Abstract
This article discusses the organization of the lexicon component in Functional Discourse Grammar with special attention to the representation of lexical meaning. After a brief introduction, Section 2 reviews the role of the lexicon in current FDG and explains the reasons why it receives a rather marginal position. It is argued that this is very much related to the theory’s top-down organization and its emphasis on the analysis of linguistic structure. In Section 3 it is claimed that a functional lexicon should be understood as a flexible entity, rather than a static repository of lexical information, and that the organization and structure of a lexicon constructed on functional principles should be compatible with demands of a different nature (cognitive, acquisitional-evolutionary, typological and communicative). Accordingly, Section 4 proposes a flexible model of the lexicon for FDG, which is compatible with those methodological demands. The key insight is that meaning definitions are not fixed entities but lists of potentially revisable specifications that speakers agree upon or negotiate in language use. The stability of lexical meaning is explained on the basis of speakers’ recurrent experiences in the use of lexical items, which determine the meaning that the linguistic community is likely to consider normal lexical competence. This section further illustrates the benefits of this proposal for the study of syntactic alternations and lexical innovations. Finally, I show how lexemes can be linked to frames on the basis of both the type of conceptual entity denoted by the lexeme and its correspondence with FDG semantic categories.
Acknowledgments
Thanks are due to the participants in the International Workshop on Functional Discourse Grammar held in Vienna in September 2013, the editors of this special issue and two anonymous reviewers for their comments, corrections, and most interesting input on previous versions of this article. I am also grateful to Chris Butler for his remarks to my discussion of his 2012 article. The initial impetus of the research reported here was given during a stay at the University of Edinburgh in June 2013, partly funded by the University of Oviedo (Campus of Excellence mobility grants).
References
Alturo, Nuria, Evelien Keizer & Lluis Payrató (eds.). 2014. The interaction between context and grammar in Functional Discourse Grammar. [Special issue]. Pragmatics 24(2).10.1075/prag.24.2Search in Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek. 1995. Language and human behavior. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.Search in Google Scholar
Butler, Christopher S. 2008. Cognitive adequacy in structural-functional theories of language. Language Sciences 30. 1–30.10.1016/j.langsci.2007.01.006Search in Google Scholar
Butler, Christopher S. 2009a. Lexical phenomena in Functional Discourse Grammar and systemic functional linguistics. In Stef Slembrouck, Miriam Taverniers & Mieke van Herreweghe (eds.), From will to well: Studies in linguistics offered to Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen, 55–67. Gent: Academia Press.Search in Google Scholar
Butler, Christopher S. 2009b. The lexical constructional model: Genesis, strengths and challenges. In Christopher S. Butler & Javier Martín Arista (eds.), Deconstructing constructions, 117–152. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.107.07theSearch in Google Scholar
Butler, Christopher S. 2012. An ontological approach to the representational lexicon in Functional Discourse Grammar. Language Sciences 34. 619–634.10.1016/j.langsci.2012.02.004Search in Google Scholar
Cann, Ronnie, Ruth Kempson & Eleni Gregoromichelaki. 2009. Semantics: An introduction to meaning in language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 1996. Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511620539Search in Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. 2007. Young children’s uptake of new words in conversation. Language in Society 36. 157–82.10.1017/S0047404507070091Search in Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. & Herbert H. Clark. 1979. When nouns surface as verbs. Language 55. 767–811.10.2307/412745Search in Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. & Richard J. Gerrig. 1983. Understanding old words with new meanings. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22. 591–608.10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90364-XSearch in Google Scholar
Contreras-García, Lucía. 2012. A parallel architecture for the FDG lexicon. Paper presented at the International Conference on FDG, University of Ghent, 6–8 June.Search in Google Scholar
Cooper, Robin. 2008. Type theory with records and unification-based grammar. In Fritz Hamm & Stephan Kepser (eds.), Logics for linguistics structures, 9–34. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Cooper, Robin. forthcoming. Type theory and language: From perception to linguistic communication. https://sites.google.com/site/typetheorywithrecords/drafts (accessed 20 November 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Cooper, Robin & Jonathan Ginzburg. 2015. Type theory with records for natural language semantics. In Chris Fox &Shalom Lappin (ed.), Handbookof contemporary semantic theory, 2nd edn., 376–407. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.10.1002/9781118882139.ch12Search in Google Scholar
Cooper, Robin & Staffan Larsson. 2009. Compositional and ontological semantics in learning from corrective feedback and explicit definition. In Jens Edlund, Joakim Gustafson, Anna Hjalmarsson & Gabriel Skantze (eds.), Proceedings of DiaHolmia: 2009 Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue, 59–66. Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology.Search in Google Scholar
Cornish, Francis. 2013. On the dual nature of the Functional Discourse grammar model: Context, the language system-language use distinction, and indexical reference in discourse. Language Sciences 38. 83–98.10.1016/j.langsci.2013.02.001Search in Google Scholar
Croft, William. & David A. Cruse. 2004. Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511803864Search in Google Scholar
Cruse, David A. 1986. Lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cruse, David A. 2011. Meaning in language: An introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin. 2011. Alternations as a heuristic to word meaning and the semantics of constructions. In Pilar Guerrero Medina (ed.), Morphosyntactic alternations in English. Functional and cognitive perspectives, 11–37. London: Equinox.Search in Google Scholar
Dik, Simon C. 1978. Stepwise lexical decomposition. Lisse: Peter de Ridder Press.Search in Google Scholar
Dik, Simon C. 1997. The theory of Functional Grammar. Part 1: The structure of the clause. 2nd revised edn., ed. by Kees Hengeveld. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Faber, Pamela & Ricardo Mairal. 1999. Constructing a lexicon of English verbs. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110800623Search in Google Scholar
Fay, David A. & Anne Cutler. 1977. Malapropisms and the structure of the mental lexicon. Linguistic Inquiry 8.505–520.Search in Google Scholar
Fawcett, Robin. 2014. The cultural classification of ‘things’: Towards a comprehensive system network for English noun senses. In María de losÁngeles Gómez González, Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza & Francisco Gonzálvez-García (eds.), Theory and practice in functional-cognitive space, 53–84. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/sfsl.68.03fawSearch in Google Scholar
García Velasco, Daniel. 2007. Lexical competence and Functional Discourse Grammar. Alfa –Revista de Lingüística 51. 165–187.Search in Google Scholar
García Velasco, Daniel 2009a. Conversion in English and its implications for Functional Discourse Grammar. Lingua 19. 1164–1185.10.1016/j.lingua.2007.12.006Search in Google Scholar
García Velasco, Daniel. 2009b. Innovative coinage: Its place in the grammar. In Christopher S. Butler & Javier Martín Arista (eds.), Deconstructing constructions, 3–24. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.107.03innSearch in Google Scholar
García Velasco, Daniel. 2011. The causative/inchoative alternation in Functional Discourse Grammar. In Pilar Guerrero Medina (ed.), Morphosyntactic alternations in English: Functional and cognitive Perspectives, 115–135. London: Equinox.Search in Google Scholar
García Velasco, Daniel & Kees Hengeveld. 2002. Do we need predicate frames? In Ricardo Mairal & María J. Pérez Quintero (eds.), New perspectives on argument structure, 95–123. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk. 2010. Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198700302.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Genee, Inge. 2013. On the representation of roots, stems and finals in Blackfoot. In J. Lachlan Mackenzie & Hella Olbertz (eds.), Casebook in Functional Discourse Grammar, 95–123. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.137.05genSearch in Google Scholar
Grice, Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 3: Speech acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.10.1163/9789004368811_003Search in Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Gonzálvez-García, Francisco. 2014. “That’s so a construction!”: Some reflections on innovative uses of “so” in present-day English. In María de los Ángeles Gómez González, Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza & Francisco Gonzálvez-García (eds.), Theory and practice in functional-cognitive space, 271–294. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/sfsl.68.12gonSearch in Google Scholar
Hanks, Patrick. 2013. Lexical analysis: Norms and exploitations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262018579.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1993 More on the typology of the inchoative/causative verb alternations. In Bernard Comrie (ed.), Causatives and transitivity, 87–120. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.23.05hasSearch in Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees, Jan Rijkhoff & Anna Siewierska. 2004. Parts-of-speech systems and word order. Journal of Linguistics 40. 527–570.10.1017/S0022226704002762Search in Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees & Jan Rijkhoff. 2005. Mundari as a flexible language. Linguistic Typology 9. 406–431.Search in Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees & J. Lachlan Mackenzie. 2008. Functional Discourse Grammar: A typologically-based theory of language structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199278107.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Hesp, Cees. 1990. A critique of FG-Computational Natural Language User. Working Papers in Functional Grammar 35.Search in Google Scholar
Honselaar, Wim & Evelien Keizer. 2009a. Lexicon and frames in FDG: A treatment of Dutch bekendzijn ‘to be familiar, well known’, behandelen ‘to treat’ and trouwen ‘to marry’. Lingua 119. 1212–1241.10.1016/j.lingua.2007.12.008Search in Google Scholar
Honselaar, Wim & Evelien Keizer. 2009b. A Functional Discourse Grammar account of set nouns in Dutch and its implications for lexicography. International Journal of Lexicography 22. 361–397.10.1093/ijl/ecp023Search in Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. J. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. J. 1997. The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. J. 2002. Foundations of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. J. 2010. Meaning and the lexicon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, Philip. 1987. The mental representation of the meaning of words. Cognition 25. 189–211.10.1016/0010-0277(87)90009-6Search in Google Scholar
Keizer, Evelien. 2009. Verb-preposition constructions in FDG. Lingua 119. 1186–1211.10.1016/j.lingua.2007.12.007Search in Google Scholar
Larsson, Staffan. 2007. A general framework for semantic plasticity and negotiation. In H. C. Bunt & E. C. G. Thijsse (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Computational Semantics. 101–107. Tilburg University.Search in Google Scholar
Larsson, Staffan. 2008. Formalising the dynamics of semantic systems in dialogue. In Robin Cooper & Ruth Kempson (eds.), Language in flux: Relating dialogue coordination to language variation, change and evolution, 121–142. London: Kings College London.Search in Google Scholar
Larsson, Staffan. 2010. Accommodating innovative meaning in dialogue. In Aspects of Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue: SemDial 2010, 14th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue. 83–90.Search in Google Scholar
Levelt, Willem J. M. 1993. Accessing words in speech production: Stages, processes and representations. In Willem J. M. Levelt (ed.), Lexical access in speech production, 1–22. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.10.1016/0010-0277(92)90038-JSearch in Google Scholar
Levin, Beth & Steven Pinker. 1991. Introduction. In Beth Levin & Steven Pinker (eds.), Lexical and conceptual semantics, 1–7. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
van Lier, Eva. 2009. Parts of speech and dependent clauses: A typological study. Utrecht: LOT.Search in Google Scholar
Mackenzie, J. Lachlan 2012. Cognitive adequacy in a dialogic Functional Discourse Grammar. Language Sciences 34. 421–432.10.1016/j.langsci.2012.02.006Search in Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 2013. Verbal argument structure: Events and participants. Lingua 130. 152–168.10.1016/j.lingua.2012.10.012Search in Google Scholar
Marconi, Diego. 1997. Lexical competence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Nunberg, Geoffrey. 1995. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 12. 109–132.10.3115/981574.981599Search in Google Scholar
Nuyts, Jan. 1992. Aspects of a cognitive-pragmatic theory of language. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.20Search in Google Scholar
O’Neill, Gareth. 2012. The cons and cons of grammar: The role and nature of the Fund. Paper presented at the International Conference on FDG, University of Ghent, 6–8 June.Search in Google Scholar
Piantadosi, Steven T., Harry Tily & Edward Gibson. 2009. The communicative lexicon hypothesis. The 31st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci09). 2582–2587.Search in Google Scholar
Pickering, Martin J. & Simon Garrod. 2004. Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27. 169–226.10.1017/S0140525X04000056Search in Google Scholar
Polinsky, Maria. 2012. (ed.). Are lexical categories universal? The view from Chamorro. [Special issue]. Theoretical Linguistics 38.10.1515/tl-2012-0001Search in Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Quine, Willard V. O. 1960. Word and object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sadock, Jerold M. 2012. The modular architecture of grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511997587Search in Google Scholar
Smit, Niels. 2010. FYI. Theory and typology of information packaging. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Andrew D. M. 2005a. Mutual exclusivity: Communicative success despite conceptual divergence. In Maggie Tallerman (ed.), Language origins: Perspectives on evolution, 372–388. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Andrew D. M. 2005b. The inferential transmission of language. Adaptive Behavior 13. 311–324.10.1177/105971230501300402Search in Google Scholar
Tamariz, Mónica. 2004. Exploring the adaptive structure of the mental lexicon. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael. 2003. Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael. 2008. Origins of human communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/7551.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. & Randy LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139166799Search in Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. & Ricardo Mairal. 2014. Interfacing the lexicon and an ontology in a linking system. In María de losÁngeles Gómez González, Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza & Francisco Gonzálvez-García (eds.), Theory and practice in functional-cognitive space, 205–227. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/sfsl.68.09valSearch in Google Scholar
Vossen, Piek. 1995. Grammatical and conceptual individuation in the lexicon. Amsterdam: IFOTT.Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre & Robyn Carston. 2007. A unitary approach to lexical pragmatics: relevance, inference and ad hoc concepts. In Noel Burton-Roberts (ed.), Pragmatics, 230–257. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/978-1-349-73908-0_12Search in Google Scholar
©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton
