Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-hzqq2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-29T07:06:13.280Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

There is no such thing as a free combination: a usage-based study of specific construals in adverb–adjective combinations1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 February 2014

BRITT ERMAN
BRITT ERMAN*
Affiliation:
Department of English, Stockholm University, 10691 Stockholm, Swedenbritt.erman@english.su.se
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The study is aimed at revealing collocational adverb–adjective patterns in the British National Corpus (BNC). The adverbs selected for the study include the maximizers absolutely, completely, entirely, fully, perfectly, totally, utterly, wholly. The study involves searches on both the selected adverbs and the adjectives they modify in a bi-directional fashion. It is claimed that only a cognitive and usage-based approach in terms of underlying conceptual structures can provide an accurate description of collocational patterns. The results show that a large proportion of the adjectives have strong bonds with particular maximizers. This is explained through the basic conceptual structure of Boundedness/Scalarity, i.e. the degree to which the adjective lends itself to a bounded or a scalar construal and the adverb is biased towards a totality construal (which is the kind of construal to be expected from maximizers). The results support the hypothesis that a substantial part of the adverb–adjective combinations investigated are (semi)-prefabricated units, presumably easily accessed by native speakers because the combinations are the result of specific construals and their members have close associative and conceptual links in the mental lexicon.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 109 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

1

Thanks are due to generous funding by Sweden's Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences.

References

Aijmer, Karin. 2011. Are you totally spy? A new intensifier in Present-day American English. In Hancil, Sylvie (ed.), Marqueurs discursifs et subjectivité, 155–72. Rouen and Le Havre: Publications des Universités de Rouen et de Havre.Google Scholar
Allerton, David J. 1987. English intensifiers and their idiosyncrasies. In Steele, Ross & Threadgold, Terry (eds.), Language topics: Essays in honour of Michael Halliday, vol. 2, 15–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1972. Degree words. The Hague and Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 1985. Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form (Typological Studies in Language 9). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Croft, William & Alan Cruse, D.. 2004. Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cruse, D. Alan & Togia, Pagonia. 1995. Towards a cognitive model of antonymy. Journal of Lexicology 1, 113–41.Google Scholar
Desagulier, Guillaume. Forthcoming. In Glynn, Dylan & Robinson, Justyna (eds.), Polysemy and synonymy: Corpus methods and applications in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Erman, Britt. 1997. Guy's just such a dickhead: The context and function of just in teenage talk. In Kotsinas, Ulla-Britt, Stenström, Anna-Brita & Karlsson, Anna-Malin (eds.), Ungdomsspråk i Norden, 96–110 (‘Teenage talk in the North’; author's trans). MINS 43. Dept of Nordic Languages, Stockholm University, Sweden.Google Scholar
Inkpen, Diana Zaiu & Hirst, Graeme. 2002. Acquiring collocations for lexical choice between near-synonyms. In Unsupervised lexical acquisition. Proceedings of the Workshop of the ACL Special Interest Group on the Lexicon (SIGLEX), 67–76.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Graeme. 2003. Amplifier collocations in the British National Corpus: Implications for English language teaching. Tesol Quarterly 37 (3), 467–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher & McNally, Louise. 2005. Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language 81 (2), 345–81.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald. 1999. A dynamic usage-based model. In Kemmer, Susan & Barlow, Michael (eds.), A usage-based conception of language, 1–63. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 1997. Degree modifiers of adjectives in spoken British English. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 2001. Adjectives and boundedness. Cognitive Linguistics 12 (1), 47–65.Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 2005. Ontologies and construals in lexical semantics. Axiomathes 15, 541–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 2008. Configurations, construals and change: Expressions of degree. English Language and Linguistics 12 (2), 317–43.Google Scholar
Partington, Alan. 1998. Patterns and meanings: Using corpora for English language research and teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie. 2008. Almost certainly and most definitely: Degree modifiers and epistemic stance. Journal of Pragmatics 40, 1521–42.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2007. The concepts of constructional mismatch and type-shifting from the perspective of grammaticalization. Cognitive Linguistics 18 (4), 523–57.Google Scholar
Wray, Alison. 2002. Formulaic language and the lexicon. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar