Prepositional Network Models. A hermeneutical case study

Andrzej Pawelec

Uzyskaj dostęp

ISBN/ISSN:

978-83-233-2868-1

DOI:

Wydawnictwo:

Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego

Rok wydania:

2009

Liczba stron:

195

XML:ISBN/ISSN:

ONIX MARC21

Bibliografia:

Pawelec, Andrzej. Prepositional Network Models. A hermeneutical case study. Red. . Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, 2009, 195 s. ISBN 978-83-233-2868-1

Bibliografia refWorks:

RT Book, Whole

SR Electronic(1)

A1 Pawelec, A.

T1 Prepositional Network Models. A hermeneutical case study

PB Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego

PP Kraków

YR 2009

SN 978-83-233-2868-1

Bibliografia BibTex:

@Book{ 40943, author = "Pawelec, Andrzej", editor = "", title = "Prepositional Network Models. A hermeneutical case study", publisher = "Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego", year = "2009", address = "Kraków", isbn = "978-83-233-2868-1" }

Bibliografia endNote:

TY - BOOK

AU - Pawelec, Andrzej

ED -

TI - Prepositional Network Models. A hermeneutical case study

PB - Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego

CY - Kraków

PY - 2009

SN - 978-83-233-2868-1

ER -

Netografia (standard APA):

Pawelec, Andrzej. Prepositional Network Models. A hermeneutical case study [baza danych online] Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, 2009 [dostęp: 22 07 2024]. Dostęp w Ibuk Libra: https://libra.ibuk.pl/reader/prepositional-network-models-a-hermeneutical-case-study-andrzej-pawelec-40943.

cognitive linguistics, network models, modelling of prepositional polysemy

e-ISBN: 978-83-233-8553-0

Primarily, it presents an ongoing debate in cognitive linguistics about the modelling of prepositional polysemy, known as "the story of over". Additionally, it discusses a Polish counterpart - "the story of za(-)" ...

Więcej

ISBN/ISSN:

978-83-233-2868-1

DOI:

Wydawnictwo:

Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego

Rok wydania:

2009

Liczba stron:

195

XML:ISBN/ISSN:

ONIX MARC21

INTRODUCTION8
CHAPTER 0. THE HERMENEUTICAL SITUATION18
0.0. Introductory remarks18
0.1. The hermeneutical perspective18
0.2. Prototype effects and categorization23
0.3. Cognitive linguistics as prototype semantics35
0.4. The intractability of polysemy43
0.5. A recapitulation52
CHAPTER 1. NETWORK MODELS: FOUNDATIONAL ACCOUNTS56
1.0. Introductory remarks56
1.1. Motivations behind the Langackerian and Lakoffian model58
1.2. Schematic networks62
1.2.1. A resume of Langacker’s position62
1.2.2. A discussion67
1.3. Radial categories71
1.3.1. A resume of Lakoff’s radial model of over73
1.3.2. A critique76
1.4. Concluding remarks78
CHAPTER 2. THE STORY OF over82
2.0. Introductory remarks82
2.1. A consistently imagistic model82
2.2. A three-level account86
2.3. A principled polysemy network89
2.4. The case of (all) over99
2.5. A discussion103
CHAPTER 3. THE STORY OF za(-)108
3.0. Introductory remarks108
3.1. A network model of the preposition za109
3.2. A network model of the verbal prefix za-115
3.3. Some diachronic observations on the prefix za-119
3.4. A discussion126
CHAPTER 4. COGNITIVE “DIACHRONY WITHIN SYNCHRONY”?132
4.0. Introductory remarks132
4.1. Saussure: synchrony vs. diachrony132
4.2. Logical diachrony: the case of “length, width, and potential passing”136
4.3. The status of network models144
CHAPTER 5. THE HERMENEUTICAL CODA152
5.0. Introductory remarks152
5.1. Language, thought, and reality153
5.1.1. Teaching chimps symbols158
5.1.2. The mimetic origins of language163
5.1.3. First words of a child166
5.1.4. Words as “stopping orders”167
5.1.5. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis168
5.2. The formalism of linguistics: a Gadamerian view173
5.3. A plea for “expressive” linguistics177
REFERENCES182

ofwords.Mywholeargumentatthisfundamentallevelcouldbesummarisedas

follows:theissueoftherepresentationoflexicalsenses(availableoutofcontext)

presupposestheissueofdistinctmeaningsofwordsinuse,whichinturnpresup-

posesthequestionofthetransformativepowerofwords(inlinguistics,articulated

byHumboldtasenergeia,cf.5.0.).AnythingIsaybelowshouldbeplacedinthe

contextofthissequence,whichIhopetomakemoretransparent.Ifalabelcould

behelpful,Iproposetocomplementanaposterioristaticcognitiveapproachwith

adynamic(or“genetic”)“expressive”one.Again,aventureofthiskindcannotbe

convincinglyarguedfor,exhaustiveetc.Wheneverafundamentalchangeofper-

spectiveisurged,onecanonlyappeal(asshownbyMerleau-PontyandCharles

Taylor22),startingwithsomeproblemsinherentinaninterlocutor’spositionand

tryingtoshowthatamoreencompassingviewmaythrowsomelightonthem.

Apossiblypresumptuousundertakingofthiskindwillsufferfromstandard

maladiesafﬂictingsuch“fundamental”and“centrifugal”ventures(asmypresen-

tationsofarhasperhapsalreadymadeabundantlyclear).Whilepointingtomore

embracingperspectivesonmattersathand(a“synoptic”view),Iwillinvokedata

andargumentsfromvariousquarters,wheneverIﬁndthemilluminating.23Thus,

Iwilloftencrossdomainboundaries(Iwilltrytosignal,though,whereItread).

NorwillItrytoofferexhaustiveexpositionsofavailablematerial,onceIfeelthat

enoughtoexemplifyapositionispresented(copiousreferencesmaybeviewed

asapartialatonement–orfurtherevidenceofdamnation).Asaresult(since

particularsarethere,waitinginthewings),Imayalsoﬁghtatplacesalosing

battlewithmyparentheticalremarksandfootnotes.24Nevertheless(asapossible

defence),whatIamdoingisintrinsicallyrelatedtothecharacteroftheﬁeldunder

investigation,whichisopenlyinterdisciplinary.Thus,Itakeseriouslythecallfor

anintegrationofperspectivesonmindandlanguageadoptedindifferentventures

anddisciplinesplacedundertheumbrellaterm“cognitivescience”.Tobesure,

Iamnotequallycompetentinalldomainsofinquiry:thisstudyisprimarilya

reviewofaparticularmethodoflexicalrepresentationinCL,whilealladditional

matterservesasthebackgroundtomakethisassessmentmoremeaningful.The

22ForMerleau-Ponty,seenote8in5.1.;forC.Taylor,seee.g.(1989:87)inthemoralcontext.

23Eventhoughthisstrategymaysuperﬁciallyresembleasearchfor“convergingevidence”,

treatedbyLakoffandJohnsonasasignofsuccessininterdisciplinaryventures(e.g.Johnson1992:

345),Ibelieveitisalmostdirectlyopposedtoit.LakoffandJohnsonapparentlyassumethat“data”

existindependentlyoftheoriesandmaybepickedatwill,whenevertheyseemtoconﬁrmone’s

point.Theydonotpaymuchattentiontotheproblemofintegrationofknowledgecomingfrom

differentresearchdomains(asopposedtoe.g.Donald2004).AsLakoffadmitsinhisonly“meth-

odological”statementIknow:“Igenerallyprefernottoengageinmethodologicaldiscussionsand

wouldratherjustgetonwithmywork”(1990:39).Thehermeneuticalapproach,however,doesnot

aimattheintegrationofdataatthe“objective”levelbutrathertreatsproblemsarisingatthatlevelas

symptomaticofassumptionsandlimitationsofparticularresearchmethods.Cf.remarksinthenext

paragraphsonmyaimsinthepresentstudy.

24Iparaphrasehere(andexemplify)Beardsmore’sremarkonKripke’sbookonWittgenstein,

asquotedbyPateman(1987:113).Myapologymaysoundﬂippantbutthepeculiaritiesmentioned

abovemaybealsotakenasevidencethatIhavestrivenatclarityasfarasmyapproachallows(and

withinmylimitations).IwouldbegladifIhadfoundamoredirectwaytosaywhatImeant.

Brak wyników

Prepositional Network Models. A hermeneutical case study

Treść książki

Znajdź bibliotekę blisko siebie, i uzyskaj dostęp do ebooka w systemie IBUK Libra