2012 7 July 2012

35 4 Journal of Foreign Languages Vol35 No4

1004 5139 2012 04 0061 09 H030 A

230039

Collostructional Analysis An Integration

of Cognitive Linguistics and Corpus Linguistics

HU JianZHANG Jiayi
School of Foreign StudiesAnhui UniversityHefei 230039China

Abstract The article presents a systematical introduction to Collostructional Analysiscontinuously developed by

Stefanowitsch Gries since 2003and its application in the researches on constructional meaning and other related
fields Collostructional Analysis is composed of Collexeme Analysis Multiple Distinctive Collexeme Analysis and
Covarying Collexeme Analysis which adopts the quantitative method to reveal the semantic clustering of the
collexemes in one or more slots of constructionsthus realizing the deep excavation of constructional meanings of
various constructions
Key words collostructional analysis background methods applications constructional meaning

1


Stefanowitsch Gries17
209 243 2003


Collostructional Analysis

61
 co-occurrence
20 71 74
into






2 KWIC Keywords in context

Goldberg
9
68
Goldberg8
Berry-Rogghe 1
1974 z-score
attraction strenghth




Goldberg
Church et al 3 t-score
Dunning4 Chi-square

1

Pat faxed Bill the Jetter 2
fax p

semantically compatible
Pat hit Chris the ball hit
hit Stefan Th Gries Anatol
Stefanowitsch17 209 243
hit
Collostructional Analysis
Goldberg
strength of attraction

62
3 N waiting to happen a
2003 accident X N
Stefanowitsch Gries waiting to happen M
W N
waiting to happen wait
Collexeme Analysis Stefanowitsch Gries BNC
Multiple Distinctive Collexeme
Analysis W
Covarying Collexeme Analysis bcd
a
3 1 R Fisher
Stefanowitsch Gries17 209 243 accident N waiting to
KWIC happen
BNC N 1 accident [N%waiting%to%happen]
waiting to happenKWIC waiting to
accident accident
happen [N waiting
collocates a c a+c=M
to happen]
raw frequency [N waiting
b d b+d=N
to happen]
a+b=X c+d=Y W=X+Y=M+N
The accident is waiting to happen Stefanowitsch Gries

N waiting to
happen 2
accidentdisaster
Stefanowitsch Gries earthquakeinvasion

BNC N waiting to happen
N 2 [N%waiting%to%happen][17219]
collexeme Fisher ( )
accident (14) 2.12E-34
p Fisher disaster (12) 1.36E-33
welkom (1) 4.46E-05
p earthquake (1) 2.46E-03
z-scoret-scoreChi-square invasion (1) 7.10E-03
N waiting to happenN recovery (1) 1.32E-02
accident revolution (1) 1.68E-02
accident N waiting to happen 3 2
collostruction strength Gries Stefanowitsch11
p abcd 1
BNC accident grammatical alternation

63
 dative alteration

ditransitive construction to- Fisher p p =
dative construction 1 84E-120
alternating pair p give
1
1 a John sent Mary the book
b John sent the book to Mary give
expected frequency
3 213 = 607 * 1035 /
2954 3 give


Goldberg9 69 give give p
Principle of No Synonymy
Gries Stefanowitsch

p

4
4 [11:106]



give (461:146) 1.84E-120 bring (7:82) 1.47E-09
Fisher tell (128:2) 8.77E-58 play (1:37) 1.46E-06
p show (49:15) 8.32E-12 take (12:63) 0.0002
give offer (43:15) 9.95E-10 pass (2:29) 0.0002
give cost (20:1) 9.71E-09 make (3:23) 0.0068
3 teach (15:1) 1.49E-06 sell (1:14) 0.0139
3% give ICE-GB[11:102]

give 4 give
461%(213) 574 (822) 1 035 tellshowoffer
1 773
146%(394) 1 919
(1 525) giveoffer
607 2 347 2 954 tellshowteach
3
Gries Stefanowitsch
bringtakepass
ICE-GB

64
 play 5 fool-think into (BNC%1.0)[18:10]
Michalichenko plays the ball forward to the


halfway line


think



fool 46%(7) 31%(70) 77
3 3

Stefanowitsch Gries 12 18
1 408
101%(140) 1 509
(1, 369)

147 1 439 1 586

into into-
causative construction 5

into 1586fool-think
2 a We must not fool ourselves into 46fool think
thinking there is no longer any problem 31 foolthink 101
b He tricked me into employing him fool think 1408 1586
c His aim was to force the Government into 46 + 31 + 101
holding a plebiscite Fisher p
2 into 8 70E 31Stefanowitsch Gries
cause-predicate fool trick p
force result-predicate think log10 Plog10 = 30 06
employhold into fool-think
fool-think
p fool-think
into
fool-think into
fool-think into
7 = 147 * 77 /
1586 5 fool-think
46 7 p
into fool-think
semantic coherence fool-think
p
Stefanowitsch Gries18 fool-think
BNC 1 0 into fool-think
Stefanowitsch Gries
fool-think into
p into
6

65
 6 into 18 13 6


p p p 0 5
fool into thinking 30 06 force into thinking 2 544 p 1 30103
6 into
coerce into +
mislead into thinking 12 755 1 421
thinking fool into thinking
mislead into thinking mislead into believing
mislead into believing 8 355 trick into making 0 945
deceive into thinkingdelude into believing
deceive into thinking 5 651 push into thinking 0 794 seduce into misbehaving torture into
trick into parting 5 248 trick into accepting 0 717 revealing force into hiding blackmail into
marrying drive into hiding
encourage into
4 652 bully into believing 0 716 +
farming
force into
dragoon into serving 4 652 talk into believing 0 671 thinking coerce into thinking

aggravate into 2
4 28 trick into thinking 0 634
producing
panick into seizing 4 078 lead into believing 0 561 1
into
seduce into
3 966 talk into making 0 536
misbehaving

delude into believing 3 952 force into giving 0 497

torture into revealing 3 75 tempt into thinking 0 42 1
frighten into 2
force into hiding 3 676 0 363 X V1 Y
thinking
into V2 V1 V2
shame into into
shock into facing 3 546 0 335
thinking

stimulate into
3 48 provoke into giving 0 295
developing Gries Stefanowitsch13 73 76

blackmail into
3 413 lead into thinking 0 28
marrying

provoke into Fisher
drive into hiding 3 372 0 269 p p
accepting

66



/




GilesHampe Schonefeld5
ICE-GB V + NPobj
+ as + X

regard p
166 476 seerecognizeconsiderthink of
4 view describe
definedepict interpretconstrue
take accept
V +
NPobj + as + X



V + NPobj + as + X
Wulff
19 BNC
go and V go-V
go and V
telic verbs
go and fetchgo and buygo and
pick go-V
go and seego and workgo and zoomgo and
look atelic verbs
behave
Gilquin6 7
hypergeometric distribution Fisher BNC
t-scoresz-scores
causegetmakehave 10

10
X

67
GET Y V to-inf
talksay
agreecomply X HAVE Y V-inf
non-action verbs
knowbelieveimagineconsider 2008 8

Gries Wulff14 187 190 64
Alvin Cheng-Hsien Chen2



Academia Sinica Balanced Corpus of Mandarin
Chinese Mandarin Possessive
Construction NP1 NP2 5
Stefanowitsch Gries 2003

body-part

ownership
participant-event

Stefanowitsch16 1 Berry-RoggheG L M Automatic identification
of phrasal verbs A J L Mitchell Computers
Stefanowitsch16 165 192 in the Humanities C Edinburgh Edinburgh

grasp understand University Press

1974 16 26
2 ChenAlvin Cheng-Hsien Covarying Collexemes
in the center of in the heart of
and Constructional Meaning A Case Study of
p
Mandarin Possessive Construction A Book of

Synopses LanguageCommunication Cogni-

Hilpert
tion C Brighton University of Brighton
15 243 257
2008 8
3 ChurchK WGaleWHanksP D
Hindle Using statistics in lexical analysis A
Gries ICE-GB ZernikU Lexical Acquisition Exploiting On-
syntactic priming line Resources to Build up a Lexicon C Hills-
10 365 399 daleNJ Lawrence Erlbaum1991 115 164
Gries 4 DunningT Accurate methods for the statistics of

68
 surprise and coincidenceJ Computational Lin-
199319 1 61 74
guistics
5 GilesS T HampeB D Schonefeld Con-
verging evidence Bringing together experimental
and corpus data on the association of verbs and
constructionsJ Cognitive Linguistics2005
16 4 635 676
6 GilquinG The Verb Slot in Causative Construc-
tions Finding the Best Fit OL Constructions
2006 2010 1 19 http / / www constructions-
online de / articles / specvol1 /674
7 GilquinG CorpusCognition and Causative
ConstructionsM Amsterdam John Benjamins
Publishing Company2010
8 Goldberg A Constructions A Construction
Grammar Approach to Argument StructureM
Chicago The University of Chicago Press
1995
9 GoldbergA Construction Grammar A K
Brown J Miller Concise Encyclopedia of Syn-
tactic TheoriesC Oxford Elsevier1996 68
71
10 GriesS T Syntactic priming A corpus-based
approach J Journal of Psycholinguistic Re-
34 4 365 99
search2005
11 GriesS T A Stefanowitsch Extending collo- 20 into-
structional analysis A corpus-based perspective
onalternationsJ International Journal of
Corpus Linguistics20049 1 97 129
12GriesS T A Stefanowitsch Covarying collex-
emes in the into-causativeA AchardM S
Kemmer LanguageCultureand Mind C
2004 225 236
Stanford CA CSLI
13 GriesStefan Th A Stefanowitsch Cluster a-
nalysis and the identification of collexeme classes
A NewmanJohn Sally Rice Empirical
and Experimental Methods in Cognitive / functional
ResearchM StanfordCA CSLI2010 73
90
14 GriesStefan Th S Wulff Do foreign lan-
guage learners also have constructions Evidence
from primingsortingand corporaJ Annual
2005 3 182
Review of Cognitive Linguistics
200
15 HilpertMartin Distinctive collexeme analysis
and diachronyJ Corpus Linguistics and Lin-
2006 2 243 257
guistic Theory
16 StefanowitschA The function of metaphor de-
veloping a corpus-based perspectiveJ Interna-
tional Journal of Corpus Linguistics200510
2 161 198
17StefanowitschA S T Gries Collostructions
Investigating the interaction between words and
constructionsJ International Journal of Cor-
pus Linguistics20038 2 209 243
18 StefanowitschA S T Gries Covarying col-
lexemesJ Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic
Theory20051 1 1 43
19WulffS Go-V vs go-and-V in English A case of
constructional synonymy A GriesS T
A Stefanowitsch Corpora in Cognitive Linguis-
tics Corpus-Based Approaches to Syntax and
LexisC Berlin Walter de Gruyter2006 101
126
into-J
2010 2 70 75
11YJC740036
2011 08 18
1973
1986
69