Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details

Cognitive Linguistics

Editor-in-Chief: Newman, John

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2015: 1.375
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.527
Rank 29 out of 179 in category Linguistics in the 2015 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Social Sciences Edition

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.592
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 1.277
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 0.833

Online
ISSN
1613-3641
See all formats and pricing

 


Select Volume and Issue

Issues

How do gerunds conceptualize events? A diachronic study

Lauren Fonteyn
  • University of Leuven, Belgium & Research Foundation Flanders, Belgium
  • :
/ Liesbet Heyvaert
  • University of Leuven, Belgium
  • :
/ Charlotte Maekelberghe
  • University of Leuven, Belgium
  • :
Published Online: 2015-10-24 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2015-0061

Abstract

This article offers a cognitive perspective on the evolution of the semantics of English nominal gerunds (NG) (I regret the signing of the contract) and verbal gerunds (VG) (I regret signing the contract). While the formal differences between NGs and VGs are well documented, their semantics remains largely unexplored territory. The perspective that is taken here is centered on the linguistic notion of reference and various aspects of the conceptualization involved in it. As they formally hover between more nominal and more clause-like internal properties, gerunds form an interesting test case for the cognitive perspective on referentiality. Our corpus analysis describes how the situations that NGs and VGs refer to are conceptualized as deictic expressions grounded in the speech event in Present-day English, and how this has changed since the Early Modern period. It is shown that only a multi-layered model of referentiality can account for the subtle differences found between NGs and VGs: while no fundamental shifts are found with regard to the traditional referential subtypes (specific, non-specific, generic), NGs and VGs do turn out to differ in their choice for either nominal or clausal grounding mechanisms, in their status as existentially stable or flexible entities and in the mental spaces in which they situate the events that they conceptualize.

Keywords: gerunds; reference; grounding; mental spaces; conceptualization


Received: 2015-06-04

Revised: 2015-09-07

Accepted: 2015-09-08

Published Online: 2015-10-24

Published in Print: 2015-11-01


Funding: Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) (Grant/Award Number: ‘G0A5412N’), KU Leuven Research Council (Grant/Award Number: ‘13/045’).


Citation Information: Cognitive Linguistics. Volume 26, Issue 4, Pages 583–612, ISSN (Online) 1613-3641, ISSN (Print) 0936-5907, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2015-0061, October 2015

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.