This paper examines the view that usage-based construction grammar is a cognitive theory of language. In the usage-based (or cognitive) strand of constructional work, constructions are typically theorised as mental representations. A culmination of this view was Adele Goldberg’s (2006) definition of construction, which states two criteria for construction-hood: formal/functional idiosyncracy and sufficient frequency, which is presumed to lead to a pattern being represented mentally, even redundantly. In this paper, this view is examined against the backdrop of Popper’s three-world ontology, which is complemented with Marr’s three levels of analysis in cognitive science (computational, algorithmic, implementational). The paper argues against treating constructions as mental representations by definition, and it also advocates caution in using the notion of construal in characterising constructional meanings. Constructions are argued to be social conventions that function as intersubjective cues for meaning. They are produced by mental representations but are not coextensive with them. Usage-based construction grammar is a cognitive theory, but only on the computational level, as part of a social cognitive linguistics.

Constructions, Bd. 15 Nr. 1 (2023): Special Issue "35 Years of Constructions" (Editors: Lotte Sommerer & Stefan Hartmann)