TAILIEUCHUNG - The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics Part 38

The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics Part 38. In the past decade, Cognitive Linguistics has developed into one of the most dynamic and attractive frameworks within theoretical and descriptive linguistics The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics is a major new reference that presents a comprehensive overview of the main theoretical concepts and descriptive/theoretical models of Cognitive Linguistics, and covers its various subfields, theoretical as well as applied. | 340 JORDAN ZLATEV Figure . A representation of form-meaning mapping within Holistic Spatial Semantics from Zlatev 1997 . The Analysis of Spatial Polysemy A claim often made in cognitive semantic analyses is that lexical items and particularly spatial ones are strongly polysemous that is characterized by a multiple set of distinct but systematically related senses Lakoff 1987 Langacker 1987 Deane 1988 Cuyckens 1991 Geeraerts 1993 Regier 1996 Tuggy 1999 this volume chapter 4 . These analyses are usually represented by networks of nodes standing for different senses connected via asymmetrical links. The terms for these asymmetrically linked nodes senses may vary with the particular network model . prototypical vs. extended Langacker 1987 central vs. peripheral Lakoff 1987 but in all cases one node of the relation is seen as cognitively more basic than the other. One of the best-known applications for this kind of analysis has been precisely the semantic study of spatial expressions where nonspatial senses are nearly always treated as extensions from the spatial ones. But what exactly is the status of such polysemy networks Are they a characterization of psychologically real structures and or processes and thus relate to the individual psychological level or are they descriptive generalizations over the use potential of the expressions in question Since the latter is derived on the basis of speakers intuitions of the appropriateness or correctness of a particular expression when applied to a particular situation they obviously represent theoretical explications of the normative nonobservable level of language. As pointed out in section the two kinds of linguistic reality the individual-psychological and the collective-normative do not coincide and therefore it cannot be assumed that a particular analysis of polysemy would satisfy simultaneously the criteria of linguistic explication and psychological explanation. This pervasive mistake of equating .

TÀI LIỆU LIÊN QUAN