On The Cognitive Contrast Between Double Object Construction And Dative Construction In English

As an important and unique linguistic phenomenon,double object construction and dative construction have been widely studied by scholars both at home and abroad.Linguists from different schools have had profound and meaningful discussions on double object construction and dative construction from different theoretical perspectives.Among them,the relationship between double object construction and dative construction can be said to be diverse.Traditional grammar,structuralism linguistics,transformational generative grammar,cognitive linguistics,etc.have not yet formed a definite conclusion on this issue,so this paper still has some research value.Based on the above analysis,this paper attempts to discover the differences between double object construction and dative construction by applying the iconicity principle and the theory of construction grammar.The research questions in this paper are as follows:(1)What are the prototypical meanings of double object construction and dative construction in English?(2)What are the differences between double object construction and dative construction in English?(3)What is the relationship between double object construction and dative construction?Based on research questions,this paper draws the following conclusions:(1)Based on the prototype theory,the prototypical meaning of English ditransitive constructions is located in “transfer”,which involves two aspects,“result” and “process”.The former is used in the double object construction,and the latter is used in the dative construction.(2)Based on the prototypical meaning of the ditransitive constructions,this paper also finds differences between double object construction and dative construction from other perspectives,e.g.,the indirect object possesses the direct object in typical double object construction,whereas there is no such obvious restriction in dative construction.In terms of imparting knowledge,the double object construction is more successful than the dative construction.In the typical double object construction,the indirect object has the property of being a living entity,while in the dative construction there is no obvious restriction.In the typical dative construction,the direct object cannot be derived from the verbs with “transient or instantaneous” meaning,while in the dative construction there is no obvious restriction.The double object construction tends to use“instantaneous ballistic motion” verbs,while the dative construction tends to use“continuous adjoint motion” verbs.(3)Based on the cognitive differences between the double object construction and the dative construction,we have enough reasons to deny the existence of transformational relationship between them,using construction grammar theory and iconicity principle to argue for abandoning the concept of“transformation”.It is not necessary to determine which is base construction and which is derivative construction.The innovation of this paper is that:(1)This paper discovers new differences based on the original cognitive differences between double object construction and dative construction and cognitively explains these differences by combining the theory of construction grammar and the principle of iconicity.(2)This paper analyzes the problem with the help of Goldberg’s theory of construction grammar and helps promote the further development of the theory.(3)This paper makes use of the iconicity principle to explain the differences between double object construction and dative construction,thus providing a new analytical perspective for the subsequent study of ditransitive constructions.