Editing Idiom (section)

==Non-compositionality==
{{POV section|date=October 2021}}

The non-compositionality of meaning of idioms challenges theories of syntax. The fixed words of many idioms do not qualify as [[constituent (linguistics)|constituents]] in any sense. For example:

{{blockquote|How do we '''get to the bottom''' of this situation?}}

The fixed words of this idiom (in bold) do not form a constituent in any theory's analysis of syntactic structure because the object of the preposition (here ''this situation'') is not part of the idiom (but rather it is an [[argument (linguistics)|argument]] of the idiom). One can know that it is not part of the idiom because it is variable; for example, ''How do we get to the bottom of this situation / the claim / the phenomenon / her statement /'' etc. What this means is that theories of syntax that take the constituent to be the fundamental unit of syntactic analysis are challenged. The manner in which units of meaning are assigned to units of syntax remains unclear. This problem has motivated a tremendous amount of discussion and debate in linguistics circles and it is a primary motivator behind the [[Construction Grammar]] framework.<ref>Culicver and Jackendoff (2005:32ff.)</ref>

A relatively recent development in the syntactic analysis of idioms departs from a constituent-based account of syntactic structure, preferring instead the [[catena (linguistics)|catena]]-based account. The catena unit was introduced to linguistics by William O'Grady in 1998. Any word or any combination of words that are linked together by dependencies qualifies as a catena.<ref>Osborne and Groß (2012:173ff.)</ref> The words constituting idioms are stored as catenae in the lexicon, and as such, they are concrete units of syntax. The [[dependency grammar]] trees of a few sentences containing non-constituent idioms illustrate the point:

::[[File:Idiom trees 1'.png|Idiom trees 1']]

The fixed words of the idiom (in orange) in each case are linked together by dependencies; they form a catena. The material that is outside of the idiom (in normal black script) is not part of the idiom. The following two trees illustrate proverbs:

::[[File:Idiom trees 2.png|Idiom trees 2]]

The fixed words of the proverbs (in orange) again form a catena each time. The adjective ''nitty-gritty'' and the adverb ''always'' are not part of the respective proverb and their appearance does not interrupt the fixed words of the proverb. A caveat concerning the catena-based analysis of idioms concerns their status in the lexicon. Idioms are lexical items, which means they are stored as catenae in the lexicon. In the actual syntax, however, some idioms can be broken up by various functional constructions.

The catena-based analysis of idioms provides a basis for an understanding of meaning compositionality. The [[Principle of Compositionality]] can in fact be maintained. Units of meaning are being assigned to catenae, whereby many of these catenae are not constituents.

Various studies have investigated methods to develop the ability to interpret idioms in children with various diagnoses including [[autism]],<ref>Mashal and Kasirer, 2011</ref> moderate learning difficulties,<ref>Ezell and Goldstein, 1992</ref> developmental language disorder<ref>Benjamin, Ebbels and Newton, 2020</ref> and typically developing weak readers.<ref>Lundblom and Woods, 2012</ref>