Iconicity and the grammar–lexis interface

Abstract

This study examines the proposal in Cognitive Grammar (Langacker 1987, Talmy 2000 that grammatical classes are iconically motivated. The discussion follows a case-study to test this hypothesis. Using found data, we examine the productivity of a range of grammatical classes across Dutch, English, and German. The study bases its analysis on the lexical concept of precipitation. The perceptual and universal nature of such a concept should be a best-case scenario for iconic motivation of grammatical classes. However, despite this, the test-case produces mixed results. Although the hypothesis is not disproved, we reveal how it cannot, alone, explain the vagaries of lexical -class grammaticality.

Arbitrary structure, cognitive grammar, and the partes orationis. A study in Polish paradigms

“…Although the findings do not discredit the work of Górska (2001Górska ( , 2002 and Tabakowska (2003), who find motivated explanations for similar phenomena for the same language, they show that even if an ico nic basis of partes orationis is viable, it certainly cannot explain a great deal the complexity involved in compositionality. The find ings presented here more consistently demonstrate the tendencies seen in Glynn (2006, P r e -P r i n t D r a f t forthcoming). The lack of productive com positio nality for the adjectival and adverbial forms of such semantically similar lexemes, where no issues of frequency or salience can be evoked to explain the variation, seem to unequivo cally show the limits of Cognitive Grammar's use of iconic motiva tion to explain lexical class.…”

“…This study builds on previous work presented in Glynn (2005Glynn ( , 2006, which examines the iconic tenets of Cognitive Gram mar. These studies show that although the theory, as propo sed by Langacker (1987) and Talmy (2000), does indeed help ex plain much of the complexity involved in this well-known issue, it fails to systematically account for the vagaries that result from the inter action of closed class and open class semantics.…”

“…The principle that basic level gram matical categories are motivated by our direct perceptual experience is an integral part of Cognitive Grammar (Langacker 1987, Talmy 2000. However, recent research on English, Dutch, and German (Glynn 2006(Glynn , 2007 has revealed mixed results in the application of this theory, suggesting that its de scriptive power may be restricted to a very abstract level of semantic structure. This investigation focuses on the above question, looking at the class-lexeme productivity of a range of relational classes, such as adverbs and adjectives, in a more morphologically rich language.…”

Diversity and Unity in Cognitive Linguistics

“…However, a milder approach in all these matters is now growing. Whereas language itself is still seen as an internally non-modular system (e.g., by Glynn, 2007), some cognitive linguists such as Taylor (2007) accept a mild form of modularity. Seen from an anatomic perspective, there are some scholars who would not deny that the various cognitive faculties may be organized on the basis of functional modularity, i.e., the encapsulation of information in distributed areas of the brain, for which there is a growing body of evidence in neuroscience, e.g., Coulson et al (1998) and Calabretta et al (2003).…”