The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics Part 53. In the past decade, Cognitive Linguistics has developed into one of the most dynamic and attractive frameworks within theoretical and descriptive linguistics The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics is a major new reference that presents a comprehensive overview of the main theoretical concepts and descriptive/theoretical models of Cognitive Linguistics, and covers its various subfields, theoretical as well as applied. | 490 WILLIAM CROFT as a construction grammar is its emphasis on symbolic and semantic definitions of theoretical constructs traditionally analyzed as purely syntactic. As noted above Langacker defines a grammar as a structured inventory of conventional linguistic units. The conventional linguistic units are symbolic units and their two halves form and meaning. Cognitive Grammar emphasizes the symbolic character of the linguistic sign to use the Saussurean term . Langacker argues that the properties of constructions as broadly defined fall into two categories which we describe here as form the signifier and meaning or function the signified the formal properties are syntactic morphological and phonological and the functional properties are semantic pragmatic and discourse-functional. A construction is thus a symbolic unit linking form and function as a symbol or sign. To a large extent the division between semantics pragmatics and discourse is arbitrary. The important distinction is between what is conventionally associated with a construction and what is not conventionally associated with it but instead conveyed in particular contexts of use. Hence we may group together all functional properties as part of the conventional function of the construction. Langacker describes this structure as the semantic pole of a symbolic unit. The formal properties of a construction also appear to be disparate. Langacker groups them together under the term phonological pole. The term phonological pole may sound odd syntax at least is not phonological particularly with respect to schematic constructions. However Langacker argues that a schema such as Noun in the description of a construction should be thought of as phonologically as well as lexically schematic the schema ranges over possible nouns and those nouns are all phonologically contentful even if their exact phonological form cannot be specified schematically. Cognitive Grammar and Construction Grammar like Pollard and Sag s
