Many attempts have been made to discover some systematicity in the semantics of phrasal verbs. However, most research has investigated the semantics of particles exclusively; no study has examined how the multiple meanings of the verb also contribute to the meanings of phrasal verbs. The current corpus-based (COCA) study advances the research on phrasal verbs by examining the interaction of the polysemy networks of both the verb and the particle in four phrasal verb constructions: get up, take up, get out, and take out. Following the Cognitive Linguistics (CL) based methodology set out by Tyler and Evans (2003) for analyzing the semantics of particles, in conjunction with Langacker’s (1991) analysis of the semantics of verbs, a replicable polysemy analysis of the semantics of get and take was established. The polysemy networks for both the verbs and the particles laid the foundation for investigating the multiple meanings of the phrasal verbs found in the corpus. The CL-based analysis of the semantics of the phrasal verb constructions provides evidence for the compositional nature of phrasal verbs, showing that the multiple meanings can be systematically accounted for through the interaction of the polysemy networks of the component verbs and particles.

Three quasi-experimental studies were conducted to investigate the relationship between the evaluative (i.e., agree/true) and the meta-cognitive (i.e., understand) response, and to determine which type of response people are more likely to provide when responding to one-sentence assertive statements. In Studies 1 and 2, participants performed two separate tasks in which they were asked to indicate the levels of: (i) understanding and (ii) agreement / perceived truthfulness of 126 one-sentence statements. The results indicated that participants were likely to provide a negative evaluative response (i.e., disagree/false) to a statement that they did not understand. In Study 3, participants were asked to evaluate the same 126 statements and choose between four response options: agree, disagree, understand, do not understand. The results indicated that people are more likely provide an evaluative response regardless of the understandability of a statement. The results of these studies are discussed in relation to (i) pragmatic perspective of how people infer speakers’ meaning, and (ii) cognitive processes underlying evaluative and meta-cognitive response.

The main aim of the present work is to demonstrate that the semantic pole of ditransitive constructions manifests itself as a multidomain matrix, consisting basically of a set of conceptual metaphors integrated through the mechanism of blending. The metaphors that participate in these multidomain matrices are, in principle, metaphors that already exist in our conceptual structure. As we shall demonstrate in the course of the analysis, these often involve primary metaphors, conceived of as metaphors that have a direct, independent, experiential base. In other cases, the starting point for the construction of such multidomain matrices is complex metaphors already existing in our conceptual structure, understood as an autonomous conceptual complex of a metaphorical nature, created through the integration of various primary metaphors. Our concrete object of analysis consists of the semantic pole of different types of ditransitive constructions. The data analyzed include examples from Romance (Catalan, French, Brazilian Portuguese, and Spanish) and Germanic (English and German) languages.

This paper offers the first general introduction to CODA (Cognitive Discourse Analysis), a methodology for analyzing verbal protocols and other types of unconstrained language use, as a resource for researchers interested in mental representations and high-level cognitive processes. CODA can be used to investigate verbalizations of perceived scenes and events, spatio-temporal concepts, complex cognitive processes such as problem-solving and cognitive strategies and heuristics, and other concepts that are accessible for verbalization. CODA builds on and extends relevant established methodologies such as cognitive linguistic perspectives, verbal protocol analysis in cognitive psychology and interdisciplinary content analysis, linguistic discourse analysis, and psycholinguistic experimentation.

Studies on gaze allocation during sentence production have recently begun to implement cross-linguistic analyses in the investigation of visual and linguistic processing. The underlying assumption is that the aspects of a scene that attract attention prior to articulation are, in part, linked to the specific linguistic system and means used for expression. The present study concerns naturalistic, dynamic scenes (video clips) showing causative events (agent acting on an object) and exploits grammatical differences in the domain of verbal aspect, and the way in which the status of an event (a specific vs. habitual instance of an event) is encoded in English and German. Fixations in agent and action areas of interest were timelocked to utterance onset, and we focused on the pre-articulatory time span to shed light on sentence planning processes, involving message generation and scene conceptualization. Findings are threefold: (i) English speakers mark the status of an event as specific in relation to the action, with progressive aspect marking on the verb in each utterance. German speakers do so by elaborating specific characteristics of the agent; (ii) participants display significantly different gaze allocation patterns to agent and action regions although the sentences produced in both languages follow the same subject−verb word order; and (iii) the analysis of gaze patterns during sentence production given dynamic scenes provide complementary results from a more naturalistic paradigm, to those obtained in studies with still images.