Formal rhetorical figures (schemes) have been largely neglected by Construction Grammar (CxG). The losses of this omission are substantial. Like metaphors, schemes leverage general-purpose neurocognitive principles and evoke communicative functions. They give utterances salience and memorability, making them highly compatible with usage-based models, and they align form with function. Their association with ludic functions also makes them of considerable interest to creativity-of-everyday-language linguists. Focusing on inverse-repetition figures (exemplified by “all for one and one for all”) and a few collocate figures, this paper argues for integrating rhetorical schemes much more fully into CxG.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Randy Allen Harris (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: