Cover not available

Article published In: The Structure of the English NP: Synchronic and diachronic explorations
Edited by Kristin Davidse
[Functions of Language 23:1] 2016
► pp. 17–39

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Loose apposition

A construction-based analysis

Published online: 16 June 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.23.1.02kim
Loose appositional constructions consist of coreferring adjacent nominals. The relation between the nominals is different from complementation and modification, and shows some intriguing syntactic, semantic and pragmatic characteristics. To model them we employ the framework of Sign-Based Construction Grammar, enriching its inventory of constructions with a highly abstract one that models supplementation in general, and a more specific one that models the loose appositional construction.
References (27)
Acuña-Fariña, Juan Carlos. 1999. On apposition. English Language and Linguistics 3(1). 59–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Aspects of the grammar of close apposition and the structure of the noun phrase. English Language and Linguistics 13(3). 453–481. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Allegranza, Valerio. 2007. The signs of determination. Constraint-based modelling across languages. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Amaral, Patricia, Craige Roberts & Allyn Smith. 2007. Review of “The logic of conventional implicatures” by Chris Potts. Linguistics and Philosophy 30(6). 707–749. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boas, Hans C. & Ivan A. Sag (eds.). 2012. Sign-based construction grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burton-Roberts, Noel. 1975. Nominal apposition. Foundations of Language 131. 391–419.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delorme, Evelyne & Ray Dougherty. 1972. Appositive NP constructions: we, the men; we men; I, a man; Etc. Foundations of Language 8(1). 2–29.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Di Sciullo, Anna-Maria & Edwin Williams. 1987. On the definition of word. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles & Collin Baker. 2010. A frames approach to semantic description. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 313–339. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fodor, Janet D. & Ivan A. Sag. 1982. Referential and quantificational indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy 5(3). 355–398. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan & Ivan A. Sag. 2000. Interrogative investigations. The form, meaning and use of English interrogatives. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, Jesse A. & Christopher Potts. 2009. Perspective-shifting with appositives and expressives. Linguistics and Philosophy 32(6). 523–552. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heringa, Herman. 2011. Appositional constructions (LOT Dissertation Series 294). Groningen: University of Groningen PhD thesis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. A multidominance approach to appositional constructions. Lingua 122(6). 554–581. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kamp, Hans & Uwe Reyle. 1993. From discourse to logic. Introduction to modeltheoretic semantics of natural language, formal logic and discourse representation theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keizer, Evelien. 2005. The discourse function of close appositions. Neophilologus 891. 447–467. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Jong-Bok. 2012. Form and function mismatch in the English appositional construction. Language Research 48(3). 1–23.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Loock, Rudy & Kathleen M. O’Connor. 2013. The discourse functions of nonverbal appositives. Journal of English Linguistics 41(4). 332–358. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meyer, Charles, 1987. Apposition in English. Journal of English Linguistics 20(1). 101–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Potts, Chris. 2005. The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Conventional implicatures: A distinguished class of meanings. In Gillian Ramchand & Charles Reiss (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces, 475–501. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffry Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan A. 2012. Sign-based construction grammar: An informal synopsis. In Hans C. Boas & Ivan A. Sag (eds.), 69–202.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1916. Cours de linguistique générale. Genève: Payot.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Eynde, Frank. 2006. NP-internal agreement and the structure of the noun phrase. Journal of Linguistics 42(1). 139–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. Predicative constructions. From the Fregean to a Montagovian treatment. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Kim, Jong-Bok
2025.  Kristin Davidse, Ngum Meyuhnsi Njende and Gerard O’Grady, Specificational and presentational there-clefts: Redefining the field of clefts. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2023. Pp. xiii + 187. ISBN 9783031322693.. English Language and Linguistics ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Davidse, Kristin, Ngum Meyuhnsi Njende & Gerard O’Grady
2023. Structural Assemblies and Semantics of the Four Existential Constructions with Relative Clause. In Specificational and Presentational There-Clefts, ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue