Cover not available

In:Substance-based Grammar – The (Ongoing) Work of John Anderson:
Edited by Roger Böhm and Harry van der Hulst
[Studies in Language Companion Series 204] 2018
► pp. 311–336

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

Figurativeness in English grammar

The role of metonymic tropes and schemes of repetition

 | University of Edinburgh
Published online: 12 December 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.204.07tro
This chapter considers the relationship between constructions and certain kinds of figurative language, namely metonymic tropes and schemes of repetition. The role of metonymy in shifts from morphological compounds to derivational affixes is explored, along with creation of affixoids. The chapter then discusses the diverse reduplication patterns of English. Both partial (e.g. nitwit) and full (e.g. night-night) reduplications are explored. It is suggested that speakers of English have conventionalised reduplicative patterns in different ways, some of which have resulted in atomic and substantive constructions, such as hush-hush ‘secret’, and some of which have resulted in more complex and schematic constructions, such as the contrastive focus reduplication construction (e.g. I need a drink-drink, not tea).
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Figurativeness and grammar
    • 2.1Figurativeness and grammar in language change
    • 2.2Beyond lexical figures
  • 3.Metonymy
    • 3.1Some introductory remarks on metonymy
    • 3.2Metonymy, word-formation and entry into the lexicon
    • 3.3Beyond conversion
  • 4.Repetition and reduplication
    • 4.1Partial reduplications
    • 4.2Total reduplications
      • 4.2.1Epizeuxis reduplications
      • 4.2.2Ploce reduplications
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (42)
References
Anderson, John M. 2014. The grammar of figurativeness, with examples drawn from English. English Studies 95: 971–989.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Andor, József. this volume. Investigating substance-based grammar: the grammar of semantic and grammatical relations – An interview with John M. Anderson. In Substance-based Grammar – The (Ongoing) Work of John Anderson [Studies in Language Companion Series 204], Roger Böhm & Harry van der Hulst (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Booij, Geert. 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cappelle, Bert. 2010. Doubler-upper nouns: A challenge for usage-based models of language? In Cognitive Perspectives on Word Formation, Alexander Onyster & Sascha Michel (eds), 335–374. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chapman, Don. 2008. Fixer-uppers and passers-by: nominalization of verb-particle constructions. In Studies in the History of the English Language, IV: Empirical and Analytical Advances in the Study of English Language Change, Susan Fitzmaurice & Donka Minkova (eds), 265–299. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Colman, Fran & Anderson, John M. 2004. On metonymy as word-formation: with special reference to Old English. English Studies 86: 547–565.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, William. 1993. The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. Cognitive Linguistics 4: 335–370.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Variation in Typological Perspective. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. Logical and typological arguments for Radical Construction Grammar. In Construction Grammar(s): Cognitive and Cross-Language Dimensions [Constructional Approaches to Grammar 3], Jan-Ola Östman & Mirjam Fried (eds), 273–314. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Curzan, Anne & Adams, Michael. 2012. How English Works: A Linguistic Introduction, 3rd edn. London: Pearson.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan & Green, Melanie. 2006. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ghomeshi, Jila, Jackendoff, Ray, Rosen, Nicole & Russell, Kevin. 2004. Contrastive focus reduplication in English: The salad-salad paper. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 22: 307–357.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan T. 2004. Shouldn’t it be breakfunch? A quantitative analysis of the structure of blends. Linguistics 42: 639–667.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grohmann, Kleanthes & Nevins, Andrew. 2004. On the syntactic expression of pejorative mood. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 4: 143–179.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haselow, Alexander. 2011. Typological Changes in the Lexicon: Analytic Tendencies in English Noun Formation. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2003. Grammaticalization, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence. 1993. Economy and redundancy in a dualistic model of natural language. Yearbook of the Linguistics Association of Finland, 33–72.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. Pragmatics and the lexicon. In The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, Yan Huang (ed), 511–549. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey K. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hudson, Richard. 2007. Language Networks: The New Word Grammar. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 2008. Construction after construction and its theoretical challenges. Language 84: 8–28.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1965. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Turner, Mark. 1989. More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lensch, Anke. 2016. The emergence of runner-ups and fixer-uppers: The constructionalization of a word-formation pattern. Paper presented at ICEHL 19, Essen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. Forthcoming. Fixer-uppers: reduplication in the derivation of phrasal verbs. In Exact Repetition in Grammar and Discourse, Rita Finkbeiner & Ulrike Freywald (eds). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Michaelis, Laura. 2003. Headless constructions and coercion by construction. In Mismatch: Form-Function Incongruity and the Architecture of Grammar, Laura Michaels & Elaine J. Francis (eds), 259–310. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Minkova, Donka. 2002. Ablaut reduplication in English: The criss-crossing of prosody and verbal art. English Language and Linguistics 6: 133–171.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nevins, Andrew & Vaux, Bert. 2003. Metalinguistic, shmetalinguistic: The phonology of shm-reduplication. Proceedings from the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 39: 702–721.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Radden, Günther. 1999. Metonymy in Language and Thought [Human Cognitive Processing 4]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Southern, Mark. 2005. Contagious Couplings: Transmissions of Expressives in Yiddish Echo Phrases. Westport CT: Praeger.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stolz, Thomas. 2008. Total reduplication vs. echo-word formation in language contact situations. In Language Contact and Contact Languages [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 7], Peter Siemund & Noemi Kintana (eds), 107–132. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stolz, Thomas, Stroh, Cornelia & Urdze, Aina. 2011. Total Reduplication: The Areal Linguistics of a Potential Universal. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, John. 2002. Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Trousdale, Graeme. 2013. Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Trips, Carola. 2009. Lexical Semantics and Diachronic Morphology: The Development of -hood, -dom , and -ship in the History of English. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Trousdale, Graeme. 2008. A constructional approach to lexicalization processes in the history of English: Evidence from possessive constructions. Word Structure 1: 156–177.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wentworth, Harold. 1936. On adding the suffix of agency, -ER, to adverbs. American Speech 11: 369–370.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwarts, Joost. 2013. From N to N: The anatomy of a construction. Linguistics and Philosophy 36: 65–90.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue