Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Effect Before Cause

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

How Content Affects Form

image of Cognitive Semantics

In the present study, I look at a regularity first observed in Talmy (2000: 483), who showed that in sentences describing sequences of events of the cause-and-effect type, effect events take precedence over causes. They tend to be mentioned first in a sentence, and grammatical patterns exist where cause events cannot be expressed before effects. I use Talmy’s observation to argue against an excessive emphasis on idiosyncrasy of grammatical constructions. Specifically, I will show that the effect-over-cause precedence visible at sentence level, applies especially well, on a smaller scale, to clauses, constraining the range of forms that constructions can take. Thus, the form of constructions is determined by factors like viable arrangements of events within a clause and the metaphoric grounding of meanings that a given construction conveys. Such constraints result in striking convergences between constructions in different languages.

Affiliations: 1: University of Silesia, Poland, konrad.szczesniak@us.edu.pl

10.1163/23526416-00202003
/content/journals/10.1163/23526416-00202003
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/23526416-00202003
Loading

Data & Media loading...

1. Blažek V. 2001. "Indo-European Prepositions and Related Words". In Sborník prací Filosofické fakulty Brněnské university , 1532. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
2. Boileau D. 1840. The Nature and Genius of the German Language Displayed In a More Extended Review of Its Grammatical Forms Than Is To Be Found in any Grammar Extant . London: Jonathan Wacey.
3. Broz V. , 2013. "Aspectual properties of the verbal prefix a- in Old English with reference to Gothic". In Diewald G. ,, Kahlas-Tarkka L. ,, & Wischer I. (eds.), Comparative Studies in Early Germanic Languages: With a focus on verbal categories. Volume 138 of Studies in Language Companion Series . 235262. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
4. Goldberg A. E. 1995. Constructions. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
5. Goldberg A. E. 2003. "Constructions: a new theoretical approach to language". trends in Cognitive Sciences , Vol 7, 219224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00080-9
6. Goldberg A. E. 2006. Constructions At Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Goldberg A. E. ,, & Jackendoff R. 2004. The English resultative as a family of constructions"". Language , Vol 80: 532–568.
8. Götzinger M. W. 1839. Die deutsche Sprache und ihre Literatur . Stuttgart: Hoffmann’sche Verlag-Buchhandlung.
9. Hartmann S. ,, & Hölzl A. (to appear). Prefixation and Force Dynamics: A Usage-Based Approach to German Prefix Constructions. Selected Papers from the 5th uk-cla Conference.
10. Heine B. 2001. Ways of explaining possession. In I. Baron, M. Herslund, & F. Sørensen (eds.), Dimensions of possession. 311–328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
11. Hewson J. ,, & Bubenik V. 2006. From Case to Adposition: The Development of Configurational Syntax in Indo-European Languages . Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
12. Jackendoff R. 1990. " Semantic Structures ". Cambridge, MA : The MIT Press.
13. Jackendoff R. , 2002. "English particle constructions, the lexicon, and the autonomy of syntax". In Dehé N. ,, Jackendoff R. ,, McIntyre A. ,, & Urban S. (eds.), Verb-Particle Explorations. 6794. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
14. Kolbe C. W. 1818. Über den Wortreichtum der deutschen und französischen. Sprache, und beider Anlage zur Poësie, nebst anderen Bemerkungen, Sprache und Litteratur betreffend. Zweite, ganz umgearbeitete Ausgabe . Berlin: In der Realschulbuchhandlung.
15. Krahe H. 1967. Germanische Sprachwissenschaft. iii Wortbildungslehre. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
16. Lakoff G. ,, & Johnson M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
17. Lampert G. (to appear). Cognitive semantics between composition and emergence: A cognitive semantics re-reading of the way-construction. Cognitive Semantics.
18. Levin B. ,, & Rappaport Hovav M. 1994. Unaccusativity At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
19. Li F. ,, Du J. ,, & Wolff P. 2015. "The linguistic representations of causing events and caused events in narrative discourse". Cognitive Semantics , Vol 1, 4576. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/23526416-00101002
20. Piaget J. 1954. The Construction of Reality in the Child . New York: Basic.
21. Pinker S. , 1995. "Language Acquisition". In Gleitman L. R. ,, & Liberman (eds.) M. , An Invitation to Cognitive Science: Language (Volume 1). 135182. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
22. Radden G. , 2003. "How metonymic are metaphors?" In Barcelona A. (ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A Cognitive Perspective. 93108. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
23. Senghas A. ,, Kita S. ,, & Özyürek A. 2004. "Children creating core properties of language: evidence from an emerging sign language in Nicaragua". Science Vol 305: 17791783. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1100199
24. Sonnenhauser B. 2012. "Zirkumstantielle modalität im Bairischen: das verbale präfix der-". Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik Vol 79: 6588.
25. Szcześniak K. 2008. "Manner of obtainment as a relative in a family of resultative constructions". Constructions Vol 1: 131.
26. Szcześniak K. 2013. "You can’t cry your way to candy: Motion events and paths in the x’s way construction". Cognitive Linguistics Vol 24: 159194.
27. Szcześniak K. 2014. The Meaning of Constructions. The Cognitive Denial of the Lexicon-Syntax Division . Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
28. Talmy L. 2000. Toward A Cognitive Semantics. Volume I: Concept Structuring Systems . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Traugott E. C. ,, & Trousdale G. 2013. Constructionalization and Constructional Changes . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30. Wierzbicka A. 2006. English. Meaning and Culture . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/23526416-00202003
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/23526416-00202003
2016-09-18
2018-09-21

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Cognitive Semantics — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation