Radical Construction Grammar

Clicks: 4
ID: 290314
2001
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #215 of 1,518 articles by views in Oxford University Press eBooks

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 1,518 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract This book presents a profound critique of syntactic theory and syntactic argumentation. Recent syntactic theories are essentially formal models for the representation of grammatical knowledge. These theories posit complex syntactic structures in the analysis of sentences, consisting of atomic primitive syntactic categories and relations. The result of this approach to syntax has been an endless cycle of new and revised theories of syntactic representation. The book argues that these types of syntactic theories are incompatible with the grammatical variation found within and across languages. The extent of grammatical variation demonstrates that no scheme of atomic primitive syntactic categories and relations can form the basis of an empirically adequate syntactic theory. This book defends three theses: (i) constructions are the primitive units of syntactic representation, and grammatical categories are derivative; (ii) the only syntactic structures are the relations between a construction and the elements that make it up (that is, there is no need to posit syntactic relations); and (iii) constructions are language-specific. Constructions are complex units pairing form and meaning. Grammatical categories within and across languages are mapped onto a universal conceptual space, following the semantic map model in typology. The structure of conceptual space constrains how meaning is encoded in linguistic form, and reflects the structure of the human mind.
Reference Key
openalex_W2337762945 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors William Croft
Journal Oxford University Press eBooks
Year 2001
DOI
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.