engleski

The Reflection of Encyclopedic Knowledge in Language Structure: The Case of Independent Complement Constructions, or Why “ Fringe” Constructions Matter

It is encouraging to see some converging ideas on meaning in such seemingly divergent theoretical frameworks as Jackendoff’ s conceptual semantics (2002) and cognitive linguistics, both of which refute the idea of a strict borderline between semantics and pragmatics and embrace an encyclopedic view of meaning. The present authors have repeatedly emphasized (e.g. Panther & Thornburg 2005) that cognitive linguistics should be open to the insights of contemporary pragmatics, and that pragmatics could benefit from insights of cognitive linguistics. In this talk we analyze what might be considered a “ fringe” construction, namely, complement clauses that are introduced by complementizers such as dass (German), that (English) and que (French), but lack a matrix clause. Such clauses may function pragmatically as autonomous speech acts. Examples are: German (1) Dass du dich ja anständig benimmst! (order, request) COMP you yourself PRT appropriately behave (2) Dass doch die drei Tag[e] schon um wären! (wish) COMP PRT the three days already gone were-SUBJ (3) Dass das ausgerechnet mir passieren muss! (expression of frustration) COMP that of-all-people to-me happen must (4) Dass ich das noch erleben darf! (expression of happiness, joy) COMP I that still experience may French (5) Que tout le monde sorte (wish, request (Grevisse 1993: 1561)) COMP everybody leave-SUBJ English (6) Oh, that she were alive to see this! (wish) (7) That it should ever come to this! (sorrow) (8) That he should turn against us, after all his professions of friendship! (indignation) Abbreviations: COMP: complementizer ; PRT: modal particle ; SUBJ: subjunctive We limit our analysis to German dass and English that clauses like (3), (4), (7), and (8) that express emotional states. These constructions exhibit rich conceptual frames with elements such as ‘ emotional involvement’ , ‘ counter-to-expectation situations’ , and even metaphysical background assumptions about ‘ what the world is like’ . These knowledge structures are captured by a “ convergent” or integrated theory of meaning encompassing contemporary cognitive linguistic approaches to metaphor, metonymy, conceptual blending, and pragmatic inferencing (conversational implicature). We thus claim that detailed analyses of “ fringe” constructions as the above shed light on some of the central issues in contemporary linguistic theorizing: 1. How much of language meaning is compositional? Answer: almost none. Constructions like the above are not “ fringe” phenomena but rather typical of language in general. Learning a language involves the acquisition of a large number of constructional idioms. 2. How is meaning constructed? Answer: dynamically, through cognitive operations such as metonymic elaborations, pragmatic inferences, and conceptual integration (cf. Fauconnier & Turner 2002). 3. What is the relation between syntactic form and conceptual/pragmatic content? Answer: Syntax is partially motivated, i.e. influenced by the conceptual contents and the pragmatic functions to be conveyed. But this is not to claim that all of syntax is motivated. At this point, it remains to be seen whether the verb-final syntax of autonomous dass clauses can be motivated on conceptual and/or pragmatic grounds or whether there is a genuine mismatch between dependent clause syntax and the autonomous speech act status of these constructions.

semantics-pragmatics interface; grammatical constructions; metonymy; inferencing; metaphor; conceptual blending

nije evidentirano