Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
14
presentworkasnotedinthesubtitleisa“casestudy”ofacognitivestyleof
theorizingaboutlexicalrepresentation.
Tolimitthecentrifugaltendenciesinherentinmyapproach,Ichosetofocus
onahighlyspecic“objective”domain,i.e.networkmodelsoftwoprepositions
(particles,adverbs,prexesetc.):EnglishoverandPolishza(-).Ipresentthis
materialin,perhaps,tediousdetail(eventhoughtheactualmaterialcoveredisby
farricher)todocumentthewayinwhichresearchersgrapplewithproblemsposed
bythephenomena,wheninspectedfromtheirvantagepoint.Itisimportantto
underlinethatIdonotproposeanysolutionstoparticularproblems,nordoIlook
foramoresuccessfulwayofdealingwiththephenomenainquestion.Rather,
whatappearsasproblematicatthe“objective”levelistreatedasasymptomof
thevantagepointadoptedbyresearchers.Iaimtomakebettervisiblesomeof
theirdeeperassumptions(rootedintheparadigmtheyworkwithin),whichmay
gobeyond(andsometimesevenagainst)theirself-declaredpositions.Thisisone
causeofthepresumptuousnessmentionedaboveandalsoofthepossiblyirritating
habittoplace“object”and“objective”ininvertedcommas(see0.1.).
SuchanapproachmayseemreminiscentofthepatronisingattitudeIcharged
LakoffandJohnsonwith(asexempliedinnote19above).However,Iamfar
frommountingthechargeoffalseconsciousnessagainsttheauthorsofthemod-
elsanalysedbelow,nordoIthinkthathermeneutics(asopposedto“scientism”)
hasanemancipatorymission,becauseit“knowsbetter”.Asfortheformerpoint,
scientistsdevelopagivenpositiontheytrytocaptureasmanyrecalcitrantphe-
nomenaastheycanwithinachosenparadigm.Theirworkisnormallyviewedas
hypothetical,25i.e.notassomethingtobelievein,butratherasapossibleexplana-
tionofarangeofphenomena(whenonetakesforgrantedasetofassumptions),
tobecomparedwithalternativeapproaches,whichapplyothermethodstoan
overlapping,oracomplementary,rangeofphenomena.Thechargeoffalsecon-
sciousnessmakesnosenseinthiscontext.Onemayonlypointoutlimitationsofa
particularpositionbutthisistrueinallsuchcases:scienceisperspectival.While
science(oragivendiscipline)asawholeaimsatamorecomprehensiveperspec-
tive,embracingallrelevantphenomena(a“synoptic”view),fragmentationanda
competitionofparadigmsisthenorm.Awiderperspectivemaybeachievedonly
thankstoalaboriousintegrationofmorepartialapproaches(transformingthe
signicanceoftheirrespective“data”intheprocess).Asforthelatterpoint,since
hermeneuticsisnotsituatedatthe“objective”level(itisnotamethod),itcannot
directlyparticipateinthetaskofintegration.Hence,ithasnoright(orintention)
toadmonishoremancipatescientists.Hermeneuticsratherrevealstheconditions
of“objectiveness”ingeneral,aswellasinparticular“objective”domains,thus
25Intheoryratherthaninpractice,though,asshownbysociologyofscience.Cf.thepioneer-
ingstudybyFleck(1986[1935])aninsider’saccountofhowWasserman’stestshapesbiological
“data”andtheclassicworkbyMannheim(1955).Thestandardworkon“paradigms”inscienceis
Kuhn(1996).On“paradigms”insocietyatlarge,seeFoucault(1994).