Cover not available

Article published In: Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Online-First Articles

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

GO (a)round and V vs. GO (a)round Ving

A multivariate distinctive collexeme analysis based on association rules

ORCiD logo with link | University of Copenhagen
ORCiD logo with link | UC Santa Barbara | JLU Giessen
Published online: 9 April 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00217.jen
Abstract
Distinctive collexeme analysis has proven very useful in identifying distinctive patterns of lexemic attraction among multiple constructions. However, if construction grammar is to take seriously the usage-based tenet that context is a crucial component of the language system, multivariate methods are required. In this article, one such analytical approach is proposed as we apply an extension of distinctive collexeme analysis — named multivariate collexeme analysis — in an analysis of the GO (a)round and V and GO (a)round Ving constructions. Based on the data-mining technique known as association rules, multivariate collexeme analysis can identify not just singular distinctive features but also establish entire ‘collo-profiles’ of multiple features going far beyond individual collexemes. Our analysis takes into account no less than eight features (including collexemic, colligational, pragmatic, and discursive ones), and it is found that this approach offers much more informative accounts of the two constructions than a traditional distinctive collexeme analysis would.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Constructions and their external properties
  • 3.A preliminary look at the two constructions
  • 4.Method
    • 4.1Data and annotation
    • 4.2Methods
  • 5.Findings
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
References (32)
References
Bresnan, J., Cueni, A., Nikitina, T., & Baayen, H. (2007). Predicting the dative alternation. In G. Boume, I. Kraemer, & J. Zwarts (Eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation (pp. 69–94). Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. A. (2001). Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). Logical and typological arguments for Radical Construction Grammar. In J.-O. Östman (Ed.), Construction grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions (pp. 273–314). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2008–). The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). Retrieved from [URL]
Fillmore, C. J. (1988). The mechanics of “Construction Grammar”. BLS, 141, 35–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language, 64(3), 501–539. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilquin, G., & Gries, S. Th. (under review). Collostructional analysis. In H. Nesi & P. Milin (Eds.), International encyclopedia of language and linguistics (3rd ed.). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Constructions at work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th. (2003). Multifactorial analysis in corpus linguistics: A study of Particle Placement. London & New York: Continuum Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th., & Stefanowitsch, A. (2004a). Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspective on ‘alternations’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 9(1), 97–129. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004b). Co-varying collexemes in the into-causative. In M. Achard & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Language, culture, and mind (pp. 225–236). Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hahsler, M., Gruen, B., & Hornik, K. (2005). arules — A computational environment for mining association rules and frequent item sets. Journal of Statistical Software, 14(15), 1–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hampe, B., & Gries, S. Th. (2018). Syntax from and for discourse II: More on complex-sentences as meso-constructions. In B. Hampe & S. Flach (Eds.), Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association (pp. 115–142). Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herbst, T. (2018). Is language a collostructicon? A proposal for looking at collocations, valency, argument structure and other constructions. In P. Cantos-Gómez & M. Almela-Sánchez (Eds.), Lexical collocation analysis: Advances and applications (pp. 1–22). Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, M. (2012). Diachronic collostructional analysis: How to use it and how to deal with confounding factors. In K. Allan & J. A. Robinson (Eds.), Current methods in historical semantics (pp. 133–160). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Construction grammar and its application to English (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (1997). Twistin’ the night away. Language, 73(3), 534–559. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jensen, K. E. (2017). Kan konstruktioner have semantisk prosodi? [Can constructions have semantic prosody?]. Ny Forskning i Grammatik, 241, 62–85. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2024). Well, maybe you shouldn’t go around shaving poodles: Collostructional semantic and discursive prosody in the go (a)round Ving and go (a)round and V constructions. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kemmer, S., & M. Barlow (2000). Introduction: A usage-based conception of language. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based models of language (pp. vii–xxviii). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olguín Martínez, J. F., & Gries, S. Th. (2024). If not for-if it weren’t/wasn’t for counterfactual constructions: A multivariate extension of collostructional analysis. Cognitive Semantics, 10(2), 158–189. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Patten, A. L. (2014). The historical development of the it-cleft: A comparison of two different approaches. In N. Gisborne & W. B. Hollmann (Eds.), Theory and data in cognitive linguistics (pp. 87–114). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schönefeld, D. (2013). It is … quite common for theoretical predictions to go untested (BNC_CMH). A register-specific analysis of the English go un-V-en construction. Journal of Pragmatics, 521, 17–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A. (2000). The English GO-(PRT)-AND-VERB construction. BLS, 251, 259–270. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A., & Flach, S. (2020). “Too big to fail but big enough to pay for their mistakes”: A collostructional analysis of the patterns [too ADJ to V] and [ADJ enough to V]. In G. Corpas & J. P. Colson (Eds.), Computational and corpus-based phraseology (pp. 248–272). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S. Th. (2003). Collostructions: Investigating the interaction between words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8(2), 209–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). Covarying collexemes. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 1(1), 1–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stubbs, M. (2001). Words and phrases: Corpus studies of lexical semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C., & Trousdale, G. (2014). Contentful constructionalization. Journal of Historical Linguistics, 4(2), 256–283. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue