1.1. Introduction
Radical Construction Grammar is a theory of syntax, that is, a theory characterizing the grammatical structures that are assumed to be represented in the mind of a speaker. As such, it is broadly comparable to the successive versions of generative grammar, such as Government and Binding Theory (Chomsky 1981) and Minimalism (Chomsky 1995), and to Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar (Pollard and Sag 1993), Lexical Functional Grammar (Bresnan 1982), Role and Reference Grammar (Foley and Van Valin 1984; Van Valin 1993; Van Valin and LaPolla 1997), Functional Grammar (Dik 1997), Word Grammar (Hudson 1984,1990), and Kay and Fillmore's Construction Grammar (Fillmore and Kay 1993; Kay and Fillmore 1999; see 1.3).
Much to my students' chagrin, it has taken me a long time to figure out what I think syntax is, or at least for a coherent view to evolve of what I think syntax is. But this is due in part to my frustration at the way syntax is generally done.
As a student myself, and afterwards as a researcher and teacher of syntactic phenomena, 1 have been frustrated with a seemingly endless series of syntactic "theories" whose chief goal appeared to be the construction of a representation language for syntactic description. The result has been a continuing kaleidoscope of notations which have made even five-year-old journal articles--and many reference grammars-difficult to decipher.