From Http://Members.Aol.Com/Lassailly/Tunuframe.Html wrote:
> Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 07/06/99 21:38:59 , Ed a =E9crit :
>=20
> > > Semantic lexemes can be distinguished from grammatical morphemes:
> > >
http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/rbeard/homepage.html#lexmorph
> > >
> > =20
> > Charles Fillmore, Ronald Langacker, and George Lakoff (among many
> > others) would strongly disagree; their work on "construction grammar=
> > begins from the hypothesis that the "grammatical vs. semantic"
> > distinction is bogus, and that *all* constructions are symbolic --
> > e.g. they pair forms with meanings. In the case of what are
> > traditionally called "grammatical" morphemes, these meanings tend to
> > be fairly abstract and sometimes complex.
>=20
> grammemes are another category of deictic referring to utterance itself=
. in
> other words they are semes specialising in utterance. so i think both
charles=20
> and you are right (or wrong) ;-)
That may be a definition of what you call "grammemes," but I don't
believe it's true of what are usually called "grammatical morphemes".
Ed Heil ------ edheil@postmark.net
--- http://purl.org/net/edheil ---