The Semantic Coercion and Generative Mechanism in English "V + Oneself" Reflexive Constructions
Keywords:
reflexive construction, semantic coercion, subject-self metaphor, causative meaningAbstract
This paper delves into the semantic coercion and generative mechanisms behind the "Verb + Oneself" reflexive constructions in English. Grounded in Lakoff's theory of the Subject-Self Metaphor and metonymy, the study classifies these reflexive constructions into four distinct categories, each based on verb semantics and the agent-patient relationship inherent in the verb phrase. By analyzing the interplay between verbs and reflexive pronouns, the research uncovers how reflexive pronouns, traditionally used to denote self-reference, can enable non-causative verbs to assume causative meanings through the process of semantic coercion. This phenomenon challenges the conventional understanding of verb argument structure, demonstrating how verbs that were once unable to take direct objects are now able to combine with reflexive pronouns, thereby transforming their syntactic and semantic functions. Through this analysis, the paper not only enriches the theoretical understanding of reflexive constructions but also offers insights into the dynamic nature of verb usage and its capacity to expand and adapt through semantic change. The findings contribute to a more nuanced view of how reflexive constructions interact with verb meaning, thereby enhancing our understanding of linguistic flexibility and evolution.
References
1. L. A. Michaelis, "Aspectual coercion and lexical semantics Part 1: Using selection to describe the interaction between construc-tion and verb meaning," Cognitive Semantics, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 383-408, 2023. doi: 10.1163/23526416-bja10036.
2. L. A. Michaelis, "Aspectual Coercion and Lexical Semantics: Part 2: Using Selection to Describe Implicit and Explicit Type-Shifting Constructions," Cognitive Semantics, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 123-157, 2024.
3. L. Busso, F. Perek, and A. Lenci, "Constructional associations trump lexical associations in processing valency coercion," Cog-nitive Linguistics, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 287-318, 2021. doi: 10.1515/cog-2020-0050.
4. S. Hartmann, and A. Willich, "Collostructional Analysis Meets Construction Semantics: Revisiting the English Way-Construction and Its German Equivalents," Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 319-349, 2024.
5. M. Hilpert, "The road ahead for Construction Grammar," Constructions and Frames, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 255-277, 2024. doi: 10.1075/cf.23014.hil.
6. U. Schneider, "Reflexive analytic causatives: a diachronic analysis of transitivity parameters," English Language & Linguistics, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 789-813, 2023.
7. A. I. Alowayed, and Y. A. Albaty, "Binding in Najdi Arabic: Types of Reflexives, the Argument Structure of Reflexive Con-structions and Possessive Reflexives," Theory & Practice in Language Studies (TPLS), vol. 14, no. 7, 2024. doi: 10.17507/tpls.1407.27.
8. M. Bogaards, X. Li, Z. Xu, Y. Du, Z. Chen, C. Hu, and V. J. Pan, "Aspectual Coercion and the Decomposition of VP," Proceedings of the 14th Generative Linguistics in the Old World in Asia (GLOW in Asia XIV) 2024, pp. 15-31, 2024.
9. V. Homer, "Actualistic interpretations in French," Semantics and Pragmatics, vol. 14, pp. 12-1, 2021.
10. L. Amaral, F. Oliveira, and C. Oliveira, "The Meaning of Inchoative se in Brazilian Portuguese: A Replication of Lundquist et al," 's (2016) Experiment. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 2567-2598, 2023.
11. L. A. Michaelis, "Staying terminologically rigid, conceptually open and socially cohesive: How to make room for the next generation of Construction Grammarians," Constructions and Frames, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 278-310, 2024.
12. G. Key, "Voice in Turkish: Re-thinking u-syncretism," Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 331-384, 2025. doi: 10.1007/s11049-024-09614-8.
13. J. B. Pomerantz, S. J. Cohen, K. Doychak, and C. Raghavan, "Linguistic indicators of coercive control: evidenced in sex traf-ficking narratives," Violence and gender, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 175-186, 2021. doi: 10.1089/vio.2020.0105.
14. J. Z. Doueihi, and T. François, "Diathesis and Valency Changes in Pronominal-Verbal Constructions in French," French Studies, vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 474-502, 2025. doi: 10.3828/fs.2025.79.3.8.
15. A. Aierken, "Valence Adjusting Operations in Modern Uyghur," International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 317-326.
16. L. Nash, "Nonunitary structure of unergative verbs in Georgian," Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 1201-1267, 2022. doi: 10.1007/s11049-021-09529-8.
17. Y. Zhao, and D. Sperlich, "Discourse effects in processing Chinese reflexive pronouns," Linguistics Vanguard, no. 0, 2025. doi: 10.1515/lingvan-2025-0016.
