perceived as a syntactic or morphological process. Presenting a wealth of evidence from African languages, the authors argue that the development of grammatical categories is in fact strongly influenced by pragmatic and cognitive forces, factors that are located outside the confines of language structure. They discuss previous models and relate grammaticalization studies to alternative approaches such as localism and natural grammar theory. This volume challenges theories which describe language as a static system, as well as those which assume that linguistic categorization is based on discrete morpheme types, word classes, or sentence constituents. In contrast, the book's central argument is that both language structure and language use are dynamic phenomena and that linguistic behavior is essentially a creative activity. That creativity manifests itself, for example, in conceptual transfer leading to the encoding of more abstract concepts and of grammatical categories. Another key element of this theory is captured in the term "grammaticalization chain," which refers to a specific kind of linguistic category which cuts across morpheme types and word classes and has both a synchronic and diachronic dimension.
... Work on grammaticalization has a long tradition, going back to the early nineteenth century (for surveys, see Heine et al. 1991 andTraugott 2003). In its present form, this tradition was shaped by Givón's (1971) groundwork, which marked a break in the tradition of modern linguistics. ...
... That grammaticalization began to emerge as a new field of linguistics was due most of all to work done at the turn of the 1980s and 1990s, which led to the publication, on the one hand, of a number of theoretical papers in the collective volumes of Traugott and Heine (1991) and, on the other hand, of some monographic treatments (Heine et al. 1991;Bybee et al. 1994;Hopper and Traugott 2003). ...
... There is a wide range of criteria that have been proposed (e.g. Lehmann 2015Lehmann [1982; Heine et al. 1991;Hopper and Traugott 2003;Bybee et al. 1994;Narrog and Heine 2021); the present entry uses the four parameters listed in (2). Some of the alternative criteria are syntacticization, morphologization, obligatorification, 3 and subjectification. ...
... In short, all languages have items which are polyfunctional, or heterosemous, to use the term popularized by Lichtenberk (1991) in his study of the grammaticalization of go and come verbs in Oceanic languages, and which have probably grammaticalized from lexical material. See Heine, Claudi, and Hünnemeyer (1991); Svorou (1994); Bybee, Perkins, and Pagliuca (1994); Hop-per and Traugott (2003); and Kuteva, Heine, et al. (2019) for excellent crosslinguistic overviews of lexical sources for grammaticalized target items. Typically, tense/aspect markers, spatial and temporal markers, evidentials, conjunctions and complementizers, relativizers, comparative devices, discourse particles, as well as hesitation devices tend to derive morphologically from more lexically transparent notions across the world's languages. ...
... This finding is in line with the argument that there is a unidirectional grammaticalization path from an RS marker to an RT marker (Casartelli et al., 2023), implying that RT markers are more grammaticalized than RS markers across languages. Such pattern is logical because thought is more abstract than speech-a linguistic item tends to be grammaticalized from a concrete to abstract concept (Heine et al., 1991). Moreover, this study also argues that a more general thinking verb like 諗 nam2 'think' can also be a source for a dedicated RT verb 心諗 sam1nam2 'think'. ...
... The objective of this study is to relate semantic-pragmatic traits with the use of pre-nominal possessives based on a cognitive-functional perspective. We adopted the metaphorical categories presented in Heine et al. (1991), ranging from the strongest level of concreteness to the strongest level of abstraction, organized along a metaphorical scale of person> object> activity> space> time> quality. We used a speech sample taken from the Falares Sergipanos database, from which we extracted 1267 occurrences of pre-nominal possessives. ...
Os possessivos são considerados como uma categoria de palavras que estabelece relação de posse entre um ser possuidor e um elemento possuído. Contudo, apenas em um sentido amplo a relação de posse pode ser considerada como sua função, já que os possessivos podem assumir outras relações. É objetivo deste estudo relacionar traços semântico-pragmáticos com o uso de possessivos pré-nominais com base numa perspectiva cognitivo-funcional. Adotamos as categorias metafóricas apresentadas em Heine et al. (1991), que vão desde o nível mais forte de concretude até o nível mais forte de abstração, organizadas ao longo de uma escala metafórica de pessoa > objeto > atividade > espaço > tempo > qualidade. Utilizamos uma amostra de fala retirada do banco Falares Sergipanos, da qual extraímos 1267 ocorrências de possessivos pré-nominais. Os dados mostram que o controle de traços semântico-pragmáticos é produtivo para a descrição do funcionamento dos possessivos no português, com predomínio da categoria mais concreta, pessoa, e da mais abstrata, qualidade; os menores números são encontrados na categoria tempo. A ocorrência dos possessivos parece estar interligada com a pessoa que produz o enunciado, com o falante, visto que as maiores ocorrências são em categorias relativas ao traço de [+pessoa].
... The so-called localist hypothesis (e.g. Lyons 1967, Anderson 1971, Jackendoff 1972, Heine et al. 1991, i.e. the idea that spatial notions are conceptually more basic than notions pertaining to other domains, and are therefore commonly exploited as structural templates for the expression of other types of meanings. b. ...
This book aims to address a gap in the existing literature on the relationship between vagueness and ambiguity, as well as on their differences and similarities, both in synchrony and diachrony, and taking into consideration their relation to language use. The book is divided into two parts, which address specific and broader research questions from different perspectives. The former part examines the differences between ambiguity and vagueness from a bird-eye perspective, with a particular focus on their respective functions and roles in language change. It also presents innovative linguistic resources and tools for the study of these phenomena. The second part contains case studies on vagueness and ambiguity in language change and use. It considers different strategies and languages, including English, French, German, Italian, Medieval Latin, and Old Italian. The readership for this volume is broad, encompassing scholars in a range of disciplines, including pragmatics, spoken discourse, conversation analysis, discourse genres (political, commercial, notarial discourse), corpus studies, language change, pragmaticalization, and language typology.
Neste trabalho, tratamos da construção nominalizadora responsável pela formação de substantivos e adjetivos a partir de uma base verbal, representada por [[X]V -nte]ADJ. O objetivo geral é analisar esse padrão formal como um pareamento forma-sentido, identificando motivações semântico-cognitivas e discursivo-pragmáticas implicadas na recorrência de seus construtos em situações reais de interação. Fundamentamo-nos teoricamente na Linguística Funcional Centrada no Uso (LFCU), tal como caracterizada em Furtado da Cunha, Bispo e Silva (2013), e em contribuições do modelo teórico da Gramática de Construções, conforme desenvolvido por Goldberg (1995, 2006), Croft (2001) e, mais recentemente, por Traugott e Trousdale (2013). Os dados da pesquisa foram coletados do Corpus Discurso & Gramática, seções Natal e Rio de Janeiro, que conta com textos na modalidade oral e escrita, produzidos por informantes de diferentes níveis de escolaridade, representativos de cinco configurações textuais. Trata-se de uma pesquisa de abordagem eminentemente quali-quantitativa; em relação aos objetivos, caracteriza-se como uma pesquisa descritivo-explicativa. Os resultados apontam que, entre as propriedades formais, há uma correlação sintático-semântica parcial entre verbo-base e adjetivo deverbal, uma vez que os adjetivos não herdam totalmente a moldura sintática da base verbal. No caso das propriedades funcionais, os dados mostram a não transparência semântica entre base verbal e adjetivo correspondente, em vários usos de adjetivos em –nte; a baixa agentividade desses nomes; e a sua multifuncionalidade nos contextos de uso em que ocorrem. Os adjetivos analisados situam-se em um continuum entre a categoria de particípio presente e a categoria de adjetivos, muito embora na maioria dos casos não sejam mais reconhecidos como uma forma do particípio. Cognitivamente, também percebemos a atuação de projeções metafóricas e metonímicas nas instâncias de uso de [[X]V -nte]ADJ. A construção pode ser caracterizada ainda como parcialmente esquemática, parcialmente produtiva e parcialmente composicional.
이 논문에서는 아주 거대한 주제를 논의 대상으로 하였다. 언어보편성 문제와 유형 비교의 과제가 그것이다. 그간의 과정을 단편적으로 소개하면서 앞으로 나아가는 데 나타나는 연구 방향을 제시하고자 한다. 언어보편성이라 하면 전통적으로 언어 범주와 규칙을 대체로 염두에 두어 생각했다. 예컨대 어휘범주로 단어가 명사나 동사 같은 품사로 나뉜다던가, 문장은 주어와 술어로 구성되고 이는 격이나 호응 혹은 어순규칙으로 나타난다는 식의 견해이다. 그러나 그간의 유형 비교로 이는 언어 특유의 현상이지 일반 언어 보편 현상이 아니라는 주장이 쏟아져 나왔다(Evans & Levinson 2009). 그리하여 언어보편성에 대한 의구심마저 일게 되었는데, 그러함에도 불구하고 언어보편성 개념이 필요하다는 생각도 없지 않다(Chomsky 1965, 1980, Comrie 1989, Jackendoff 2002). 그것은 유형 다양성 비교에서 필요한 기준의 문제와 직결된다(Haspelmath 2008, 2010). 또 다른 측면으로는 인지와 소통이라는 양대 언어 기능은 언어 보편 특질로 규정될 수 있기 때문이다.
이 논문에서는 유형 비교를 위한 기준을 설정할 때 필요 되는 언어 일반 이론에 언어 보편 원리에 대한 설명이 반드시 나타나기에 그 설명 중 언어보편성(Greenberg 1963, 1986, Seiler 1978, Croft 2001, 2003)과 관련지어 이해할 수 있는 부분을 눈여겨보려 한다. 구조주의 이후 생성문법, 기능문법(Dik 1997)이 있었고, 인지 담화문법(Givón 1979, Langacker 1987)이 연이어 나타났다. 최근에는 사용-기반 구성문법이 등장했는데(Bybee 1985, 2006, Goldberg 1995, 2003, Langacker 2000, Barlow & Kemmer 2000, Schmid 2015, Diessel 2017, 권명식 2023, §3.6) 이는 문법화 이론(Lehmann 1982, Heine et al. 1991)과 비교되면서 새로운 관심을 불러일으키고 있다. 이 두 일반 이론을 전통 개념(Lyons 1968, Matthews 1981)과 관련지어 생각해 보면 어떤 문제가 야기되는지, 그리고 앞으로 풀어나가야 할 과제가 무엇인지 서서히 나타나게 될 것이다. 전통적 유형 연구(Schlegel 1818, Humboldt 1836)의 출발점인 단어구조와 형태 유형론은 그 결점에도 불구하고 여전히 중요한 통찰을 제시하고 있다. 그러므로 §3에서는 이 접근이 문법화 이론과 사용-기반 구성문법 시각과 비교할 때 어떤 의미와 의의가 있는지 조망해 보고자 한다. 그러기 위해서는 먼저 §2에서 언어체계 구조와 담화 세계에 대한 사전 지식이 요구된다(Lehmann 2024). 언어 구성의 네트워크 시스템과 구성체라는 새로운 개념(Diessel 2019, 2023)과 함께 전통적 언어 운영의 핵심인 상징, 통합, 계열관계(Schmid 2020)를 여기에 관련지어 설명하고자 한다(§3.3).
언어변이와 변화는 현대 언어 연구의 중심 화두로 떠오르고 있는데 이에 대한 설명 개념으로 문법화와 어휘화 현상을 시스템 내부 변화로 이해하고 언어구조 밖 담화 세계와 발화 상황을 연결 짓는 일련의 현상을 ‘화용화’라는 개념으로 정리하고자 한다(§4.2). §5 사례 분석에서는 아프리카 언어들을 중심으로 유형 비교의 실제 즉 문법범주 생성과 진화 그리고 비교를 살펴보고 좀 더 높은 층위에서의 유형 비교 주제인 문법 관계(Bickell 2011, Witzlack-Makarevich 2011) 사례를 되돌아 보고자 한다. §6에서는 이제까지 논의한 사항을 문제점과 과제라는 측면에서 정리해 나가되, 구성체와 범주화, 규칙, 그리고 패턴이라는 용어를 중심으로 정리하고자 한다. 끝으로 §7에서는 결론과 함께 간단히 유형 비교 연구의 전망으로 마무리하고자 한다.
Despite the fact that Andic languages ( East Caucasian) are widely recognised as agglutinating, their verbal systems barely demonstrate any agglutinating properties. The most important characteristics of these systems are the incomplete orthogonality of grammatical categories and the related properties of semantic non-additivity or morphological idiomaticity. In terms of morphotactic structure, different Andic systems can be either morphotactically complex or simplex. The difference is related to the intensity of fusional processes in the system. The relationship between the structures of semantic and formal oppositions in such systems is opaque. Many formatives in formally additive systems exhibit morphomic properties, and their decreased combinatorial potential is manifested in the hierarchical structure of the paradigm. From a typological perspective, such peculiarities are not unexpected for systems expressing predominantly TAM meanings. The paper proposes a number of diachronic considerations to explain the observed characteristics of the systems. Non-orthogonality and semantic non-additivity can be explained by asynchronous grammaticalization, which prevents the formation of orthogonal categories with additive means of expression and is related to different stability of meanings in the system and different rates of their diachronic renovation. Morphomic and hierarchical structures in the paradigm arise due to layering and grammatical drift leading to polysemic and heterosemic meaning structures of markers.
Objective: The objective of this study is to investigate the periphrases with the verb ir, in the third singular person, searching to describe the motivations for semantic change. Theoretical Framework: In this topic, the main concepts and theories that underpin the research are presented. Stand out the Usage-Centered Functional Linguistics - LFCU (Oliveira; Rosário, 2015; Furtado da Cunha, Bispo, Silva, 2016) which is based on Construction Grammar, Cognitive Linguistics (Goldberg, 1995; Traugott; Trousdale, 2021; Bybee, 2016), providing a solid basis for understanding the context ofthe investigation. Method: The methodology adopted for this research it is explanatory-descriptive and can be considered empirically based, focusing on the synchronic character, since the samples are extracted in a single temporal dimension Results and Discussion: The results obtained revealed that metaphorical and metonymic mechanisms are involved in the use of these constructions. In the discussion section, these results are contextualized in light of the theoretical framework, highlighting the implications and relationships identified. Possible discrepancies and limitations of the study are also considered in this section. Research Implications: The practical and theoretical implications of this research are discussed, providing insights into how the results can be applied or influence practices in the portuguese language teaching. These implications could encompass to other areas of study, such as cognition. Originality/Value: This study contributes to the literature when highlighting that there is a pattern in linguistic change. The relevance and value of this research are evidenced by describing the change at different levels and the impact on Portuguese language teaching.
Our aim in this paper is to explain the progressive semantic change of the Spanish verb volver from the 13th century until the 21st. We will show that at the beginning, its unique use is a transitive one, from Latin until the 14th. Then it acquired an intransitive use in the 15th. We will claim that the semantic change meaning of this verb from the transitive use to the intransitive, ending by the grammaticalization of the verb with the creation of a periphrasis (volver a + infinitive), is part of a ‘reanalysis’ process of the semantic relation between both cases the agent and the patient in the eventive structure and, consequently, of the subject and the object complement in the syntactic distribution. The semantic core which conveys a metaphorical or a spatial path toward a goal (“to make a rotary motion, to turn”) is unchanged. We claim that the telic character of the verb allowed it to impose itself and to replace tornar.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.