The Five Level Model of Language:

[Linear Order + Structural Determination = C.G.'s 'form' ]

Level 1 is the physical instantiation of the words. Sentences have a structural determination existing in level two; this is represented here by stemma. These first two levels correspond to what construction grammars refer to as 'form' or expression. The problem raised in class was that there are two components of form paired with meaning, but they are not delineated by construction grammars; they list things in [ N VP Obl ] terms, and state a meaning such as 'the x'er the y'er' construction, but the form is comprised of two components that are being lumped into one, namely stemma and word classes. Meaning in the current stemmatic model is framed in level three. This framing was discussed as basically a representation of some current state of affairs. The representation must be finite because they are thoughts and have a background against which they exist, this frame is thought of as limiting that instance of the mental ideation. There can be multiple frames, and these frames are claimed to be closely linked to the closed class elements of language. Stemmatic theory holds that prepositions do a lot of work, evidenced by their end place on the stem and the fact that certain prepositions tend to be a determining factor in node selection. They provide  an action schema and frame the meaning of the node.

Level 3 example - Example 3 in Adele Goldberg's Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure

3a) Bees are swarming in the garden.

3b) The garden is swarming with bees.

Goldberg says: "3b suggests that the whole garden is full of bees, whereas 3a could involve bees in only a part of the garden." We wanted to dive into the stemmatic difference between these two sentences:

3a)

3b )

     Here, the subject of the stemma changes; along with this change is a change from Modal(C6)  to Co-Agent(C5), style or manner. The verb is being framed in different ways. This framing brings about a shift in meaning. The verb 'loaded' is not responsible for the change; two meanings are not necessary. In 3a, the subject, bees, are in the garden exemplified by the containment scheme provided by the preposition 'in'. The difference between the two is that of viewpoint. This first example is more first person perspective. In 3b, the garden is the subject, one is viewing the entire scene from afar, the garden is doing the swarming, and the manner of that swarming is with bees. It was debated that a garden cannot really swarm anything, and that swarming should not be a 2 for this reason. There was a suggestion  to consider swarming as a 5, a manner of existing for the garden. This is logical, but I have aproblem with the implications this assertion has.

     If we say that swarming is a 5 off of is, then all predicative verbs would have to be this way. Phrases like 'the paper is sitting over there' , or 'he is painting' . The manner of being for the paper is in the sitting state, or the manner of being for him is in the painting state' . However, this is not the usual way of stemmatizing this phrase. I would assume that sitting or painting would reside in the predicate branch. My logic may be flawed in this objection, but I think it should be kept in mind while viewing the alternative stemma:

3b.2)

It was basically decided that this was the better option, but the debate is still open. Please provide any input that you have