A cognitive analysis of English cognate objects

In this paper, from the perspective of Cognitive Grammar, we consider the question of what kind of verbs can take cognate objects (COs) and what kind of verbs cannot. We investigate the syntactic properties of COs, such as the ability to take modifiers, the passivizability of cognate object constructions (COCs), and the it-pronominalization of COs. It is our contention that a detailed classification of verbs that occur in COCs is required in order to capture the relation between the syntactic properties and the modification of COs. While classifying verbs, we focus on three conceptual factors: the force of energy of the subject, a change of state of the subject, and the objectivity of the cognate noun. The study reveals that these three parameters enable us to capture the difference in the interpretation of COs in relation to modification and syntactic tests.

Construction Grammar For Kids

Most accounts of child language acquisition use as analytic tools adult-like syntactic categories and schemas (formal grammars) with little concern for whether they are psychologically real for young children. Recent research has demonstrated, however, that children do not operate initially with such abstract linguistic entities, but instead operate on the basis of concrete, item-based constructions. Children construct more abstract linguistic constructions only gradually – on the basis of linguistic experience in which frequency plays a key role – and they constrain these constructions to their appropriate ranges of use only gradually as well – again on the basis of linguistic experience in which frequency plays a key role. The best account of first language acquisition is provided by a construction-based, usage-based model in which children process the language they experience in discourse interactions with other persons, relying explicitly and exclusively on social and cognitive skills that children of this age are known to possess.

Manner of Obtainment as a relative in a family of resultative constructions

The present paper examines the syntactic and semantic properties of a group of constructions which carry an idiomatic interpretation of obtainment. In Polish and German, the constructions under consideration consist of a verb with a directional particle followed by an object NP, as exemplified in (1a)-(1b). (1a) Adam wynurkował starego buta. (Polish) Adam wy- snorkeled old shoe. ‘Adam found an old shoe while snorkeling.’ (1b) Michael erboxte sich den Titel. (German) Michael er- boxed REFL the title. ‘Michael boxed his way to the (championship) title.’ Sentences containing these constructions will be assumed to have the same basic interpretation “Subject obtains/produces Object by V-ing”. A constructional analysis of the constructions will be proposed, as they pose licensing problems and their interpretation cannot be accounted for in terms of the individual conceptual structures of the lexical items composing the sentence. Unlike most accounts of verb particle constructions based on implicit or explicit assumptions of straightforward semantic composition, the present study proposes an analysis under which the semantic structure of verb particle combinations is not a compositional function of the verb and the particle/prefix alone. It is argued that the construction comes with its own subcategorization frame (separate from that carried by the verb) which is motivated by the meaning of the construction and its corresponding constructional subevent. Additionally, a crosslinguistic correlation will be shown to hold between a language’s ability to express event conflation (Talmy 1985, 2000) and the occurrence of some form of the construction in that language. This will be taken as an indication of the resultative nature of those types of directional phrases which involve the semantic interpretation of boundary crossing.

Information as Property

Information is widely regarded as one of the key concepts of modern society. The production, distribution and use of information are some of the key aspects of modern economies. Driven by technological progress information has become a good in its own right. This established an information economy and challenged the law to provide an apt framework suitable to promote the production of information, enable its distribution and efficient allocation, and deal with the risks inherent in information technology. Property rights are a major component of such a framework. However, information as an object of property rights is not limited to intellectual property but may also occur as personality aspects or even tangible property. Accordingly, information as property can be found in the area of intellectual property, personality protection and other property rights. This essay attempts to categorize three different types of information that can be understood as a good in the economic sense and an object in the legal sense: semantic information, syntactic information and structural information. It shows how legal ownership of such information is established by different subjective rights. In addition the widespread debate regarding the justification of intellectual property rights is demonstrated from the wider perspective of informational property in general. Finally, in light of current debates, this essay explores whether “data producers” shall have a new kind of property right in data.