Non-prototypical constructions verbalizing negative emotional-evaluative attitude and regret

. The article deals with analysis of structural and semantic peculiar features of non-prototypical constructions N person hate ing-form and N person hate Infinitive that categorize both the regret and emotional-evaluative attitude situations. The research is made from concept to form. Firstly, models of prototypical situations of the emotional-evaluative attitude and of regret are built. The prototypical situation model enables to distinguish language means and grammatical constructions expected in speaker’s verbalization of the situations and to determine prototypical constructions, categorizing these prototypical situations in the best way. Non-prototypical construction-blends are analyzed within the theory of mental spaces and conceptual integration. The basic method of the theory makes it possible to divide a situation categorized by a speaker into mental spaces and single out even the most unusual cases of categorization. Construction-blends borrow lexical and grammatical means of prototypical constructions of the regret and emotional-evaluative attitude creating a unique structure that is inequivalent to the prototypical constructions either semantically or grammatically. Analysis within the theory enables observing sematic differences between non-prototypical constructions N person hate ing-form and N person hate Infinitive and proves that all sentence members equally contribute to a sentence meaning building. It enables speaking of the holistic approach to the sentence study.


Introduction
After the anthropocentric paradigm had come into linguistics, scientists become interested in ways of verbalizing the inner and outer world of a person by means of a language. Studies within the framework of cognitive grammar wariness that when a person finds himself / herself in this or that situation he / she categorizes the situation, adapting it to a definite prototype -an abstract scheme [1,2]. Then it is verbalized by a concrete set of grammatical constructions. The latter can be roughly divided into two types of constructions: prototypical and nonprototypical. For the latest decades, prototype and nonprototype in grammar have been considered and investigated by Е.V. Rakhilina, L.M. Kovalyova, L.A. Furs, M.Yu. Ryabova, and others [1,2]. It should be mentioned that concern of linguists for the topic has been growing. However, some semantic areas remain overlooked and demand study.
The research object of the investigation is nonprototypical constructions verbalizing the situation of the emotional-evaluative attitude and the situation of regret. The data for the study were taken from British National Corpus.

Non-prototypical construction and construction-blend
Non-prototypical constructions, verbalizing any prototypical situation can categorize situations that combine elements of two or more prototypical situations. Besides, it is not obligatory to represent all the dimensions of the initial prototypical situations at the syntactical level. It results from the human nature. In the process of speaking and thinking, a speaker pays attention to different situations and their dimensions at the same time. It results in combining and blending different mental spaces in speaker's mind. That definitely affects both the sense of the situations and the meaning of the grammatical construction: the meaning of the grammatical construction becomes diffuse, emergent, in other words, "here and now" meaning [3][4][5][6].
G. Fauconnier finds mental spaces of small conceptual domains being constructed in the process of thinking and speaking. They are created for the purpose of localized understanding and acting [7]. They are extra-linguistic entities in a mind of a person, where they blend and are verbalized by grammatical constructions. According to G. Fauconnier, these constructions are "instructions", because they illustrate the process of categorization this or that situation systematically. A construction offers information minimal but complete enough for finding the domains and principles corresponding to conceptualizations of a certain situation [7]. Moreover, every time a person speaks he / she may deal with a new situation, but its conceptualization is impossible without turning to previous, structured basic experience.
Conceptual integration in the definition given by G. Fauconnier and M. Turner is a basic cognitive process that makes the basis of a person's thinking and it leads to making up a new meaning "global insight", conceptual compression, "manipulation of diffuse ranges of meaning" [6]. The main idea of the conceptualization process is that when mental spaces interact a new mental space with its own peculiar features is made up. It is called «blend» [6].
Blends are dynamic as far as they are created and structured by a person "here and now", when a person is thinking and speaking. Blends appear because the person's mind is analogous to a creative process that allows a speaker for active making a mental procedure of combining and selecting language means.
One of the main basic features of the blend is compression. It makes it possible to compress inconvenient for understanding and huge for operating constructions into more compact and convenient ones. Native speakers tend to use it to compress big real worlds into small pages. This process is so natural that native speakers hardly notice it. Different types of conceptual domains can be compressed, such as timespace, part -whole, cause -consequence. For instance, when we envision ourselves replying to criticism some years ago or when we tell, we compress time. Emergence is one more concept regarding blend. It implies that blend partially and selectively inheriting features of initial mental spaces is not semantically equivalent to any of them and does not make up a sum of their dimensions. Only senses of mental spaces relevant to the speaker at the moment of creating a new entity are subjected to integration, the rest of them are beyond his / her attention [5,8,9]. Let us illustrate this idea by the example suggested by G. Fauconnier: He is the Immanuel Kant of modern philosophy. This statement is believed to blend or the result of projection of the two initial mental spaces: «a modern philosopher» and «Immanuil Kant». The saying is interpreted as: «this philosopher is not competent in matters of modern philosophy». However, neither of the spaces contains the dimension «competence», the latter emerges only in the blend [5,8]. Emergence of the blend is revealed in the fact that the initial mental space «perception» lacks information about the person's thoughts, and the initial mental space «understanding» lacks information that it is based on perception. A resulting mental space contains all these elements. Besides, the person of the situation performs two roles simultaneously: a person who precepts and a person who understands. The whole construction categorizes the situation «perceptionunderstanding».

Prototypical situations of regret and negative emotional-evaluative attitude
Construction blend is made by fusing two or more mental spaces in other terms two or more prorotypical situations. G. Lakoff, M. Johnson defined propotypical situation as an idealized abstract sheme existing in potentia [3]. It is a kind of abstract entity in a mind of an average, typical native speaker. In other words, it is an ideal image or a thought of a real-life situation. This abstract entity implies definite dimensions or associations that emerge in a speaker's mind when he / she visualizes this situation or faces it in everyday life. As far as prototypical situation is defined as an ideal representative of all similar situations of real life it comprises all possible dimensions that can be connected with it. Evidently, not all the dimensions are represented in the syntactical construction by members of this construction. Some dimensions of a prototypical situation come into background of the situation and are just implied by a speaker. So, the constructions that categorize the greater number of dimensions of a certain prototypical situation without representing dimensions of other prototypical situations can be called prototypical constructions.
Language representation of a negative emotionalevaluative attitude and of a regret is connected with the world not directly but through a speaker's mind. It means that the situations of real life are processed by a speakers mind and then they are represented by language means. If follows that common mental space for a language representation of the situations is a prototypical situation. As far as blend is a mixture of some mental spaces we have to realize which spaces are mixed. For this purpose, we have designed models of prototypical situations of the negative emotioanal-evaluative attitude and of regret and also found out prototypical constructions for their representations. To distinguish the dimensions of the situations we analyzed lexicosemantic groups of the verbs denoting regret and the negative emotional evaluative attitude and studied these notions from a psycological aspect.
All explicit dimensions are found in the prototypical construction of emotional evaluative attitude. It is headed by the verb to hate that renders the 3 rd dimension of the situation. This is the central verb of the lexical semantic group. An animated subject and object are represented by a noun or pronoun: Nperson hate Nanim. and Nperson hate Ninanim.concrete. [10].
Prototypical constructions for the prototypical situation of regret is regarded such constructions as Nperson regret Ving and Nperson regret Nevent [10]. Firstly, the constructions are headed by semantically neutral and stylistically unmarked verb to regret that represents the second dimension of the situation. The first dimension of the situation is verbalized by a noun or pronoun denoting a person, the third and the fourth dimensions are observed through the ing-form or the noun denoting some event unpleasant for the person.
It should be mentioned that implicit dimensions make up the background of the situation for explicit dimensions. They are implied but not verbalized in a prototypical construction. Explicit and implicit dimensions create a common structure and implicitly affect each other. Depending on a perception of the situation by the speaker, implicit dimensions can turn into explicit ones, and vice versa. When implicit dimensions become central, we are dealing with a nonprototypical situation. Non-prototypical constructions are also a result of merging two prototypical situations: the situation of the emotional evaluative attitude and the situation regret. Analysis of non-prototypical situations (blends) makes it clear which dimensions of prototypical situations are noticed and categorized by the speaker and how they are represented at a syntactical level.

4
Analysis of non-prototypical constructions (blends) verbalizing negative emotional-evaluative attitude and regret

Construction Nperson hate Infinitive
Although the semantics of the verb to hate does not bear a meaning connected with regret, some constructions headed by this verb can be regarded as blends «negative emotional-evaluative attitude -regret». In modern English, to hate + V Infinitive constructions are blends «negative emotional-evaluative attitude to the event -regret of performing this event», where the person (the subject) is performing an action unpleasant for him / her and regrets it. At the same time the person combines two roles: the person feeling regret and the person revealing a negative emotional-evaluative attitude to doing something. Moreover, the major verb retaining with primary meaning together with the infinitive makes up an emergent meaning. Besides, the action expressed by the infinitive is regardless of a certain period of time. We take into account the theory suggested by L.M. Kovalyova. The scientist defines a construction with non-finite forms of the verb as prototypical one for categorization the prototypical situation of regret, excuse, and repentance. She also points out that in constructions with the verbs denoting regret, relationships of either simultaneity or precedence are observed between the major verb and the infinitive [11]. In constructions to hate + V Infinitive, actions of the head verb and of the infinitive are simultaneous. The person expresses a negative attitude towards he / she is doing now. Let us consider examples containing blends «negative emotional-evaluative attitude to the eventregret of performing this event»: (1) She's real happy nowadays. I'm really, really glad about that. I hate to see someone sad. This construction represents dimensions from prototypical situation of negative emotional-evaluative attitude and regret. The negative attitude is rendered by the meaning of the verb to hate. The regret is rendered by the infinitive with the particle to from the prototypical construction verbalizing regret. The person tells that he / she always feels pity when he / she sees someone upset. In an unpacked form, situations verbalized by this construction may look as follows: Mental space 1: the person expresses his / her negative attitude to the situation of watching someone being sad; Mental space 2: he / she feels pity towards the object of sad emotions. In the result of conceptual integration of two mental spaces, the construction acquires the emergent meaning «negative emotional-evaluative attitude -regret», while the initial prototypical situation of the negative emotional-evaluative attitude lacks information that the person feels regret, and the prototypical situation of regret does not find out the dimensions from the situation of the negative emotional-evaluative attitude. Let us analyze the following construction-blend «negative emotional-evaluative attitude -regret»: (2) "Perhaps I shouldn't interfere but I hate to see a young man throwing his life away". The example describes the situation where the person shows his / her negative attitude to the way of life the young man has. It is accompanied by regret. The lexical elements of the blend (to hate) are borrowed from the prototypical construction for the situation of negative emotional-evaluative attitude, while grammatical elements (form of the infinitive) are borrowed from the prototypical construction for the situation of regret. Initial mental spaces of the blend can be presented in the following way: Mental space 1: person-speaker reveals negative attitude to the way of life another person has; Mental space 2: he / she fells regret of it.
The similar situation is verbalized in example (3), where we told that the speaker's negative attitude to the unpleasant situation is revealed together with regret: (3) I hate to see a decent man making a mess of his life. From the point of view of semantics, the most frequent verb in the place of the infinitive in the construction to hate + V Infinitive is the verb of speech. Such constructions represent apology of the speaker for what he / she is going to say. Let us observe such situation: (4) "The house damaged by fire? How badly?" "I hate to tell you -but it is completely gutted. I think it is quite beyond repair". Here the person informs the interlocutor a shocking piece of news about the house. The speaker knows that the news is unpleasant for his / her interlocutor and intuitively employs the construction-blend willing to apologize for what he / she has to say. At the same time the speaker regrets that he / she has to do that. Being unpacked the situation looks as follows: Mental space 1: the person expresses his / her negative attitude to what he / she is going to say; Mental space 2: the person regrets that he / she has to do it. Let us observe how such properties of blend as compression and emergence are revealed. Compression implies transformation of complicated conceptual structures inconvenient for human understanding and for operating them into more compact and convenient structures. In the example (4) we see compression of relationships «cause -consequence», as well as of time. This sentence does not contain the description of the process of burning, the duration of the fire, the causes of the fire. All the process is compressed: the fire took place as a result the house is practically burnt. Emergent character of the construction is seen in the fact that the initial prototypical situation of negative emotionalevaluative attitude and its verbal representation do not comprise information that the person feels regret. In a prototypical situation of regret, there is no information showing that regret of a person is accompanied by the emotional-evaluative attitude. However, a new mental space -blend -contains all these dimensions. Besides, the person fulfils two roles: a person who reveals the negative emotional attitude and regrets at the same time. So, constructions with the verb to hate and infinitive verbalize situations in which a person regrets of doing things he does not like to. More often these constructions include disjunctive conjunction but, pointing out that after all the person performs the unpleasant action in spite of his / her negative attitude. The verb to hate + Infinitive construction is more polite than the construction headed by the verb to regret. Employing this construction he seems to prepare the interlocutor for unpleasant news for him. For instance, in the sentence (5) I hate to tell you, but Uncle Jim is coming this weekend negative attitude of the speaker is represented by the meaning of the chief verb to hate. Regret is represented by the prototypical construction for the prototypical situation of regret with the infinitive, and the disjunctive conjunction but the person performs the action regardless of his / her negative attitude towards that.

Construction Nperson hate ing-form
A non-finite form gerund or ing-form developed in the Middle English period from the verbal noun in the Objective case in the adverbial meaning. The gerund, like the Infinitive that had already existed in the language and it acquired the meaning "not localized in time, hypothetical action" common for all non-finite verbal forms.
So, infinitive and gerund possess common features. Those features are the basis that makes it possible for the native speakers to start using ing-form intuitively after some verbs of emotional-evaluative attitude while initially they required only infinitive. However, constructions with infinitive and with gerund categorize different situations. According to L.M. Kovalyova, the speaker is able to categorize situations by means of constructions with different non-finite forms if these situations have even the slightest difference from each other in speaker's mind. This is the factor of differentiating some meaning in the mind, i.e. emergence of a cognitive structure that gives way to a construction being specified in a language. That is the development of opposition in a language system [10].
Constructions with ing-form can verbalize not only abstract, weakly bound to a real life situation, but also concrete localized in time situation. That makes the construction with ing-form semantically opposed to the construction with infinitive. Despite gerund does not possess the feature «localized in time action», the speaker chooses it when he / she verbilizes action bound to a certain period of time. It happens because gerund being a newer form appears to be free. On the other hand, infinitive as a wider and unmarked form attracts the form with more concrete features. Some constructions headed by the verb to hate and ing-form unlike constructions with infinitive verbilize the situation where a person performs unpleasant for his / her actions many times and feels regret because he / she has to perform them under some circumstances. At the same time the reason of his / her performing these actions is not represented in the sentence, because it is the fact of regret, not the reason of it, that is more important for the speaker.
Let us observe the sentence (6) Then, once I am at home, I usually think the whole of it was splendid, and hate having to settle down to the monotonous, lonely life of a writer. Every time the person returns to the monotonous and hard work of a writer after a short break, he / she feels negative emotions (distress, depression) as well as regret of that he /she has to do that under intractable circumstances. In the «unpacked form» the situation looks like as follows: Mental space 1: work causes person's negative emotions; Mental space 2: returning to it after break the person feels regret.
Let us observe how emergence is revealed in this construction. In the initial space of the emotionalevaluative attitude (represented by the verb to hate as well as the adjectives monotonous, lonely bearing a negative connotation), there is no information that the person feels regret. The initial space of regret (represented by the prototypical construction for the prototypical situation of regret) does not contain any information that the person' s regret is accompanied by a negative attitude. On the contrary, a new mental spaceblendcomprises these dimensions, acquiring a unique dimension that is not found in the initial spaces.
We can also observe compression of conceptual domains of time and space in this construction. The sentence lacks information where and how long the person had rest. Everything comes down to his / her feeling of discontent and regret.
In sentences (7) and (8), the person realizes that the process of making decisions and destroying things that are hard to create causes his negative emotions and regret. These constructions are also blends «negative emotional evaluative attitude -regret», where the negative attitude is represented by the meaning of the verb and regret is verbalized by the prototypical construction (ing-form) of the mental space of regret. The person also performs two roles here : the person from the prototypical situation of a negative emotional evaluative attitude and a person from the prototypical situation of regret.
(7) I hate having to make these sort of decisions; (8) They must be very hard to make. I hate destroying things that are hard to make.
Constructions with ing-forms as well as in the constructions with ifinitive include the disjunctive conjunction but showing that a person performs an action despite his negative attitude. For example: (9) I hate asking favours of anyone, especially you, but if it does come to thatif your sister gets the police on my trail, do you think you could let me know?
So in sentence (9) the speaker feels unpleasant emotions when he asks a favour (the reason is not stated yet), but, nevertheless, he does that and feels regret. The construction is the result of integration of two initial mental spaces of emotional-evaluative attitude and regret. The blend borrows lexical elements (the meaning of the verb to hate) from the mental space of the negative emotional-evaluative attitude and prototypical construction verbalizing regret (ing-form) from the mental space of regret. At the same time, each of the initial spaces separately does not embrace the dimensions of one another. That is the representation of emergence. The situation can be presented in the following way: Mental space 1: the person feels negative emotions every time he / she asks a favour; Mental space 2: the person regrets he / she has to do that.
The following construction (10) also categorizes the situation where negative attitude is fused with regret and presents a blend: (10) I hate hurting you, but I did hurt you, and I'd sooner die than do it again.
The person expresses his negative attitude towards what hurts his / her feelings and he regrets he did it again. In an "unpacked" form, the situation looks as follows: Mental space 1: the person hates to hurt someone's feelings; Mental space 2: in some cases he / she is not able of avoiding such a situation and consequently he / she regrets it.
At the same time, the situation is verbalized by a construction typical for a prototypical situation of regret and the lexical elements are borrowed from the mental space of emotional-evaluative attitude. Emergence is revealed in the fact that in the initial mental space of the negative emotional-evaluative attitude, dimensions of the situation regret are not found and the initial mental space of regret in its turn does not contain dimensions of negative emotional-evaluative attitude. Compression is revealed when the main idea comes down to the fact of offence without mentioning the reason of doing this and to the person's regret. So, negative emotional-evaluative attitude is represented lexically be the meaning to the chief verb to hate while regret is represented grammatically by the prototypical categorization of the situation of regret.
All in all, to hate + ing-form construction is a blend «negative emotional-evaluative attituderegret». It verbalizes the situation where the person performing certain actions regrets that he / she has to do some actions that he / she does not like.

Conclusion
So, non-prototypical constructions Nperson hate Infinitive и Nperson hate ing-form categorize two prototypical situations at the same time.
Nperson hate Infinitive is a construction-blend «negative emotional-evaluative attitude -regret». Such constructions represent situations where a person regrets doing things, he / she hates. Intuitive usinig this constructions allows speaker expressing his / her emotions more politely.
Nperson hate ing-form construction is also blend «negative emotional-evaluative attitude -regret». Unlike infinitive construction it represents a bit different situation. The person performing some actions every time feels regret that he / she has to perform something he / she dislikes Analysis of the constructions-blends makes it possible to find out that constructions existing in a person's mind and allowing him / her categorize reality are interconnected and interrelated. It reflects person's natural way of thinking.