‘Performance pairing’ of forms and meanings has distinct properties from the pairing imposed using the grammar alone. The grammar-alone system is type it produces plausible and implausible interpretations, specific knowledge of the speaker’s intent is unnecessary, and there is no need for competing forms, no need to direct attention away from form.Thanks to Andrew Weir for collecting these data.
The next principle justifying the idiom label in this paper will be the integrity of the structure of the construction. As will be demonstrated later on, there are some phrases which allow some movement of their parts (passivisation, particle movement) or change of the structure (the addition of a modifier, the deletion of some part, the substitution of one element for another). Since literal phrases allow all such modifications without any restrictions, it is assumed here that if some idiom does not allow
Concerning , the is a state true in all —mere —whereas the hinges on the way the particular world is. Concerning , the is knowable before or without, whereas the is knowable only after or through, relevant experience. Concerning the is true via terms' and , thus a —true by logical necessity but uninformative about the world—whereas the adds reference to a state of facts, a .
As regards the definition of idiom adopted in the present paper, the key principle will be the non-compositionality of meaning (after Hockett 1958 and Makkai 1972). It is possible to say which construction is more compositional (and consequently less idiomatic), as when comparing highly non-compositional bite the dust (in the sense of 'be killed, fall to the ground') with more regular let the cat out of bag (meaning 'tell a secret without intending to do so'). In the former case the verb let as well as the