A Study Of English Delextcalized Verb Constructions

Based on Culicover and Jackendoff’s Simpler Syntax and cognitive linguistics,especially Goldberg’s Construction Grammar, the dissertation aims to make thoroughresearches on idiomatic English delexicalized verb constructions (DVC) like give a sigh，give someone a kick, have a swim, take a walk etc. The research is carried out by acombination of deduction and induction, together with description and explanation. Themain content and points are as follows:Ⅰ. The syntactic and semantic analysis of give+Vn、have+Vn、take+VnHaving applied experimental method, the dissertation has studied DVCs withdelexicalized verbs of high frequency: give，have and take. We come to the conclusionbelow. To ensure the grammaticality and acceptability of the most simplex DVC, the Vn ofmost simplex DVCs with give must possess some semantic features. The features of Vn formonotransitive DVC with give are:[+dynamic,+atelic,+/-controllable,+repeatable]. Thefeatures of Vn for ditransitive DVC with give are:[+dynamic,+atelic,+controllable,+repeatable]. Besides, the thesis has explored the factors which may exert influence uponthe autonomy of the most simplex DVC with have and take. Among the factors thatinfluence have+Vn are as follows: dynamic/stative, stylistic features and regional factor.The factors affecting take+Vn are: dynamic/stative, regional factor. In general, EnglishDVC may be stretched rightwards by the addition of words, phrases and non-finite clauses.DVC does not permit passivization by moving deverbal nouns to the initial position of asentence. As for ditransitive give+Vn, the normal order is Dv+Obj+Vn. The conclusionsupports the views of Cattell (1984) and Dixon (1991,2005).Ⅱ. The mechanism of English DVC’s formation and reasons for the use of DVCFrom the viewpoint of cognitive linguistics, the formation of DVC is related todecategorization, IM-Links and coercion. Decategorization partially alters the grammaticalproperties of verbs, IM-Links causes abstract concept to become relatively concrete,henceforce verbal abstract nouns are eligible to act as objects. To some degree coercionensures the semantic acceptability of DVC. The reasons for the use of DVC are associated with three factors, namely, the principle of end weight, modifiers and the referentiality ofwords. Due to the principle of end weight, speakers/writers are not inclined to produceheavy-headed sentences by avoiding using single intransitive verbs as predicates.Therefore, the DVC becomes their best choice. Indefinite articles and other modifiers maygive rise to the shades of difference in meaning between DVC and SVC. In addition, theNPs with heads ‘Vn’ possess certain referentiality facilitate speakers/writers to producelong complicated structures.Ⅲ. The comparison between DVC and COCThe thesis has also made a comparison between DVC and COC from the viewpointsof delexicalization, syntactic features and information focus, etc. The common property ofDVC and COC can be represented by the same information structure, i.e. both of themserve as predicates and express new information. Both are characteristic of idiomaticity tosome extent. The different properties of the two constructions are as follows: the predicateverbs in DVC are delexicalized, but verbs in COC are not. Besides, the difference may bedemonstrated by the position of information focus in DVC and COC.Finally, the thesis points out the deficiency in the current research and discusses theprospect in future research relative to the subject.