In:Constructional Approaches to Nordic Languages
Edited by Evie Coussé, Steffen Höder, Benjamin Lyngfelt and Julia Prentice
[Constructional Approaches to Language 37] 2023
► pp. 145–178
Chapter 6Construction grammar in domain-specific discourse
A contrastive analysis of existential constructions in Swedish, Norwegian and Dutch weather reports
Published online: 7 November 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.37.06lie
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.37.06lie
Abstract
Within various frameworks interested in domain-specific language,
like language for specific purposes (LSP) research and discourse
linguistics, the insights provided by CxG-theory have
led to the question of whether constructions can have domain-specific
manifestations. Even though many linguists would, intuitively, answer this
question positively, little empirical research can be found to back up this
hypothesis, which is especially true for Scandinavian linguistics. To this
aim, we conducted a contrastive (Swedish – Norwegian – Dutch) corpus-based
analysis of existential constructions (e.g., Eng., there
are some books on the table) within the specialized domain of
weather reports. The analysis sets out to uncover (a) what their
contextual-constructional features are, (b) how these can be linked to the
domain and (c) whether these features appear across different languages.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Constructions and domain-specific language
- 3.Methodology
- 3.1existential constructions
- 3.2Corpus
- 3.3Data analysis
- 4.Text-linguistic and lexicological analysis
- 4.1Swedish
- 4.1.1Dominating speech act
- 4.1.2Main topic
- 4.1.3Information structure
- 4.1.4Stylistic and formulative prototypical features
- 4.2Norwegian
- 4.2.1Dominating speech act
- 4.2.2Main topic
- 4.2.3Information structure
- 4.2.4Stylistic and formulative prototypical features
- 4.3Dutch
- 4.3.1Dominating speech act
- 4.3.2Main topic
- 4.3.3Information structure
- 4.3.4Stylistic and formulative prototypical features
- 4.4Overview
- 4.1Swedish
- 5.Constructional analysis
- 5.1Swedish
- 5.1.1Frequency
- 5.1.2Formal features
- 5.1.3Argument structure
- 5.2Norwegian
- 5.2.1Frequency
- 5.2.2Formal features
- 5.2.3Argument structure
- 5.3Dutch
- 5.3.1Frequency
- 5.3.2Formal features
- 5.3.3Argument structure
- 5.4Comparison
- 5.1Swedish
- 6.Summary
Notes References
References (24)
Bamford, J. (2014). Rendering
the dismal science more lively: Popularizing Economics in English
and
Italian. In G. Bongo & G. Caliendo (Eds.), The
Language of Popularization – Die Sprache der Popularisierung:
Theoretical and Descriptive Models – Theoretische und deskriptive
Modelle (pp. 23–49). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Beaver, D., Francez I. & Levinson, D. (2005). Bad
subject: (non)- canonicality and NP distribution in
existentials. In G. Effi & J. Howell (Eds.), Proceedings
of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT)
XV (pp. 19–43). Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.
Bentley, D., Ciconte F. M. & Cruschina, S. (2013). Existential
constructions in crosslinguistic
perspective. Rivista di
Linguistica, 25(1), 1–13.
Berkeley
FrameNet. URL: << [URL] >>. (last
consulted
on 8 June 2021)
Bernstein, B. (1990). Class,
codes and control. Vol. 4: The structuring of pedagogic
discourse. London: Routledge.
Brinker, K., Cölfen, H. & Pappert, S. ([1985]
2018). Linguistische Textanalyse: Eine
Einführung in Grundbegriffe und
Methoden. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.
Factiva. URL: << [URL] >>. (last
consulted
on 20 june 2020)
FrameNet des
Deutschen. URL: << [URL] >>. (last
consulted
on 8 june 2020)
Gautier, L. (2009). Nochmals
zum (Fach-)Textmuster: Von der Kognition zur Beschreibung einzelner
Exemplare. In H. Baldauf-Quilatre, J. Poitou & E. Prak-Derrington (Eds.), Histoires
de textes: Mélanges en l’honneur de
Marie-Hélène
Pérennec (pp. 171–181). Lyon: Université Lumière Lyon.
Gautier, L. & Bach, M. (2019). Von
Patterns zu fachspezifischen Konstruktionen im Fachdiskurs: Eine
kontrastive Fallstudie (Deutsch-Französisch) zu
Weinsprache. Paper presented at
Europhras
2019, Santiago.
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions:
A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument
Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
(2003). Constructions:
A new theoretical approach to
language. Trends in Cognitive
Sciences, 7(5), 219–224.
(2006). Constructions
at Work: The Nature of Generalization in
Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kilgarriff, A., Pychlý, P., Smrž, P. & Tugwell, D. (2004). The
sketch engine. Information
Technology. URL: << [URL]. >>.
Kilgarriff, A., Baisa, V., Bušta, J., Jakubíček, M., Kovář, V., Michelfeit, J., Rychlý, P. & Suchomel, V. (2014). The
Sketch Engine: Ten years
on. Lexicography, 1, 7–36.
Koch, P. & Oesterreicher, W. ([1990]
2011). Gesprochene Sprache in der Romania:
Französisch, Italienisch,
Spanisch [Romanistische Arbeitshefte
31]. Berlin, NY: De Gruyter.
Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information
structure and sentence
form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liégeois, V. (2021). Die
fachinterne und fachexterne Kommunikation des Wetters: Ein
Quaestio-basierter, lexikalischer
Vergleich. Germanistische
Mitteilungen, 47, 199–238.
(2022). La
sintassi specialistica della previsione meteo. Analisi contrastiva
di frasi nominali in previsioni italiane e
tedesche. In U. Wienen, T. Reichmann & L. Sergo (Eds.), Syntax
in
Fachkommunikation (pp. 337–366). Berlin: Frank & Timme.
McNally, L. (2011). Existential
sentences. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics:
An International Handbook of Natural Language
Meaning (pp.1829–1848). Berlin, NY: De Gruyter.
Ruppenhofer, J. & Michaelis L. A. (2010). A
constructional account of genre-based argument
omissions. Constructions and
Frames, 2, 158–184.
Sketch
Engine. URL: << [URL] >>. (last
consulted
on 25 June 2021)
Teubert, W. (1996). Comparable
or Parallel Corpora? International
Journal of
Lexicography, 9(3), 238–264.
Textométrie –
TXM. URL: << [URL] >>. (last
consulted
on 13 January 2022)
