Paradigms lost – paradigms regained

Abstract

Based on Diewald (2009, 2015a, 2017), it is claimed that the notion of paradigm needs to be introduced into constructional accounts, as otherwise the essence of grammaticalization cannot be properly captured in construction grammar. It is suggested to define grammatical paradigms as a new node type, a “hyper-construction”, which represents the categorical, non-gradient specifics of grammatical meaning. This line of argumentation is supported by a discussion of changes in the German and English modality, tense, determiner, and number paradigms. Independent arguments for the psychological reality of paradigms come from the study of implicational relations in inflectional morphology and diachronic phenomena such as layering, suppletion, and paradigm pressure.

Grammaticalization of verdienen into an auxiliary marker of deontic modality

“…The last years have seen an upsurge of discussions concerning the connections as well as the dissociations of grammaticalization theory on the one hand and construction grammar on the other (e.g. Cousse, Andersson & Olofsson, 2018;Diewald, 2006;Diewald, 2020;Hilpert, 2018;Noel, 2007). Though this study is not the place to enter deeply into these questions (for a discussion of convergence as well as the incompatibilities of grammaticalization theory and construction grammar see Diewald, 2020), it is necessary to sketch some lines of thought and some theoretical foundations that guide this work.…”

“…Cousse, Andersson & Olofsson, 2018;Diewald, 2006;Diewald, 2020;Hilpert, 2018;Noel, 2007). Though this study is not the place to enter deeply into these questions (for a discussion of convergence as well as the incompatibilities of grammaticalization theory and construction grammar see Diewald, 2020), it is necessary to sketch some lines of thought and some theoretical foundations that guide this work. This is done in Section 2.1, while Section 2.2 offers an introduction to the conception of modality, in particular deontic modality, that is the foundation of this study.…”

“…For the development of auxiliaries from lexical verbs in verbal periphrases in the domains of TAM categories, the possible diachronic scenarios including all decisive factors have been established in the works of many researchers, e.g. Lehmann (2015Lehmann ( [1982), Bybee, Perkins &Pagliuca (1994), Hopper & Traugott (2003), Diewald (1999Diewald ( , 2020, Diewald & Smirnova (2010). From these and other studies, major changes in auxiliarization processes are known to be the following: morpho-phonological change (e.g.…”

Diachronic trajectory of the connector com isso in Portuguese

“…Isso pode significar que, à medida que a anteposição de com isso se consolida como conector, os usuários evitam empregar os adjuntos adverbiais nessa posição, mantendo-os à direita do subordinador. Trata-se de um tipo de acomodação de que trata Diewald (2020). Em outras palavras, à medida que com isso se torna um conector convencional do português, para manter a distinção entre o uso adverbial e o uso conector, o sistema linguístico passa a comportar traços distintivos -neste caso, posicionais, por pressão dos paradigmas -que facilitam ao usuário reconhecer cada um desses usos como pertencente a uma ou a outra categoria.…”

From grammaticalization to Diachronic Construction Grammar

“…Thus, the extension of Diachronic Construction Grammar to the earlier community of scholars working on grammaticalization (cf. Bybee 2013;Traugott & Trousdale 2013;Trousdale & Norde 2013;Diewald 2020) has begun to make a major addition to this field of research.…”