| Popis: |
Following up on earlier Cognitive Linguistic (Radden 1996, Schönefeld 2012) and typological studies (Bourdin 2003), the present paper reopens the discussion on the conceptual motivation and constructionalization (see Traugott & Trousdale 2013) of two types of English fictive motion constructions involving evaluative modality (Bourdin 2003) and caritive semantics (see Haspelmath 2009), as illustrated by the following examples: (1) The garbage went uncollected for weeks. (Radden 1996: 449) (2) The crime went without an arrest until the test for DNA was finally carried out. (Bourdin 2003: 105) Unlike previous empirical studies, which focused on the go un-participle and other V un-participle constructions (Schönefeld 2012, 2013, 2015), the present study will use corpus data to examine and compare the distribution and productivity of the go un-participle and go without NP construction, representing kindred pseudo-copular constructions (Schönefeld 2012). Based on corpus data, the paper will revisit the different lines of argumentation concerning the role of image schemas (Lakoff and Johnson 1980) in the conceptual motivation of the go un-participle construction, and additionally explore the conceptual motivation of the go without NP construction. Special attention will be paid to the verb go’s ability to profile both the SOURCE and PATH subpart of the SOURCE-PATH-GOAL schema (Lakoff and Johnson 1980), i.e. to its ability to code itive (deictic) (Bourdin 2003: 16) and ambulative (non-deictic) (Bourdin 2003: 117) motion events. Previous accounts of the conceptual motivation behind the go un-participle construction will be contrasted in terms of their appeals to the DIVERSION SCHEMA (Radden 1996: 437) and the UNDIRECTED MOTION SCHEMA (Bourdin 2003: 115, Schönefeld 2012: 16). In light of the new data obtained for its kindred go without NP construction, the paper will also discuss whether it is necessary to assume that depictive (Schönefeld 2012) go un-participle constructions, i.e. those involving literal motion (e.g. go unaccompanied ~ walk unaccompanied), initiated the constructionalization of their attributive (Schönefeld 2012), i.e. metaphorical counterparts. |
