Home Constructionalization areas
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Constructionalization areas

The case of negation in Manchu
  • Andreas Hölzl
View more publications by John Benjamins Publishing Company

Abstract

Heine & Kuteva (2005) proposed the concept of a grammaticalization area. Given the recent appearance of the concept of constructionalization, (Traugott & Trousdale, 2013) it seems reasonable to ask whether there are constructionalization areas as well. The paper exemplifies this concept with the help of the Tungusic language Manchu and some surrounding languages. Manchu does not have the common Tungusic negative verb e‑, but, like Mongolian, employs the negative existential akū instead (e.g., Ikegami, 1999 [1979]). Manchu and Mongolian share not only this development, but also an underlying interlingual constructional network (Höder, 2012). The paper proposes the name areal construction grammar as a label for those aspects of construction grammar that are concerned with the study of language contact.

Abstract

Heine & Kuteva (2005) proposed the concept of a grammaticalization area. Given the recent appearance of the concept of constructionalization, (Traugott & Trousdale, 2013) it seems reasonable to ask whether there are constructionalization areas as well. The paper exemplifies this concept with the help of the Tungusic language Manchu and some surrounding languages. Manchu does not have the common Tungusic negative verb e‑, but, like Mongolian, employs the negative existential akū instead (e.g., Ikegami, 1999 [1979]). Manchu and Mongolian share not only this development, but also an underlying interlingual constructional network (Höder, 2012). The paper proposes the name areal construction grammar as a label for those aspects of construction grammar that are concerned with the study of language contact.

Downloaded on 18.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1075/cal.21.c9/pdf
Scroll to top button