Hans-Jörg Schmid, GCLC 6, Erlangen 1 October 2014 1. Introduction: my plans for today a model of language: the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model • a glimpse of how key aspects of the EC-model can be tested • Entrenchment and conventionalization. Testing some predictions of the model against Inspired by the work of historical data Peter Auer Daphné Kerremans Alice Blumenthal-Dramé Ron Langacker Joan Bybee Annette Mantlik Bill Croft John Searle Hans-Jörg Schmid, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München Nick Ellis John Sinclair Chuck Fillmore Anatol Stefanowitsch Dirk Geeraerts Michael Tomasello Adele Goldberg Elizabeth Traugott Franziska Günther Alison Wray Thomas Herbst Martin Hilpert Paul Hopper 1 2 2. Some (more or less) indisputable facts about language 3. Towards a model which tries to do justice to these facts Linguistic knowledge is hosted in language users’ minds ... hosted in language users’ minds cognitive • • • Linguistic knowledge is represented in language users’ brains ... represented in language users’ brains neurocognitive • • • Linguistic knowledge is shared by the members of a speech community ... shared by members of speech community sociocognitive • • • No two members of a speech community have identical linguistic knowledge No two members ... have identical knowledge variational • • • Individual and shared linguistic knowledge are both stable and dynamic ... knowledge ... are both stable and dynamic adaptive • • • Language has, among others, a communicative function ... a communicative function pragmatic • • • The “structure of language” emerges from use in the service of the ... emerges from use emergentist • • • communicative function under the influence of social, cognitive and pragmatic ... determined by ... factors factors usage-based • • Stability and change of language structure are determined by social, cognitive • and pragmatic factors parsimonious, elegant, testable ... • 3 4 1
Hans-Jörg Schmid, GCLC 6, Erlangen 1 October 2014 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) Entrenchment in associative networks (Langacker 2008: 226, Traugott and Trousdale 2013: 50ff, Schmid communication 2014 and Ms.) usage linguistic knowledge is available to individuals in the form of networks of • associations showing different and constantly changing degrees and types pragmatic forces cognitive forces of entrenchment . (For descriptive purposes, these associative networks can be understood in terms of constructions on different levels of schematicity.) cognitive sociopragmatic processes processes form form form form form form ENTRENCHMENT CONVENTIONALIZATION meaning meaning meaning meaning meaning meaning function function function function function function emotive- situation social forces affective forces symbolic association form form form form pragmatic association meaning meaning meaning meaning paradigmatic association function function function function syntagmatic association 5 6 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) Example: Example: What can I do for you? What can I do for you? F: Why Vaux/mod NP Vfull M/F: ‘asking for reason’ F: What Vaux/mod NP Vfull F: What Vaux/mod NP Vfull F: Who Vaux/mod NP Vfull wh-question construction M/F: ‘asking about possible event’ M/F: ‘asking for person’ M/F: ‘asking about possible event’ symbolic association pragmatic association paradigmatic association syntagmatic association 7 8 2
Hans-Jörg Schmid, GCLC 6, Erlangen 1 October 2014 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) Example: Example: What can I do for you? What can I do for you? F: Why Vaux/mod NP Vfull F: Why Vaux/mod NP Vfull M/F: ‘asking for reason’ M/F: ‘asking for reason’ F: What Vaux/mod NP Vfull F: Who Vaux/mod NP Vfull F: What Vaux/mod NP Vfull F: Who Vaux/mod NP Vfull M/F: ‘asking about possible event’ M/F: ‘asking for person’ M/F: ‘asking about possible event’ M/F: ‘asking for person’ F: What F: can F: I F: do F: for F: you F: What F: can F: I F: do F: for F: you M/F: ‘wh-question’ M/F: ‘permission’M/F: ‘S’ M/F: ‘wh-question’ M/F: ‘permission’M/F: ‘S’ M/F: ‘action’ M/F: ‘benef.’ M/F: ‘H.’ M/F: ‘action’ M/F: ‘benef.’ M/F: ‘H.’ F: What can I do M/F: ‘offer’ S symbolic association symbolic association pragmatic association pragmatic association paradigmatic association paradigmatic association syntagmatic association syntagmatic association 9 10 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) Example: Conventionalization What can I do for you? F: Why Vaux/mod NP Vfull linguistic knowledge comes to be shared by the individuals in a speech • community by means of conventionalization but differs interindividually in M/F: ‘asking for reason’ terms of degrees and types of entrenchment (Booij 2010; 93, Boye and Harder 2012: 8) F: What Vaux/mod NP Vfull F: Who Vaux/mod NP Vfull e.g. What can I do for you today? • M/F: ‘asking about possible event’ M/F: ‘asking for person’ Speaker 1 Speaker 2 Speaker 3 F: What F: can F: I F: do F: for F: you F: wh-interrogative F F F M/F: ‘wh-question’ M/F: ‘permission’M/F: ‘S’ M/F: ‘action’ M/F: ‘benef.’ M/F: ‘H.’ M/F M/F M/F M/F:‘wh-question’ F: What can I do F: what can I V F F F M/F: ‘offer’ M/F M/F: ‘offer’ S M/F M/F S symbolic association F: What can I do for you? pragmatic association F: what can I do for you paradigmatic association F F F M/F: ‘please tell me your request’ syntagmatic association M/F: ‘please tell me your request’ M/F M/F M/F S 11 S 12 3
Hans-Jörg Schmid, GCLC 6, Erlangen 1 October 2014 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) Entrenchment processes Conventionalization processes Entrenchment processes Conventionalization processes take place in the mind take place in social situations association co-adaptation • • • • operate over associations operate over utterances routinization and automization diffusion • • • • affect the strength of associations affect the behaviour of speakers schematization normation • • • • affect the organisation of the cogni- affect the organisation of “language” • • tive network in society meet via pragmatic associations 13 14 4. A blueprint of the Entrenchment and Conventionalization Model (EC-Model) 5. How does entrenchment work? society mind Definition entrenchment Definition conventionalization sensory motor control cognitive system system system continuous routinization and re- continuous mutual coordination and provides percept/ causes organization of all types of associations, matching of communicative knowledge usage event processing exposure depending on exposure to and frequency and practices, subject to the exigencies leaves of identical or similar processing events, of the entrenchment processes taking entrenchment subject to the exigencies of the social place in individual minds memory trace repetition causes environment provides routinization causes reconfiguration strengthening of network of association increases increases likelihood of ease of production activation usage event brings about 15 16 4
Recommend
More recommend
