ConstructiCon-based description: A nominal modification case study

Constructional models of grammar are helpful tools for the analysis and description of un(der)-studied languages, leading to more accurate analyses. This is despite the fact that as a whole, working with and describing un(der)studied languages has been afforded little or no room in theoretical or empirical discussions in the Construction Grammar community. In particular, we suggest here that The Constructicon is a useful tool for the description and analysis of individual functional domains, and that thinking in Constructicon terms is likely to improve the accuracy of descriptions, reduce descriptive ambiguity, and point at areas of incipient and completed grammaticalization. To illustrate this, we focus on the domain of nominal modification in two typologically distinct languages: Alsea (Oregon Coast Penutian / Isolate; Oregon, USA) and U̠t‑Ma’in (Niger-Congo, Kainji; Nigeria). We analyze the domain of nominal modification in each language as composed of sets of constructional families with different typologies of vertical and horizontal connections between them. This exercise illustrates how this type of work may contribute to typological comparisons of whole functional domains. Further, using Constructicons in descriptions allows scholars to explore general properties of constructional-networks based on a more linguistically diverse, and hence representative, picture.

Publication Details

Journal
HHU Journals
Published
2024-12-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.24338/cons-649
Primary Topic
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

ConstructiCon-based description: A nominal modification case study

HHU Journals
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
article

ConstructiCon-based description: A nominal modification case study

article en

Abstract

Constructional models of grammar are helpful tools for the analysis and description of un(der)-studied languages, leading to more accurate analyses. This is despite the fact that as a whole, working with and describing un(der)studied languages has been afforded little or no room in theoretical or empirical discussions in the Construction Grammar community. In particular, we suggest here that The Constructicon is a useful tool for the description and analysis of individual functional domains, and that thinking in Constructicon terms is likely to improve the accuracy of descriptions, reduce descriptive ambiguity, and point at areas of incipient and completed grammaticalization. To illustrate this, we focus on the domain of nominal modification in two typologically distinct languages: Alsea (Oregon Coast Penutian / Isolate; Oregon, USA) and U̠t‑Ma’in (Niger-Congo, Kainji; Nigeria). We analyze the domain of nominal modification in each language as composed of sets of constructional families with different typologies of vertical and horizontal connections between them. This exercise illustrates how this type of work may contribute to typological comparisons of whole functional domains. Further, using Constructicons in descriptions allows scholars to explore general properties of constructional-networks based on a more linguistically diverse, and hence representative, picture.

HHU Journals
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 33%
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.