4. Results of Sentence Patterns and Construal
4.3 Construals and Sentence Patterns in the ‘ AGENT - OUT action chain’
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
sentence pattern, featured by the ‘agent defocusing’ which allows the profiling of the
‘AGENT’ participant as the secondary landmark (lm) at best. Then, [NPIN + be + Verb-pp] (Margarine can be substituted in the recipe) occurs 83 times as the third
predominant sentence pattern. The less occurrence of [NPIN + be + Verb-pp] (83 hits) than that of [NPIN + be + Verb-pp + for NPOUT] (120 hits) suggests that the profiling of ‘OUT’ participant is preferred in the passive construction. In contrast, the rare occurrence (3 hits) of [NPIN + be + Verb-pp + by NPAGENT] (Margarine can be substituted for butter in the recipe by you) suggests that the profiling of the ‘AGENT’ participant is not preferred in the passive construction.
In the next section, we will present the sentence patterns which reflecting different construals imposed on the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’.
4.3 Construals and Sentence Patterns in the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’
Table 4.13 displays the sentence patterns and their underlying construals imposed on the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’.
Table 4.13 Construals and the sentence patterns of the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’
Sentence Pattern AGENT-OUT action chain
(a) NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT
+ with/by NPIN
You can substitute butter with/by margarine in the recipe.
(b) NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT
You can substitute butter in the recipe.
Agent In Out
TR lm LM
Agent In Out
TR LM
‧
Margarine can substitute butter in the recipe.(d) NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + by NPAGENT
Butter can be substituted in the recipe by you.
(e) NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + with/by NPIN
Butter can be substituted with/by margarine in the recipe.
(f) NPOUT + be + Verb-pp
Butter can be substituted in the recipe.
As demonstrated in Table 4.13, three variant construals were found in the
‘AGENT-OUT action chain’, the action chain where all the participants are involved in the force-dynamic interaction. Notably, each participant could be the primary focus (i.e. trajector) of the event. First, the attention could be focused on the interaction between the ‘AGENT’ and the ‘OUT’ participant in the construal of ‘TR (AGENT) + LM (OUT)’, as in Table 4.13 (a) and (b). The attention could also be drawn to the
interaction between the ‘IN’ and the ‘OUT’ participant in the construal of ‘TR (IN) + LM (OUT)’, as in Table 4.13 (c). Lastly, the ‘OUT’ participant could be the only focal participant in the construal of ‘TR (OUT)’, as in Table 4.13 (d), (e), and (f).
The sentence patterns reflect these variant construals will be illustrated as follows. In sub-section 4.3.1, the sentence patterns reflecting the ‘TR (AGENT) + LM (OUT)’
Agent In Out
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
construal will be introduced; in sub-section 4.3.2, the only sentence pattern reflecting the ‘TR (IN) + LM (OUT)’ construal will be illustrated; in sub-section 4.3.3, the three sentence patterns reflecting the construal of ‘TR (OUT)’ will be illustrated.
4.3.1 ‘TR (AGENT) + LM (OUT)’ Construal
This sub-section presents the sentence patterns which reflect one of the
construals imposed on the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’, the action chain which involves the ‘AGENT’,‘IN’,and‘OUT’ participants in the force-dynamic interaction. The ‘TR (AGENT) + LM (OUT)’ construal focuses on the interaction between the ‘AGENT’ and the ‘OUT’participant. In other words, this construal particularly focuses on the portion that ‘AGENT’ removes the ‘OUT’ participant in the event of substituting. [NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT + with/by NPIN] (You can substitute butter with/by margarine in the recipe) and [NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT] (You can substitute butter in the recipe) are the two sentence patterns reflecting this construal, illustrated as follows.
4.3.1.1 NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT + with/by NPIN
This sentence pattern is exemplified in (4.9) in Table 4.14.
Table 4.14 The action chain and examples of [NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT + with/by NPIN] Action
Chain
(4.9)
a. I have seen countries where [AGENT you]TR substituted [OUT a white oppressor]LM [IN with a black one]lm. (GXK-948)
b. If [AGENT we]TR substitute [OUT an atom in a molecule]LM [IN by an isotope of different mass]lm, we alter the frequencies of some modes.
(H9R-769)
Agent In Out
TR lm LM
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
In (4.9a), the subject ‘AGENT’ (you) replaces the direct object ‘OUT’(a white oppressor) by using the oblique ‘IN’participant (with a black one) in the with-phrase.
The attention of the event is direct to the portion that the ‘AGENT’ (you) replaces the
‘OUT’(a white oppressor). Likewise, (4.9b) describes the event in chemistry that the subject ‘AGENT’ (we) removes the direct object ‘OUT’ (an atom in a molecule) by means of inserting the oblique ‘IN’ participant (by an isotope of different mass) in the by-phrase.
Instances in (4.9) demonstrate that the sentence pattern [NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT + with/by NPIN] reflects the construal in which the ‘AGENT’ removes the ‘OUT’ by means of the ‘IN’ participant, as diagrammed in Table 4.14. The ‘AGENT’ applies the force on the ‘IN’ participant and uses it as the instrument to replace the ‘OUT’ participant. Therefore, all the profiled participants are involved in the energy transmission of the action chain.
4.3.1.2 NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT
This sentence pattern is exemplified in (4.10) in Table 4.15.
Table 4.15 The action chain and examples of [NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT] Action
Chain
(4.10) [AGENT SOUTHAMPTON manager Ian Branfoot]TR substituted [OUT
hardman Terry Hurlock]LM to save him from the red card. (CEP-10994)
In (4.10), the subject ‘AGENT’ (manager) replaces the direct object ‘OUT’ (Terry Hurlock) in a football game. In general, there will be another substitute player to
Agent In Out
TR LM
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
come up as the NPIN, or the team will be at a great disadvantage of fewer players in the field. This evidence may substantiate the interpretation that the ‘IN’ participant exists in the event of substituting. The sentence pattern focuses on the portion that the
‘AGENT’ removes the ‘OUT’ while not specifying the ‘IN’ participant.
Therefore, this sentence pattern reflects the same construal as [NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT + with/by NPIN] (You can substitute butter with/by margarine in the recipe) since both sentence patterns highlight the portion that the ‘AGENT’ removes the ‘OUT’ participant. However, in [NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT], the ‘IN’ participant is not profiled, and thus the circle representing the ‘IN’ is not bolded. The construal is diagrammed in Table 4.15.
The consequence of the unprofiled ‘IN’ participant is that the event is construed or described as if the ‘AGENT’ directly removes the ‘OUT’ without the ‘IN’ as the intermediary instrument in the action chain. For example, in (4.10), the subject
‘AGENT’ (manager) replaces the direct object ‘OUT’ Terry Hurlock in the soccer game while the substitute player (NPIN) is not mentioned.
In this sub-section, the sentence patterns reflecting the construal that focuses on the ‘AGENT’ and the ‘OUT’ participant have been illustrated. In the next sub-section, we will present another construal, the ‘TR(IN)+LM(OUT)’ construal, imposed on the
‘AGENT-OUT action chain’.
4.3.2 ‘TR(IN) + LM (OUT)’ Construal
This construal focuses on the force-dynamic interaction between the ‘IN’ participant and the ‘OUT’ participant. Specifically, the ‘IN’ participant becomes the trajector which transmits the force to the ‘OUT’ participant, the primary landmark of the construal. In SUBSTITUTE, [NPIN + Verb + NPOUT] is the only sentence pattern that reflects this construal.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
4.3.2.1 NPIN + Verb + NPOUT
This sentence pattern is exemplified in (4.11) in Table 4.16.
Table 4.16 The action chain and examples of [NPIN + Verb + NPOUT] Action
Chain
(4.11) Not very, despite the fact that [IN gas]TR can substitute [OUT 50–80% of diesel oil]LM. (ACR-3228)
Instance (4.11) describes the interaction between ‘IN’ and ‘OUT’ that the subject
‘IN’ (gas) is able to take the place of the direct object ‘OUT’ (50–80% of diesel oil).
The construal underlying this sentence pattern directs attention to the interaction that the ‘IN’ participant (gas) takes the place of the ‘OUT’(50–80% of diesel oil), and the
‘AGENT’ is unprofiled. The construal is diagrammed in Table 4.16.
However, in our corpus result, this sentence pattern merely occurs 20 times in SUBSTITUTE. The rare occurrence of this sentence pattern suggests that the construal of ‘TR(IN) + LM (Out)’ is less preferred in SUBSTITUTE.
In contrast, the sentence pattern [NPIN + Verb + for NPOUT] (Gas can substitute for diesel oil) which bears the close resemblance to [NPIN + Verb + NPOUT] (Gas can substitute diesel oil) is preferred due to its occurrence of 131 times in the corpus.
In this section, we have demonstrated the sentence pattern reflecting the construal of ‘TR(IN) + LM (Out)’. In the next section, we will present the sentence patterns which particularly direct the attention to the ‘OUT’ participant in the construal of ‘TR (OUT)’.
Agent In Out
TR LM
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
4.3.3 ‘TR (OUT)’ Construal
This construal particularly focuses on the ‘OUT’ participant in the ‘AGENT-OUT
action chain’. Specifically, the ‘OUT’ participant is the primary focus of the event while the ‘AGENT’ and the ‘IN’ participant could be the secondary landmark at best. In other words, the ‘AGENT’ and the ‘IN’ participant may be implied even if they are not presented in the sentence. According to the corpus result, this construal accounts for 12.2% of the use in SUBSTITUTE. The proportion suggests that although this construal is not frequently reflected, it is not negligible in SUBSTITUTE.
Three sentence patterns reflect this construal: [NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + by NPAGENT] (Butter can be substituted in the recipe by you), [NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + with/by NPIN] (Butter can be substituted with/by margarine in the recipe), and [NPOUT
+ be + Verb-pp] (Butter can be substituted in the recipe). Each sentence pattern will be presented in detail below.
4.3.3.1 NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + by NPAGENT
This sentence pattern is exemplified in (4.12) in Table 4.17.
Table 4.17 The action chain and examples of [NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + by NPAGENT] Action
Chain
(4.12)
[OUT The words]TR in the second pair of square brackets in sub-section two B were substituted [AGENT by the Courts Act]lm nineteen seventy one, section three, subsection five. (JSJ-280)
Agent In Out
lm TR
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
(4.12) shows that the primary focus is the replaced entity (the words) realized as the subject of the sentence, and the ‘AGENT’ participant (the Courts Act) is realized as the oblique.
Note that since the Courts Act is an inanimate law, the real ‘AGENT’ could be the animate legislators by whom the law is enacted. This construal underlying the
sentence pattern is diagrammed in Table 4.17.
This sentence pattern reflects the reversed construal of [NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT] (You can substitute butter in the recipe). As diagrammed in Table 4.17, the construal underlying [NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + by NPAGENT] (Butter can be substituted in the recipe by you) focuses on the ‘OUT’ participant as the trajector and downgrades the ‘AGENT’ from the trajector to the secondary landmark. Since the ‘IN’ participant is not profiled, the ‘OUT’ participant in the event of substituting is construed as if it is directly affected by the ‘AGENT’.
However, as reported in the corpus result, this sentence pattern merely occurs 2 times in SUBSTITUTE. Together with the limited use (3 hits) in [NPIN + be + Verb-pp + by NPAGENT] (Margarine can be substituted in the recipe by you), [NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + by NPAGENT] (Butter can be substituted in the recipe by you) is not
preferred in the natural language use as well. Possibly, the result suggests that the realization of the ‘AGENT’ in the oblique (by NPAGENT) is not preferred in the ‘Passive construction’.
4.3.3.2 NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + with/by NPIN
This sentence pattern is exemplified in (4.13a) and (4.13b) with different prepositional phrases in Table 4.18.
‧
b. It uses modern technology to provide an extremely cost effective meal and [OUT it]’s substituted [IN with fresh items] every day.
(JWA-446)14
In (4.13a), the subject ‘OUT’ (desserts) can be replaced by the oblique ‘IN’ (by a portion of fresh fruit, or fresh fruit salad). Similarly, in (4.13b), the subject ‘OUT’ (it) refers to the alternative meal offered at schools, and they are replaced by the oblique
‘IN’ (with fresh items) every day. It is interesting to indicate that, in (4.13b), the it (alternative meal) is not the replaced entity; instead, what is replaced is the filler in the alternative meal (i.e. the food ingredient that constitutes the meal). Then, the NPIN
(fresh items) is the fresh food ingredient that is used in the alternative meal. However, since they still hold the relation of being used as the ‘IN’ participant and being
replaced as the ‘OUT’, they conform to the construal reflected in the sentence pattern.
Sentences in (4.13) reflect the construal in which the ‘OUT’ participant is
primarily focused while the ‘IN’ participant is peripheral. The ‘AGENT’ is unprofiled as part of the conceptual base. The construal is diagrammed in Table 4.18.
As demonstrated in Table 4.18, the trajector ‘OUT’ receives the force from the
‘IN’ participant which transfers the energy from the unprofiled ‘AGENT’. In other words, the construal implies an implicit ‘AGENT’ rather than reduce the agentivity as in the absolute construal. In addition, as reported in the corpus result, [NPOUT + be +
14 ‘It’s’ was considered two distinct lemmas in which ‘it’ was annotated as the ‘OUT’ participant.
Agent In Out
lm TR
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Verb-pp + by NPIN] occurs 56 times, while [NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + with NPIN] merely occurs 4 times. The result suggests that the oblique ‘IN’ in the ‘Passive construction’ prefers the realization of by-phrase to with-phrase.
4.3.3.3 NPOUT + be + Verb-pp
This sentence pattern is exemplified in (4.14) in Table 4.19.
Table 4.19 The action chain and examples of [NPOUT + be + Verb-pp]
Action Chain
(4.14) Couldn’t see why [OUT Speed]TR was substituted but he wasn’t playing well. (J1J-765)
In this event of substituting, the attention is directed to the portion that the subject ‘OUT’ (Speed) ceases to play in the ball and leaves his position. The source of force, ‘AGENT’ (i.e. the manager) and ‘IN’ (i.e. the substitute player), is not specified in the sentence.
This sentence pattern reflects the construal in which the ‘OUT’ participant is the only profiled participant and receives the primary focus. The attention is directed to the portion that the ‘OUT’ participant is forced to leave the position it initially occupied by the force from the ‘head’ of the action. In other words, the ‘OUT’
participant could be either replaced by the ‘IN’ participant or removed by the ‘AGENT’ participant. However, since the construal focuses on the portion that the ‘OUT’ is affected and leaves its initial position, the exact source of the force is not specified.
The construal in this sentence pattern is diagrammed in Table 4.19.
Agent In Out
TR
‧
In our corpus result, this sentence pattern occurs 72 times and accounts for 6.5%
of SUBSTITUTE. This sentence pattern, though not widely used, is not negligible in the use of SUBSTITUTE.
Then, in Table 4.20, we display the overall distribution of the sentence patterns and their underlying construals in the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’.
Table 4.20 Construals and sentence pattern in the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’
Construal Sentence Pattern Hits Total
TR (AGENT) +
The corpus result shows that 65.7% of construal takes the ‘OUT’ participant as the primary focus of the event of substituting, 24.5% proportion reflect the ‘TR (Agent) + LM (Out)’ construal, and 9.8% proportion reflect the ‘TR(IN) + LM (Out)’
construal. It suggests that the ‘OUT’ participant is mostly conferred on the primary focus in the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’.
In the ‘TR (Out)’ construal, as indicated above, the attention is particularly directed to the ‘OUT’ participant, and other participants, if profiled, could only be the secondary landmark at best. In this construal, the sentence pattern [NPOUT + be +
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Verb-pp] (Couldn’t see why Speed was substituted but he wasn’t playing well) occurs 72 times as the most predominant one. Then, [NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + by NPIN] (Desserts can be substituted by a portion of fresh fruit) is the second predominant sentence pattern in which the ‘IN’ participant is profiled and realized in the by-phrase.
In contrast, [NPOUT + be + Verb-pp + with NPIN] merely occurs 4 times. It suggests that the ‘IN’ participant prefers the realization of by-phrase than with-phrase when profiled in the ‘TR (Out)’ construal.
As for the ‘TR (Agent) + LM (Out)’ construal, the 27 hits of [NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT + with NPIN] (Customs officers substituted the drugswith another substance) serves as the predominant sentence pattern in this construal. In addition, the 20 hits of [NPAGENT + Verb + NPOUT] (If a player’s fitness falls below 75% his performance is impaired – you may need to substitute him) are not negligible in this construal as well.
Lastly, the ‘TR(IN) + LM (Out)’ construal is rare, and only the sentence pattern [NPIN + Verb + NPOUT] (Gas can substitute 50–80% of diesel oil) corresponds to this construal.
In section 4.2 and section 4.3, we have presented how different sentence patterns reflect their own particular construals imposed on the ‘AGENT-IN’and the‘AGENT
-OUT’ action chains.
On the one hand, in the ‘AGENT-IN action chain’, seven distinct construals are found underlying the sentence patterns. Among these construals, the ‘OUT’ participant cannot be the trajector of the construal since it is not involved in the force-dynamic relation of the ‘AGENT-IN action chain’. Therefore, the construals vary in terms of the degree of prominence of the ‘AGENT’ participant.
On the other hand, in the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’, six distinct construals are reflected by the sentence patterns. The trajectors of the construals range from the
‧
force-dynamic relation with the participants in the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’.Then, after the illustration of the sentence patterns found in our corpus data, we present the top seven predominant sentence patterns of SUBSTITUTE, including the
‘AGENT-IN’ and ‘AGENT-OUT’ action chain, in Table 4.21.
Table 4.21 Distribution of the top seven sentence patterns of SUBSTITUTE
Construal Sentence Pattern Number Number of
SUBSTITUTE
These seven sentence patterns cover the 89.7% proportion of SUBSTITUTE. This suggests that most use of SUBSTITUTE falls in these seven sentence patterns. These sentence patterns serve as the preferred forms of their respective construals.
When the ‘AGENT’ is the primary focus, [NPAGENT + Verb + NPIN + for NPOUT] (You can substitute margarine for butter in the recipe) is the preferred sentence pattern which highlights the portion that the ‘AGENT’ uses the ‘IN’ participant as the substitute. Then, when the ‘IN’ is primarily focused, two preferred sentence patterns are found. On the one hand, [NPIN + Verb + for NPOUT] (Margarine can substitute for butter in the recipe) diminishes the existence of ‘AGENT’ in the ‘absolute construal’.
On the other hand, [NPIN + be + Verb-pp + for NPOUT] (Margarine can be substituted
‧
for butter in the recipe) does not profile the ‘AGENT’ but implies its existence in the conceptual base. Lastly, when the ‘OUT’ is primarily focused, the ‘AGENT-OUT action chain’ is conceptualized, and [NPOUT + be + Verb-pp] (Butter can be substituted in the recipe) is the preferred sentence pattern which highlights the portion that the ‘OUT’ is removed by an implied ‘AGENT’.