Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：ELSEVIER SCI LTD  

In recent years, a "debate" has been going on in Language Sciences. First, Iwata (2006) criticized Broccias (2003). Seven years later, Broccias (2013) replied to lwata (2006). Then Iwata (2014) replied to Broccias (2013), to be followed yet again by Broccias (2014). The purpose of this paper is to sort out the mess which this endless "debate" falls into. It is shown that all the arguments initially advanced by Iwata (2006) are practically unchallenged. So there is no longer any need for debate, although Broccias (2013, 2014) continues the "debate" by going astray from the original issues.
It is also shown that Broccias' (2014) "objections" against Iwata (2014) concerning the Type A/Type B distinction and to one's death are based on loose reasoning and severe misunderstandings. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

DOI： 10.1016/j.langsci.2014.06.019

Web of Science

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：ELSEVIER SCI LTD  

DOI： 10.1016/j.langsci.2013.11.002

Web of Science

researchmap

researchmap

Language：Japanese  

CiNii Books

researchmap

researchmap

Language：English   Publisher：Tukuba English Linguistic Society  

CiNii Books

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：MOUTON DE GRUYTER  

This article advances a lexical-constructional analysis of sentences like The door swung open and The trap door fell shut (henceforth open/shut expressions). These open/shut expressions involve both motion and change of state, as described by the verb and the AP, respectively.
Two important characteristics of open/shut expressions are: (1) that they involve internal motion, as distinct from translational motion (e.g., The ball bounced down the hall) or self-contained motion (e.g., The ball bounced up and down on the same floor the) in the sense of Talmy (2000), and (2) that the change of state is concurrent with the internal motion.
Since open/shut expressions involve both motion and change of state, they are different from simple change-of-state expressions like He fell silent, which involve a change of state alone. They cannot be identified with spatial resultatives like Bill rolled out of the room, either, for the post-verbal A P denotes a state.
Remarkably, open/shut expressions should also be discriminated from intransitive resultatives like The kettle boiled dry, in that the AP open or shut simply indicates that the state of being open or shut results, without specifying the entity that state is predicated of. This analysis allows us to account for why, open/shut expressions behave differently from ordinary resultatives, which are to be accounted for by means of argument structure constructions, as Goldberg (1995) argues.
Open/shut expressions with verbs of sound emission (e.g., The door creaked open) can be similarly handled. What makes these open/shut expressions distinct from open/shut expressions like The door swung open is that, generally, the verb metonymically stands for the internal motion, rather than describing the manner/path of the internal motion.

DOI： 10.1515/LING.2008.035

Web of Science

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

Language：English   Publisher：The English Linguistic Society of Japan  

DOI： 10.9793/elsj1984.23.493

researchmap

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：MOUTON DE GRUYTER  

Verbs like load or spray are known to alternate between two variants (John sprayed paint onto the wall/John sprayed the wall with paint). Both Rappaport and Levin (1988) and Pinker (1989) derive one variant from the other, but these lexical rule approaches have a number of problems. This paper argues for a form-meaning correspondence model which distinguishes between two levels of verb meaning: that of a lexical head spray on the one hand and that of a phrasal constituent spray paint onto the wall or spray the wall with paint on the other. Locative alternation stems from the fact that a frame semantic scene encoded by spray can be construed in two alternate ways. This proposed model allows us to account for the data straightforwardly without suffering from the problems created by lexical rule approaches. This proposed analysis is fundamentally the same as Goldberg's (1995) in being a version of Construction Grammar approach. But unlike Goldberg's Correspondence Principle-based account, my analysis makes the most of the semantic compatibility between verbs and constructions, thereby giving a more straightforward account of locative alternation.

Web of Science

researchmap

researchmap

Language：English   Publisher：Tukuba English Linguistic Society  

CiNii Books

researchmap

Language：English   Publisher：SPRINGER  

Web of Science

researchmap

Language：Japanese   Publisher：研究社  

CiNii Books

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：MOUTON DE GRUYTER  

Pinker (1989) observes that particular manners of so-called manner-of-motion verbs like roll or bounce play no role in the mapping between syntax and semantics. This paper argues that while Pinker's claim seems to be valid for the sentences that he cites, it is rash to conclude that the particulars of the manner never count in form-meaning correspondences, in that the differences among manner-of-motion verbs as to syntactic expression of arguments (e.g. roll the doll into a blanket vs. ?bounce/?slide/?*skid the doll into a blanket, roll a blanket around the doll vs. *bounce/?slide/*skid a blanket around the doll) can be attributed to nothing other than the particulars of the manner.
The information that goes into the MANNER component of roll and bounce in Pinker's theory is actually image-schematic and plays a central role in establishing relatedness between senses of these verbs. The image-schematic properties of roll and bounce are related to syntactic frames via a form-meaning correspondence model that is crucially based on a two level verb meaning.
The proposed analysis is constructional in that verb meanings interact with form-meaning pairing mechanisms to yield particular senses. But it also attaches much importance to lexical contents of individual verbs and draws heavily on a usage-based view of grammar. In this sense, the present analysis is lexical constructional.

Web of Science

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate, following Jackendoff (1992), that parallelism across semantic fields is constrained by properties specific to each field, and that these field-specific properties play a crucial role in accounting for the non-parallels which particular lexical items exhibit across semantic fields. Three semantic fields (Temporal, Possessional, and Identificational) are shown to have different properties with respect to three parameters, dimensionality, directedness and continuousness. These differing, field-specific properties account for where parallelism obtains and where its does not. The examination of field-specific properties reveals a number of cross-field behavioral differences that have received little recognition, as shown by case studies of spread, between, over, and extent verbs. © 1999 The Editorial Board of Studia Linguistica.

DOI： 10.1111/1467-9582.00040

Scopus

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：BLACKWELL PUBL LTD  

Web of Science

researchmap

researchmap

Language：English  

CiNii Books

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

Language：English  

CiNii Books

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

This paper examines what it means for image-schematic structures to be preserved in metaphorical mappings (Lakoff (1990, 1992)). It is shown that only those parts of the image-schematic structure which are compatible with the inherent target domain structure are preserved, and that accordingly only parts of inferential structure are preserved. It is also shown that some putative cases of preservation should be analyzed differently, suggesting that what counts as the preservation of an image-schematic structure constitutes a rather delicate problem. © 1995, The English Linguistic Society of Japan. All rights reserved.

DOI： 10.9793/elsj1984.12.173

Scopus

researchmap

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

This paper analyzes passives of psych-verbs within the framework of Conceptual Semantics in the sense of Jackendoff (1983, 1987, 1990). It is shown that there are three types of passives derived from psych-verbs: both verbal and adjectival passives followed by a by phrase, contrary to Grimshaw's (1990) claim, and an adjectival passive with an idiosyncratic preposition like at or with. These three types of passives have different conceptual structures, with the prepositions being introduced through different adjunct rules. © 1993, The English Linguistic Society of Japan. All rights reserved.

DOI： 10.9793/elsj1984.10.160

Scopus

researchmap

Language：Japanese   Publisher：University of Tsukuba  

CiNii Books

researchmap

Language：Japanese   Publisher：University of Tsukuba  

CiNii Books

researchmap

Language：Japanese   Publisher：University of Tsukuba  

CiNii Books

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

In this article we analyze two psychological predicates, strike and impress, and posit their conceptual structures based on the theory of Conceptual Semantics advocated in Jackendoff 1983,1987. We will first examine three types of strike in terms of three semantic criteria (verb type, semantic field, and EVENT/STATE) on the assumption that psychological strike is fundamentally the same as spatial strike. We will extend our analysis to impress, which has two types. All these types require their own distinct conceptual structures. Finally, we will show the necessity of these distinctions by critically examining the raising analysis of Chomsky 1981. © 1988, International Heart Journal Association. All rights reserved.

DOI： 10.9793/elsj1984.5.111

Scopus

researchmap

Language：Japanese   Publisher：University of Tsukuba  

CiNii Books

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

Venue：大阪市立大学  

第42回大阪市立大英文学会

researchmap

Venue：筑波大学  

第35回筑波英語学会

researchmap

Venue：Osnabrueck University. Germany  

Eighth International Conference on Construction Grammar

researchmap

Venue：University of Texas, Austin, USA  

Fifth International Conference on the Linguistics of Contemporary English

researchmap

Venue：Hankuk University of Foreign Studies. South Korea  

Seventh International Conference on Construction Grammar

researchmap

Venue：専修大学生田キャンパス  

第84回日本英文学会シンポジウム 『結果表現をめぐって』

researchmap

Venue：Osnabrueck University. Germany  

Fourth International Conference on the Linguistics of Contemporary English

researchmap

Venue：大阪市立大学  

日本英文学会関西支部第５回大会シンポジウム 『構文文法の現在と未来』

researchmap

Venue：Charles University. Czech Republic  

Sixth International Conference on Construction Grammar

researchmap

Venue：Aoyama Gakuin University (Aoyama Campus)  

ELSJ Third International Spring Forum

researchmap

Venue：東京大学駒場キャンパス  

第81回日本英文学会シンポジウム 『項構造研究の最前線』

researchmap

Venue：筑波大学  

第26回日本英語学会シンポジウム 『レキシコンの構造化をめぐって：意味場的視点から』

researchmap

Venue：University of Texas, Austin, USA  

Fifth International Conference on Construction Grammar

researchmap

Venue：東京大学本郷キャンパス  

第24回日本英語学会シンポジウム 『metarepresentationをめぐって』

researchmap

Venue：University of Tokyo, Kobama campus  

Fourth International Conference on Construction Grammar

researchmap

Venue：University of Marseille. France  

Third International Conference on Construction Grammar

researchmap

Venue：University of Helsinki. Finland  

Second International Conference on Construction Grammar

researchmap

Venue：慶応大学日吉校舎  

Keio Construction Grammar Workshop

researchmap

Venue：University of California, Berkeley  

First International Conference on Construction Grammar

researchmap

Venue：甲南大学  

第18回日本英語学会シンポジウム（司会兼講師）『構文の意味と動詞の意味』

researchmap

Venue：京都大学  

第70回日本英文学会シンポジウム（講師）『認知言語学の展望と課題』

researchmap

Venue：筑波大学  

東西言語文化の類型論特別プロジェクト研究 第２部門第２回ワークショップ「言語・文化・レトリック」

researchmap

Venue：岐阜大学  

First Lund-Gifu Joint Conference on Linguistics and Languages

researchmap

Venue：京都大学  

第11回日本英語学会シンポジウム（講師）『認知意味論と普遍文法』

researchmap

Venue：岐阜大学  

researchmap