In his paper “Not-fragments and negative expansion”, Bert Cappelle argues for a discourse-level construction status of sentence fragments with an emphatic meaning, such as Not in a million years! Sentence fragments are non-canonical sentences in that they lack a subject, predicate or some other constituent. In the generative literature, it is assumed that not-fragments are the result of elliptical mechanisms such as ‘stripping’, operating on full clauses, through which identical material can be omitted in a subsequent clause. However, the author argues against the analysis of fragments as shortened forms of full sentences, as there is often no candidate utterance for full-sentence reconstruction. Fragments can, for instance, appear as first elements of negative clauses with subject- auxiliary inversion, which makes the deletion hypothesis rather implausible. On other occasions, the meaning even needs to be ‘reconstructed’ from the situational context. As an alternative, Cappelle proposes a constructional account and defines not-fragments as a unique combination of formal (syntactic and phonological) and functional (semantic and pragmatic) properties, mentally stored by speakers. As to its form, the author highlights the frequent appearance of particular adverbs (e.g. again, too) and the emphatic stress pattern. The general meaning of the construction is instructional, as it urges the hearer to look in the (extra)linguistic context for a proposition in which the emphasized constituent can be integrated. The construction also conveys different pragmatic meanings such as strong denial, strong emotional feeling, or a pledge to avoid something to happen. However, not only the sentence fragments themselves are defined in constructional terms, but also the discourse pattern in which they appear. Indeed, not-fragments commonly appear in contexts of ‘negative expansion’, in which successive negation leads to a reinforcement of negation rather than to cancellation. This discourse pattern also qualifies as a construction. It is assumed that not-fragments functionally establish a SAME-EXCEPT relation between two turns, being a general cognitive mechanism. From a formal point of view, the negative expansion construction is defined by the presence of a negative statement preceding the fragment, and an emphatic phonology; from a functional point of view, it mostly involves a strong denial as expressed by a highly emotional speaker in an informal register. In his paper “Creative constructs, constructions, and frames in Internet discourse”, Lieven Vandelanotte reflects upon issues of constructionality and framing in Internet discourse. The paper sets out to problematizing the notion of memes not just as cultural replicators, but as essentially linked to the creative intervention of human beings, and suggests that some patterns of online discourse usage can qualify as constructions, as commonly understood in Construction Grammar. Compared to standard linguistic constructions emerging from usage, they can be interpreted as accelerated cases of the emergence and entrenchment (and possible subsequent decline) of constructions and frames. Against this background, the paper focuses on the presentational templates that indicate particular meme constructions, and points to distinctions between creative constructs and entrenched, conventionalized constructions. Vandelanotte offers a comprehensive account of what Internet memes are, before describing the formal and semantic aspects of Internet memes as multimodal (image-text) constructions, i.e. visual components are recognized as parts of constructions on a par with textual components. This is a valuable step forward towards research into multimodal construction grammar and, specifically, into other types of multimodal constructions and multimodality with gestures (see Zima & Bergs 2014). The study also offers a differentiated analysis