Abstract In this paper, we discuss the prevalent diversity of constructionist approaches in relation to the idea of Construction Grammar as a coherent field of linguistic study. We do so, based on the views of about 190 constructionist researchers, as expressed in a questionnaire in 2021. While the responses show both variety and agreement, the main dividers appear to be whether all constructionist approaches are usage-based, on the one hand, and the stance towards formalization, on the other. We argue that the diversity of approaches is on the one hand a strength, in that a great variety of linguistic phenomena can be accounted for from a constructionist viewpoint. On the other hand, it is a weakness if these accounts are not mutually compatible. If Construction Grammar is to truly work as a model of language as a whole, the various approaches must not only get to co-exist — and flourish — but also be made to fit together. This is not a call for conformity, but rather for communication and cross-fertilization.
Boas et al. (Fri,) studied this question.