Review article published In: On the Role of Pragmatics in Construction Grammar
Edited by Rita Finkbeiner
[Constructions and Frames 11:2] 2019
► pp. 171–192
Introduction
Reflections on the role of pragmatics in Construction Grammar
Published online: 7 November 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00027.fin
https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00027.fin
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theoretical challenges
- 3.Inferential pragmatics and constructions
- 4.Conventionalized pragmatics and constructions
- 5.Approaching a “Construction Pragmatics”
- 6.Contributions to this issue
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (59)
Antonopoulou, E., & Nikiforidou, K. (2011). Construction Grammar and conventional discourse: A construction-based approach to discoursal incongruity. Journal of Pragmatics, 431, 2594–2609.
(2012). Research paradigms in pragmatics. In K. Allan & K. Jaszczolt (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of pragmatics (pp. 23–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(2016). Revisiting the typology of pragmatic interpretations. Intercultural Pragmatics, 13(1), 1–35.
Bach, K., & Harnish, R. M. (1992). How performatives really work: A reply to Searle. Linguistics and Philosophy, 151, 93–110.
Bergs, A., & Diewald, G. (2009). Contexts and constructions. In A. Bergs & G. Diewald (Eds.), Contexts and constructions (pp. 1–14). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Bezuidenhout, A. (2017). Contextualism and Semantic Minimalism. In Y. Huang (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 21–46). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cappelle, B. (2017). What’s pragmatics doing outside constructions? In I. Depraetere & R. Salkie (Eds.), Semantics and pragmatics: Drawing a line (pp. 115–151). Cham: Springer.
Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and utterances. The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Copestake, A., & Terkourafi, M. (2010). Conventional speech act formulae: from corpus findings to formalization. In P. Kühnlein, A. Benz, & C. Sidner (Eds.), Constraints in Discourse 21 (pp. 125–140). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Depraetere, I., & Salkie, R. (Eds.). (2017). Semantics and pragmatics: Drawing a line. Cham: Springer.
Diewald, G. (2011). Pragmaticalization (defined) as grammaticalization of discourse functions. Linguistics, 49(2), 365–390.
Fetzer, A. (2012). Contexts in interaction: relating pragmatic wastebaskets. In R. Finkbeiner, J. Meibauer, & P. Schumacher (Eds.), What is a context? Linguistic approaches and challenges (pp. 105–127). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Fillmore, C. (1981 [1976]). Pragmatics and the description of discourse. In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 143–166). New York: Academic Press.
(1996). The pragmatics of constructions. In D. I. Slobin, J. Gerhardt, A. Kyratzis, & J. Guo (Eds.), Social interaction, social context, and language. Essays in honor of Susan Ervin-Tripp (pp. 53–69). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Fillmore, C., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions. The case of ‘let alone’. Language, 641, 501–528.
Finkbeiner, R. (2017). ‘Argumente hin, Argumente her’. Regularity and idiomaticity in German ‘N hin, N her’. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 29(3), 205–258.
(2018). ‘Bla(h), bla(h), bla(h)’. Usage and meaning of a repetitive all-rounder. In A. Urdze (Ed.), Non-prototypical reduplication (pp. 71–89). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Fischer, K. (2015). Situation in grammar or in frames? Constructions and Frames, 7(2), 258–288.
Fischer, K., & Stefanowitsch, A. (Eds.). (2008). Konstruktionsgrammatik I. Von der Anwendung zur Theorie. Second edition. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Fried, M., & Östman, J.-O. (2005). Construction Grammar and spoken language: The case of pragmatic particles. Journal of Pragmatics, 371, 1752–1778.
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: a Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
(2013). Constructionist approaches. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 15–31). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grice, H. P. (1989). Logic and conversation. In H. P. Grice, Studies in the way of words (pp. 22–40). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gutzmann, D. (2015). Use-conditional meaning. Studies in multidimensional semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (Eds.). (2013). The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2005). Default semantics: Foundations of a compositional theory of acts of communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kaplan, D. (1999). The meaning of ouch and oops. Explorations in the theory of meaning as use. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Los Angeles.
Kay, P. (2004). Pragmatic aspects of constructions. In L. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.), The Handbook of pragmatics (pp. 675–700). Oxford: Blackwell.
Kay, P., & Fillmore, C. (1999). Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations. The What’s X Doing Y? construction. Language, 751, 1–34.
Kay, P., & Michaelis, L. A. (2012). Constructional meaning and compositionality. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics (pp. 2271–2296). Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Lakoff, G. (1987). There-constructions. In G. Lakoff, Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind (pp. 462–585). Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.
Lambrecht, K. (1990). “What, me worry?” – ‘Mad Magazine sentences’ revisited. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 215–228.
(1994). Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Levinson, S. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Liedtke, F. (2017). Constructions, templates, and pragmatics: Response to Cappelle. In I. Depraetere & R. Salkie (Eds.), Semantics and pragmatics: Drawing a line (pp. 153–162). Cham: Springer.
Matsumoto, Y. (2010). Interactional frames and grammatical descriptions: The case of Japanese noun-modifying constructions. Constructions & Frames, 2(2), 135–157.
Meibauer, J. (2015). On “R” in phrasal compounds – a contextualist approach. Language Typology and Universals (STUF), 68(3), 241–261.
Morgan, J. L. (1978). Two types of convention in indirect speech acts. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics 9: Pragmatics (pp. 261–280). London: Academic Press.
Nikiforidou, K. (2009). Constructional analysis. In F. Brisard, J.-O. Östman, & J. Verschueren (Eds.), Grammar, meaning and pragmatics (pp. 16–32). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
(2011). Grammar and discourse: A constructional approach to discourse-based conventionality. Athens: Parousia.
Nikiforidou, K., & Fischer, K. (2015). On the interaction of constructions with register and genre. Constructions and Frames, 7(2), 137–147.
Östman, J.-O. (2005). Construction Discourse. A prolegomenon. In J.-O. Östman & M. Fried (Eds.), Construction Grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions (pp. 121–144). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
(2015). From Construction Grammar to Construction Discourse … and back. In J. Bücker, S. Günthner, & W. Imo (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik V. Konstruktionen im Spannungsfeld von sequenziellen Mustern, kommunikativen Gattungen und Textsorten (pp. 15–43). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Paul, I., & Stainton, R. (2006). Really intriguing, that Pred NP! Actes du congrès annuel de l’Association Canadienne de Linguistique 2006. Proceedings of the 2006 annual conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, 1–12.
Salmon, W. (2015). Conversational implicatures, reference point constructions, and that noun thing. Linguistics, 53(3), 443–477.
Savva, E. (2017). Subsentential speech from a contextualist perspective. PhD diss., University of Cambridge.
Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning. Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance. Communication and cognition. Second Edition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Taylor, J. R. (2012). The mental corpus: How language is represented in the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Terkourafi, M. (2009). On de-limiting context. In A. Bergs & G. Diewald (Eds.), Contexts and constructions (pp. 17–42). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Cited by (18)
Cited by 18 other publications
Matsumoto, Yoshiko
Gillmann, Melitta
Raineri, Sophie
Wiesinger, Evelyn
DESAGULIER, GUILLAUME & PHILIPPE MONNERET
Foolen, Ad
Sommerer, Lotte
2022.
Day to day and night after night
. In English Noun Phrases from a Functional-Cognitive Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series, 221], ► pp. 363 ff.
Willich, Alexander
Goria, Eugenio & Francesca Masini
2021. Category-building lists between grammar and interaction. In Building Categories in Interaction [Studies in Language Companion Series, 220], ► pp. 73 ff.
Kaltenböck, Gunther
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
2021. The rise of a concessive “category reassessment” construction. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 22:2 ► pp. 164 ff.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
2023. On the rise of a marker of disaffiliation from Others’ discourse. In Reconnecting Form and Meaning [Studies in Language Companion Series, 230], ► pp. 99 ff.
De Vaere, Hilde, Julia Kolkmann & Thomas Belligh
Kuzai, Einat
Leclercq, Benoît
2020. Semantics and pragmatics in Construction Grammar. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 34 ► pp. 225 ff.
Leclercq, Benoît
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
