Home Multimodal constructs – multimodal constructions? The role of constructions in the working memory
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Multimodal constructs – multimodal constructions? The role of constructions in the working memory

  • Thomas Hoffmann EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: June 29, 2017

Abstract

Language is a symbolic system, whose basic units are arbitrary and conventionalized pairings of form and meaning. In fact, in light of substantive empirical evidence, Construction Grammar approaches advocate the view that not only words but all levels of grammatical description – from morphemes, words, and idioms to abstract phrasal patterns as well as larger discourse patterns – comprise form-meaning pairings, which are collectively referred to as constructions. In this paper, I will discuss the status of multimodal usage-events (multimodal constructs) for the potential entrenchment of multimodal constructions and their implications for human cognition in general. As I will argue, constructionist approaches need to pay more attention to the role of the working memory in assembling and interpreting constructions. Drawing on verbal as well as gesture constructions, I will show that it is essential to distinguish entrenched constructions that are stored in the long-term memory from form-meaning pairings that are assembled in the working memory (online constructions). Once this distinction is made, the precise role of multimodal constructs and the nature of multimodal constructions can finally be disentangled.

References

Andrén, Mats. 2010. Children’s gestures from 18 to 30 months. PhD thesis. Lund University, Centre for Languages and Literature.Search in Google Scholar

Armstrong, Nancy & Melissa Wagner. 2003. Field guide to gestures – how to identify and interpret virtually every gesture known to man. Philadelphia, PA: Quirk Books.Search in Google Scholar

Auer, Peter & Stefan Pfänder. 2011. Constructions: Emergent or emerging? In P. Auer & S. Pfänder (eds.), Constructions: Emerging and emergent, 1–21. Berlin: de Gruyter. (= Linguae et Litterae Bd. 6).10.1515/9783110229080Search in Google Scholar

Bartlett, Frederic Charles. 1932. Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Bergen, Benjamin K. & Nancy Chang. 2013. Embodied construction grammar. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds.), 168–190.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0010Search in Google Scholar

Boas, Hans C. 2003. A constructional approach to resultatives. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Boas, Hans C. 2005. Determining the productivity of resultative constructions: A reply to Goldberg and Jackendoff. Language 81(2). 448–464.10.1353/lan.2005.0050Search in Google Scholar

Boas, Hans C., Ivan A. Sag (eds.). 2012. Sign-based construction grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Brandt, Per Aage & Jakob Simonsen. 2007. Editorial preface. Cognitive Semiotics 1. 5–6.10.1515/cogsem.2007.1.fall2007.5Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L. 2006. From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language 82. 711–733.10.1353/lan.2006.0186Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511750526Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L. 2013. Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of constructions. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds.), 49–69.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0004Search in Google Scholar

Cienki, Alan. 2015. Spoken language usage events. Language and Cognition 7. 499–514.10.1017/langcog.2015.20Search in Google Scholar

Cowan, Nelson. 2008. What are the differences between long-term, short-term, and working memory? Progress in Brain Research 169. 323–333.10.1016/S0079-6123(07)00020-9Search in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2013. Radical construction grammar. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds.), 211–232.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0012Search in Google Scholar

Croft, William & Alan D. Cruse. 2004. Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511803864Search in Google Scholar

Culicover, Peter W. & Ray Jackendoff. 1999. The view from the periphery: The English comparative correlative. Linguistic Inquiry 30. 543–71.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199271092.003.0014Search in Google Scholar

de Saussure, Ferdinand. 2006 [1916]. Course in general linguistics, Ed. Charles Bally & Albert Sechehaye. Trans. Roy Harris. La Salle, IL: Open Court.Search in Google Scholar

Deacon, Terrence. 1997. The symbolic species: The co-evolution of language and the human brain. London: Penguin.Search in Google Scholar

Diamond, Adele. 2013. Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology 64. 135–168.10.1016/B978-0-444-64150-2.00020-4Search in Google Scholar

Ekman, Paul & Wallace V. Friesen. 1969. The repertoire of nonverbal behaviour: Categories, origins, usage, and coding. Semiotica 1. 49–98.10.1515/semi.1969.1.1.49Search in Google Scholar

Elforn, David. 1941. Gesture and environment. New York: King’s Crown Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 2013. Construction grammar and second language acquisition. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds.), 365–378.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0020Search in Google Scholar

Fabbri-Destro, Maddalena, Pietro Avanzini, Elisa De Stefani, Alessandro Innocenti, Cristina Campi & Maurizio Gentilucci. 2015. Interaction between words and symbolic gestures as revealed by N400. Brain Topography 28(4). 591–605.10.1007/s10548-014-0392-4Search in Google Scholar

Fillmore, Charles J. 1985. Syntactic intrusions and the notion of grammatical construction. Berkeley Linguistic Society 11. 73–86.10.3765/bls.v11i0.1913Search in Google Scholar

Fillmore, Charles J. 1988. The mechanisms of ‘construction grammar’. Berkeley Linguistic Society 14. 35–55.10.3765/bls.v14i0.1794Search in Google Scholar

Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay & Mary C. O’Connor. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 64(3). 501–38.10.2307/414531Search in Google Scholar

Steen, Francis & Mark Turner. 2013. Multimodal construction grammar. In M. Borkent, B. Dancygier & J. Hinnell (eds.), Language and the creative mind, 255–274. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Franck, Dorothea. 1985. Sentences in conversational turns: A case of syntactic ‘double bind’. In M. Dascal (ed.), Dialogue. An Interdisciplinary Approach, 233–245. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbcs.1.23fraSearch in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 2003. Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(5). 219–224.10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00080-9Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268511.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 2013. Constructionist approaches. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds.), 15–31.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0002Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. & Ray Jackendoff. 2004. The English resultative as a family of constructions. Language 80. 532–568.10.1353/lan.2004.0129Search in Google Scholar

Gries, Stefan Th. 2013. Data in construction grammar. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds.), 99–100.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0006Search in Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Thomas. 2011. Preposition placement in English: A usage-based approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511933868Search in Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Thomas. 2013. Abstract phrasal and clausal constructions. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds.), 307–328.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0017Search in Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Thomas. 2014. Comparing English comparative correlatives. Post-Doc thesis, Osnabrück University.Search in Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Thomas & Graeme Trousdale (eds.). 2013. The Oxford handbook of construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Hopper, Paul. 2011. Emergent grammar and temporality in interactional linguistics. In P. Auer & S. Pfänder (eds.), Constructions: Emerging and emergent (De Gruyter linguae & litterae/Publications of the School of Language and Literature Freiburg Institute for Advanced Studies 6), 22–44. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110229080.22Search in Google Scholar

Imo, Wolfgang. 2015. Interactional construction grammar. Linguistics Vanguard 2015. 1(1). 69–77.10.1515/lingvan-2015-0008Search in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray. 2002. Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray. 2013. Constructions in the parallel architecture. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds.), 70–92.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0005Search in Google Scholar

Jurafsky, Daniel. 1992. An on-line computational model of human sentence interpretation. In American Association for Artificial Intelligence (eds.), Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-92). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 302–308.Search in Google Scholar

Kendon, Adam. 1982. The study of gesture: Some remarks in its history. Recherches Sémiotiques/Semiotic Inquiry 2. 45–62.10.5840/cpsem198148Search in Google Scholar

Kendon, Adam. 2004. Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511807572Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 2005. Construction grammars: Cognitive, radical, and less so. In F. Ruiz De Mendoza & S. Peña Cervel (eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction, 101–159. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197716.1.101Search in Google Scholar

McNeill, David. 1992. Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

McNeill, David. 2000. Introduction. In D. McNeill (ed.), Language and gesture, 141–161. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511620850.010Search in Google Scholar

McNeill, David. 2005. Gesture and thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

McNeill, David. 2016. Why we gesture: The surprising role of hand movements in communication. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781316480526Search in Google Scholar

Mittelberg, Irene. 2013. The exbodied mind: Cognitive-semiotic principles as motivating forces in gesture. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill & S. Teßendorf (eds.), Body – language – communication (HSK 38.1), 755–784. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110261318.755Search in Google Scholar

Müller, Cornelia. 1998. Redebegleitende Gesten: Kulturgeschichte – Theorie – Sprachvergleich. Berlin: Berlin Verlag Arno Spitz.Search in Google Scholar

Pagán Cánovas, Cristóbal & Mihailo Antovic. 2016. Formulaic creativity: Oral poetics and cognitive grammar. Language and Communication 47. 66–74.10.1016/j.langcom.2015.12.001Search in Google Scholar

Schoonjans, Steven. 2014. Modalpartikeln als multimodale Konstruktionen. Eine korpusbasierte Kookkurrenzanalyse von Modalpartikeln und Gestik im Deutschen. Unpublished dissertation. University of Leuven.Search in Google Scholar

Schoonjans, Steven, Geert Brône & Kurt Feyaerts. 2015. Multimodalität in der Konstruktionsgrammatik: Eine kritische Betrachtung illustriert anhand einer Gestikanalyse der Partikel einfach. In Jörg Bücker, Wolfgang Imo & Susanne Günthner (eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik V, 291–308. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Search in Google Scholar

Steels, Luc. 2013. Fluid construction grammar. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds.), 152–167.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0009Search in Google Scholar

Stefanowitsch, Anatol. 2013. Collostructional analysis. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (eds.), 290–306.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0016Search in Google Scholar

Tomasello, Michael. 1999. The cultural origins of human cognition: An essay. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674044371Search in Google Scholar

van Trijp, Remi. 2015. Towards bidirectional processing models of sign language: A constructional approach in fluid construction grammar. In: G. Airenti, B. G. Bara & G. Sandini (eds.), Proceedings of the EuroAsianPacific Joint Conference on Cognitive Science. Turin: University of Torino, 668–673.Search in Google Scholar

Zima, E. in press. Multimodal constructional resemblance. The case of English circular motion constructions. In F. J. Ruiz De Mendoza Ibáñez, A. Luzondo & P. Pérez-Sobrino (eds.), Constructing families of constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Zima, Elisabeth. 2014. Gibt es multimodale Konstruktionen? Eine Studie zu [V(motion) in circles] und [all the way from X PREP Y]. Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 15. 1–48.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2016-08-01
Accepted: 2016-09-27
Published Online: 2017-06-29

© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 11.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0042/html
Scroll to top button