Abstract
In this paper we explore from a synchronic perspective the GET construction of Modern Irish and the GET construction in the contact language Irish English. These productive GET constructions have two core senses (‘HAVE’ and ‘BECOME’). There are no morphosyntactic indicators to identify either sense yet a language user of Irish or Irish English will have no difficulty unpacking the correct meaning. There is a constructional indicator. One sense is that of a simple recipient construction (non-passive) whereas the other is more passive-like in that the subject=undergoer of the construction undergoes a change of state. A result state is an outcome of the verbal action but it is not always expressed with a resultative adjective. The state is elaborated by the second argument of the verb. In functional models of grammar we expect the verb to project an argument structure and reflect an associated semantics based on the verb's lexical entry but we provide instances where a constructional perspective seems best to explain the behavior of this particular GET verb and its meaning in a clausal construction. We claim that the GET construction of Irish English and the GET construction of Modern Irish are related within a synchronic perspective, reflecting a unique cognitive perspective on bilingual lexicon architecture and the role of constructions. We provide an account of both language constructions and argue that a characterization grounded within functional account (Van Valin 2005) with a robust lexical constructional perspective (Goldberg 1995; Michaelis 2006; Van Valin 2005; Nolan 2011c), that mediates the relationship between lexicon and construction, best explains the relationship between these constructions across the two languages.
©[2012] by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Masthead
- The art of getting: GET verbs in European languages from a synchronic and diachronic point of view: Introduction
- Noncanonical passives revisited: Parameters of nonactive Voice
- The GET constructions of Modern Irish and Irish English: GET-passive and GET-recipient variations
- What you give is what you GET? On reanalysis, semantic extension and functional motivation with the German bekommen-passive construction
- The verb krijgen ‘to get’ as an undative verb
- The BECOME=CAUSE hypothesis and the polysemy of get
- Norwegian få ‘get’: A survey of its uses in present-day Riksmål/Bokmål
- Semantic extension and language contact: The case of Irish faigh ‘get’
- Grammaticalization of Estonian saama ‘to get’
- Language-specific meanings in contrast: A corpus-based contrastive study of Swedish få ‘get’
Articles in the same Issue
- Masthead
- The art of getting: GET verbs in European languages from a synchronic and diachronic point of view: Introduction
- Noncanonical passives revisited: Parameters of nonactive Voice
- The GET constructions of Modern Irish and Irish English: GET-passive and GET-recipient variations
- What you give is what you GET? On reanalysis, semantic extension and functional motivation with the German bekommen-passive construction
- The verb krijgen ‘to get’ as an undative verb
- The BECOME=CAUSE hypothesis and the polysemy of get
- Norwegian få ‘get’: A survey of its uses in present-day Riksmål/Bokmål
- Semantic extension and language contact: The case of Irish faigh ‘get’
- Grammaticalization of Estonian saama ‘to get’
- Language-specific meanings in contrast: A corpus-based contrastive study of Swedish få ‘get’