The expression of service provision in American English: A constructionist approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36517/ep15.96316Keywords:
construction grammar, profiling, semantics, American EnglishAbstract
This article investigates two constructions in American English used to express service provision: the Service Provision Causative Construction (SPCC), as in "I had my nails done," and the Service Provision Transitive Construction (SPTC), as in "I did my nails." To the extent that these constructions seemingly challenge the Principle of Non-Synonymy (Goldberg, 1995), they present an issue for functionalist framework Principle. Through the lens of Usage-Based Construction Grammar (UBCG), this paper argues that while both constructions evoke a service provision event, the SPTC also evokes an additional event and profiles different elements of the scene, suggesting a greater degree of involvement by the subject referent. This difference in profiling and involvement helps explain why speakers might choose one construction over the other, thus providing evidence in favor the Non-Synonymy Principle and contributing to a deeper understanding of the relationship between form and meaning in service provision expressions.
Downloads
References
DIESSEL, H. Usage-based construction grammar. In: DABROWSKA, E.; DIBJAK, D. (Org.) Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 2015, p. 295-321.
DIESSEL, H. The Constructicon: Taxonomies and Networks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
GILQUIN, G. Causative Get and Have: So Close, So Different. Journal of English Linguistics, v.31, n.2, p.125-148. 2003.
GOLDBERG, A. Constructions: a construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.
GOLDBERG, A. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
HOFFMANN, T. Construction grammar: The structure of English. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2022.
KEMMER, S.; VERHAGEN, A. The grammar of causatives and the conceptual structure of events. Cognitive Linguistics, v. 5, n.2, p. 115-156, 1994.
LANGACKER, R. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical prerequisite. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987.
LANGACKER, R. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991.
LECLERCQ, B.; MORIN, C. No equivalence: A new principle of no synonymy. Constructions, [S. l.], v. 15, n. 1, 2023. DOI: 10.24338/cons-535. Disponível em: https://constructions.journals.hhu.de/article/view/535. Acesso em: 15 mai. 2024.
SANTOS, C. Processing of the English causative-have Construction by Monolinguals and Brazilian Portuguese – English bilinguals. Dissertação (Mestrado em Linguística) – Faculdade de Letras, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, p. 78. 2019.
TRAN, Q. H. Analysis of State Changes in English Causative Constructions: Insights from Construction Grammar. International Journal of TESOL & Education, v 4, n 4, p. 35-53. 2024.
VILELA, A. Transferência Linguística e Transferência de Treinamento na Interlíngua do Falante de Português-L1/Inglês-L2. Dissertação (Mestrado em Linguística Aplicada) – Faculdade de Letras, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, p. 288. 2009.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Diogp Pinheiro, Paula Sasse
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Todos artigos são publicados sob os termos da licença Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY NC 4.0). Sob esta licença, os autores mantêm a propriedade dos direitos autorais de seu conteúdo, mas permitem que outros remixem, adaptem e criem a partir do seu trabalho para fins não comerciais, e, embora os novos trabalhos tenham de lhe atribuir o devido crédito e não possam ser usados para fins comerciais, os usuários não têm de licenciar esses trabalhos derivados sob os mesmos termos.
