The relation between schematic construction and its slot filler is a hot topic discussed by both philosophers and linguists worldwide. This topic involves not only the question of meaning in linguistic philosophy but also the relations of word meaning, sentence meaning and syntax meaning. This thesis is supportive of the concept of mutual definition between schematic construction and its slot filler proposed by Chinese philosopher Chen Jiaying, and the concept of interaction between two sides which has been widely accepted in linguistic community. As an instance of the interactive relationships between construction and lexicon, the Construction and Lexicon Interactive Coercion Model is proposed in the thesis, which can realize two commitments of cognitive linguistics: generalization commitment and cognitive commitment.
Chen Jiaying, (2003). Linguistic Philosophy. Beijing: Beijing University Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
Li. (2002). Record of Grammar Study. Beijing: Beijing University Press.
Michaelis, L. A. (2002). Headless constructions and coercion by construction. In Elaine J. Francis & Laura A. Michaelis (Eds.). Mismatch: Form-function incongruity and the architecture of grammar. Standford: CSLI Publications.
Michaelis, L. A. (2003). Word meaning, sentence meaning, and syntactic meaning. In Cuyckens, Hubert, Rene Dirven & John Taylor (Eds.). Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics. (Cognitive Linguistics Research 23). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Michaelis, L. A. (2004). Type shifting in construction grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion. Cognitive Linguistics, (2), 1-61.
Michaelis, L. A. (2005). Entity and event coercion in a symbolic theory of syntax. In J. Ostman & Fried, M. (Eds.). Construction grammar: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extension (Pp. 45-87). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Panther, Klaus-Uwe. & Thornburg, L, L. (2005). The role of conceptual metonymy in meaning construction. In Ruiz deMendoza Ibá ez, Francisco, J., & Sandra, Pe, a Cerve, l. (Eds.). Cognitive Linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction. (Cognitive Linguistics Research 32). Berlin & NewYork: Mouton deGruyter.
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Taylor, J. R. (1989). Linguistic categorization third edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Taylor, J. R. (2002). Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Taylor, J. R. (2007). Ten lectures on applied cognitive linguistics by John Taylor. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Wang. (2009a). Construction Grammar Approach to Chinese “adverb+noun” Construction. Foreign Language and Literature, (4), 1-8.
Wang. (2009b). Construction Coercion, Lexical Coercion and Inertia Coercion. Foreign Language and Foreign Language Teaching, (12), 7-15.
Copyright: © 2014 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
