浮现语法(Emergent Grammar) 与构式语法(Construction Grammar)的区别与联系

[Pennylin]

首先，两者都谈construction,但他们的所指一样吗？
其次，两者都注重语境的作用；具体而言，有什么区别和联系吗？
在国内CNKI等搜索过相关文章，好像不太多见，尤其是EG. 两语法在国内外的研究现状如何？
谢谢！

 

[动态语法]

回复: 浮现语法(Emergent Grammar) 与构式语法(Construction Grammar)的区别与联系

首先，两者都谈construction,但他们的所指一样吗？

Not really.

其次，两者都注重语境的作用；具体而言，有什么区别和联系吗？

Construction Grammar doesn't pay much attention to context, as far as I can tell. So there is a big difference.

在国内CNKI等搜索过相关文章，好像不太多见，尤其是EG. 两语法在国内外的研究现状如何？
谢谢！

For papers written in Chinese, try search authors such as 张伯江、方梅、陶红印 etc. (You probably know some of these authors already since you use the term that way.)

For non-Chinese writings, read Paul Hopper's original papers if possible. It also helps if you can access the works by such scholars as Joan Bybee and Sandra A. Thompson.

 

[Pennylin]

回复: 浮现语法(Emergent Grammar) 与构式语法(Construction Grammar)的区别与联系

In EG, constructions can be "words, phrases and small sets" (Hopper, 1987), such as gonna, I'm, you take.

In CxG, 构式包括“复句到词素的不同单位”，如 ing, Him a doctor, What's X doing Y, etc.

In EG, a linguistic sign is "

defined as a unit that links a​

linguistic form with a meaning or function." (Hopper, 1998)
In other words, construction = form + meaning/function;

In CxG, 构式 = 形式 + 语义 + 语用

Therefore, it seems to me that "construction" in both grammars are the same.

Is my understanding correct?

THanks!

 

[Pennylin]

回复: 浮现语法(Emergent Grammar) 与构式语法(Construction Grammar)的区别与联系

Thanks for your reply, 动态语法。

 

[动态语法]

回复: 浮现语法(Emergent Grammar) 与构式语法(Construction Grammar)的区别与联系

The units themselves don't really mean much, what matters is the source of these constructions. In EG they are mostly discourse units whereas in CxG this is not necessarily the case.

In EG, constructions can be "words, phrases and small sets" (Hopper, 1987), such as gonna, I'm, you take.

In CxG, 构式包括“复句到词素的不同单位”，如 ing, Him a doctor, What's X doing Y, etc.

In EG, a linguistic sign is "

defined as a unit that links a​

linguistic form with a meaning or function." (Hopper, 1998)
In other words, construction = form + meaning/function;

In CxG, 构式 = 形式 + 语义 + 语用

Therefore, it seems to me that "construction" in both grammars are the same.

Is my understanding correct?

THanks!

 

[Pennylin]

回复: 浮现语法(Emergent Grammar) 与构式语法(Construction Grammar)的区别与联系

Thanks again, 动态语法。

What kinds of "discourse units" are the constructions in EG then? Are they units with discourse functions?

The term "construction" in both papers by Hopper seems rather vague to me. I wonder if Hopper has any further illustrations or new development of this theory?

Finally, do you agree that EG is a language philosophy instead of a grammar?

Thank you.