Abstract submission deadline: 13 March 2026

Notification of acceptance: 10 May 2026

‘Grammaticalization’ (a term introduced by Meillet in 1912) has been the subject of numerous studies, which have highlighted regularities in the emergence of grammatical forms across typologically diverse languages. Grammaticalization refers both to a type of change (and sometimes its result) and to a framework for analysing such change. As a type of change, many of the definitions that have been proposed can be formulated as follows: the evolution of a form from a lexical status to a grammatical status, or from a grammatical status to a more grammatical status (Kuryɬowicz [1965] 1976). However, several broader definitions exist, such as Lehmann’s (2024: 1) ‘subjection of a linguistic construction or schema or of a linguistic operation to the rule of grammar’. Such definitional extensions affect a) the scope of this concept and b) the notion of unidirectionality (Prévost 2003, Haspelmath 2004, Norde 2009, Fischer 2013). The term ‘grammaticalization’ also refers to an analytical framework, or even a theory, built from observations of regularities of such processes. This framework expanded considerably in the latter half of the 20th century, notably through the work of Kuryɬowicz (1976), Benveniste (1968), and Givón (1979). Among the key publications are Lehmann ([1982] 1995), Hopper & Traugott (2003), Hopper (1991), Traugott & Heine (1991), Heine (1993, 1997), and Heine & Kuteva (2005, 2007).

Around the turn of the 21st century, Construction Grammar developed rapidly. Much early research drew inspiration from Goldberg (1995), who defined a construction as a ‘form-meaning pair’ (1995: 4). Constructions are acquired individually because they are partly unpredictable, yet they are organized into a hierarchical network – the constructicon – that represents a speaker’s linguistic knowledge (Diessel 2023). In this network, lower-level constructions inherit properties from higher-level ones, and these vertical relations have been extensively studied. More elusive are the horizontal relations that link constructions at the same level, whether schematic or specific (e.g. He broke the vase / The vase broke). Diachronic Construction Grammar (a term first used by Ziegeler 2004; see Noël 2013) brings together work investigating how constructions evolve and how such changes are integrated into the constructicon (Barðdal et al. 2015, Smirnova & Sommerer 2020 inter alia).

Several authors have examined the relationship between grammaticalization theory and Diachronic Construction Grammar, but their conclusions diverge (Noël 2007, Trousdale 2012, Traugott & Trousdale 2013, Coussé et al. 2018, Hilpert 2018, Gildea & Barðdal 2023). Combining the two approaches helps capture a broader range of diachronic phenomena, though it raises both terminological and conceptual challenges. For instance, grammaticalization theory assumes a continuum between two poles – lexicon and grammar – whereas Construction Grammar conceives of grammar as the entire inventory of constructions, without such a fundamental division (Trousdale 2015, Heine et al. 2016; see also Boye & Harder 2012). In grammaticalization theory, ‘construction’ does not mean ‘form-meaning pair’ but rather the combination of at least two linguistic signs in interaction with context (Heine 2002, Bybee 2003, Himmelmann 2004: 31, Noël 2007, Legallois & Patard 2017, Haspelmath 2023). One may also ask which approach better accounts for syntactic changes, especially those involving word order (Lehmann 1992, Hilpert 2021, Prévost 2025). As a result, several scholars have questioned attempts to subsume grammaticalization under Construction Grammar principles (Börjars et al. 2015, Gregersen 2018, Heine et al. 2016, Hilpert 2021, Mélac 2024, 2025, Basile & Ziegeler in press, Heine et al. in press). Work on grammaticalization covers many linguistic areas, which led to numerous works adopting a typological approach (Heine & Kuteva 2002, Haspelmath 2019, Narrog & Heine 2018, Kuteva et al. 2019, Bisang & Malchukov 2020). Although Construction Grammar has increasingly been applied to languages beyond English (e.g. Croft 2001), it still tends to focus on specific constructions and their idiosyncratic features (Hilpert 2021). Given its theoretical orientation, Construction Grammar focuses less on typological generalizations and more on universals of linguistic usage and cognition.

We invite proposals for papers or posters (500–800 words excluding references) which may be either case studies discussing fundamental theoretical issues or theoretical work based on innovative empirical analyses, regardless of language. Contributions to the conference are invited to address especially questions like the following:

• What place should grammaticalization and Diachronic Construction Grammar occupy within a general theory of language change? Should we maintain them as distinct analytical frameworks, or seek to integrate them?
• What exactly is the scope of grammaticalization and Diachronic Construction Grammar?
• What predictive or explanatory power can be attributed to studies on grammaticalization and Diachronic Construction Grammar?
• To what extent are grammaticalization and Diachronic Construction Grammar relevant for explaining linguistic diversity and typological patterns?
• Which kinds of change, such as word order shifts or the development of discourse markers, are better accounted for by grammaticalization theory or Diachronic Construction Grammar?
• Do temporality or gradualness distinguish grammaticalization from other types of language change?
• Do frequency, analogy, and productivity have the same role for lexical and grammatical changes?
• How does the constructicon evolve – through the simple emergence or disappearance of constructions, through internal modification, or through reconfiguration of the network itself? Are these changes compatible with the key principles of grammaticalization theory?

References

Barðdal, Jóhanna, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer & Spike Gildea (eds.). 2015. Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Basile, Carmelo Alessandro & Debra Ziegeler. In press. Rescuing grammaticalization from construction hegemony: The evolution of the modal better. Folia Linguistica Historica 47(1).

Benveniste, Emile. 1968. Mutations of linguistic categories. In W. P. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (eds.), Directions for historical linguistics: A symposium, 83–94. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Bisang, Walter & Andrej Malchukov (eds.). 2020. Grammaticalization Scenarios from Europe and Asia. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Börjars, Kersti, Nigel Vincent & George Walkden. 2015. On constructing a theory of grammatical change. Transactions of the Philological Society 113(3), 363−382.

Boye, Kasper & Peter Harder. 2012. A usage-based theory of grammatical status and grammaticalization. Language 88(1), 1−44.

Bybee, Joan. 2003. Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency. In Richard D. Janda, & Brian D. Joseph (eds.), Handbook of historical linguistics, 602–623. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Coussé, Evie, Peter Andersson & Joel Olofsson. 2018. Grammaticalization meets Construction Grammar: Opportunities, challenges and potential incompatibilities. In Evie Coussé, Peter Andersson & Joel Olofsson (eds.), Grammaticalization meets construction grammar, 3–19. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Diessel, Holger. 2023. The constructicon: Taxonomies and networks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fischer, Olga. 2013. An inquiry into unidirectionality as a foundational element of grammaticalization: On the role played by analogy and the synchronic grammar system in processes of language change. Studies in Language 37(3), 515–533.

Gildea, Spike & Jóhanna Barðdal. 2023. From grammaticalization to Diachronic Construction Grammar. A natural evolution of the paradigm. Studies in Language 47(4), 743–788.

Givón, Talmy. 1979. On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press. (Revised and reprinted in 2018, John Benjamins).

Gregersen, Sune. 2018. Some (critical) questions for diachronic construction grammar. Folia Linguistica Historica 39, 341–360.

Haspelmath, Martin. 2004. On directionality in language change with particular reference to grammaticalization. In Olga Fischer, Harry Perridon & Muriel Norde, Up and down the cline: The nature of grammaticalization, 17–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Haspelmath, Martin. 2019. Can cross-linguistic regularities be explained by constraints on change? In Karsten Schmidtke-Bode, Natalia Levshina, Susanne Maria Michaelis & Ilja A. Seržant (eds.), Competing explanations in linguistic typology, 1–23. Berlin: Language Science Press.

Haspelmath, Martin. 2023. On what a construction is. Constructions 15(1).

Heine, Bernd. 1993. Auxiliaries: Cognitive forces and grammaticalization. New York: Oxford University Press.

Heine, Bernd. 1997. Possession. Sources, forces, and grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Heine, Bernd 2002. On the role of context in grammaticalization. In Ilse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (eds.), New Reflections on Grammaticalization, 83–101. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2002. World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2005. Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2007. The genesis of grammar: A reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Heine, Bernd, Heiko Narrog & Haiping Long. 2016. Constructional change vs. grammaticalization. From compounding to derivation. Studies in Language 40(1),137–175.

Heine, Bernd, Debra Ziegeler, Alessandro Basile & Eric Mélac. In press. Grammaticalization vs. Diachronic Construction Grammar: A reappraisal. Studies in Language.

Hilpert, Martin. 2018. Three open questions in diachronic construction grammar. In Evie Coussé, Peter Andersson & Joel Olofsson (eds.), Grammaticalization meets construction grammar, 21–39. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Hilpert, Martin 2021. Ten lectures on Diachronic Construction Grammar. Leiden: Brill.

Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2004. Lexicalization and grammaticalization. Opposite or orthogonal? In Walter Bisang, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Björn Wiemer (eds.), What makes grammaticalization? A look from its fringes and its components, 21–42. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hopper, Paul J. 1991. On some principles of grammaticalization. In Elizabeth C. Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 1, 17–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Hopper, Paul J. & Traugott, Elizabeth C. (eds.). 2003. Grammaticalization (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kuryłowicz, Jerzy. 1976 [1965]. The evolution of grammatical categories. Esquisses linguistiques II: 38-54. Munich: Fink.

Kuteva, Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Haiping Long, Heiko Narrog & Seongha Rhee. 2019. World lexicon of grammaticalization. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Legallois, Dominique & Adeline Patard. 2017. Les constructions comme unités de la langue: illustrations, évaluation, critique. Langue française 194(2), 5–14.

Lehmann, Christian. 1992. Word order change by grammaticalization. In Marinel Garritsen & Dieter Stein, Internal and external factors in syntactic change, 395–416. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter

Lehmann, Christian. 1995 [1982]. Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Munich: Lincom Europa. Revision of Thoughts on Grammaticalization: A Programmatic Sketch, 1. Arbeiten des Kölner Universalienprojekts 49.

Lehmann, Christian. 2024. Ten Lectures on Grammaticalization: An Introduction. Leiden and Boston: Brill.

Meillet, Antoine. 1912. L‘évolution des formes grammaticales. In Antoine Meillet, Linguistique historique et linguistique générale, Tome 1, 130–148 Paris : Klincksieck.

Mélac, Eric. 2024.The links between evidentiality, modality, and grammaticalization. Studies in Language 48(3), 513–542.

Mélac, Eric. 2025. Grammaticalization VS Diachronic Construction Grammar: A study of evidentiality in Tibetan and English. Paper presented at the international workshop ‘Grammaticalization and Diachronic Construction Grammar’, Sun Yat-Sen University, 25–26 October.

Narrog, Heiko & Bernd Heine (eds.). 2018. Grammaticalization from a typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Noël, Dirk. 2007. Diachronic construction grammar and grammaticalization theory. Functions of language 14(2), 177–202.

Noël, Dirk 2013. Grammaticalization in diachronic construction grammar. In M. A. Furtado da Cunha, E. Balduíno Bispo & J. Romerito Silva (eds.), Anais do IV Seminário Internacional do Grupo de Estudos Discurso & Gramática e XVII Seminário Nacional do Grupo de Estudos Discurso & Gramática: Teoria da gramaticalização e gramática de construções, 5−12. UFRN.

Norde, Muriel. 2009. Degrammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Prévost, Sophie. 2003. La grammaticalisation : unidirectionnalité et statut. Le Français Moderne – Revue de linguistique Française 2(71), 144–166.

Prévost, Sophie. 2025. Grammaticalisation et changements constructionnels à l’épreuve de l’évolution de l’ordre des mots en français. Temps et Espace. Dix études en l’honneur de Walter De Mulder à l’occasion de son éméritat, 249–277. Bruxelles: Peter Lang.

Smirnova, Elena & Lotte Sommerer. 2020. The nature of the node and the network: Open questions in Diachronic Construction Grammar. In Lotte Sommerer & Elena Smirnova (eds.), Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar, 1–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Bernd Heine (eds.). 1991. Approaches to grammaticalization. Volume I: Theoretical and methodological issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Graeme Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Trousdale, Graeme. 2015. Three areas where Grammaticalization and Construction Grammar don’t meet. Paper presented at the workshop ‘Grammaticalization meets Construction Grammar’, University of Gothenburg 8–9 October.

Trousdale, Graeme 2012. Grammaticalization, Constructions, and the Grammaticalization of Constructions. In Kristin Davidse, Tine Breban, Lieselotte Brems & Tanja Mortelmans (eds.), Grammaticalization and Language Change: New Reflections, 167–98. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Ziegeler, Debra. 2004. Grammaticalisation through constructions: The story of causative have in English. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 2, 159–195.