Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (11)
- Part of a Book (10)
- Working Paper (6)
- Conference Proceeding (2)
- Preprint (2)
- Review (2)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Language
- English (16)
- German (14)
- Portuguese (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (34)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (34)
Keywords
- Deutsch (8)
- Sprachverstehen (7)
- Spracherwerb (5)
- Kognitive Linguistik (4)
- Referenzidentität (4)
- Sprachproduktion (4)
- Kognitionswissenschaft (3)
- Referenz <Linguistik> (3)
- Russisch (3)
- Anapher <Syntax> (2)
Institute
In this paper we test previous claims concerning the universality of patterns of polysemy and semantic change in perception verbs. Implicit in such claims are two elements: firstly, that the sharing of two related senses A and B by a given form is cross-linguistically widespread, and matched by a complementary lack of some rival polysemy, and secondly that the explanation for the ubiquity of a given pattern of polysemy is ultimately rooted in our shared human cognitive make-up. However, in comparison to the vigorous testing of claimed universals that has occurred in phonology, syntax and even basic lexical meaning, there has been little attempt to test proposed universals of semantic extension against a detailed areal study of non-European languages. To address this problem we examine a broad range of Australian languages to evaluate two hypothesized universals: one by Viberg (1984), concerning patterns of semantic extension across sensory modalities within the domain of perception verbs (i .e. intra-field extensions), and the other by Sweetser (1990), concerning the mapping of perception to cognition (i.e. trans-field extensions). Testing against the Australian data allows one claimed universal to survive, but demolishes the other, even though both assign primacy to vision among the senses.
Gegenstand des vorliegenden Beitrags ist der Zusammenhang der beiden Bereiche Sprache und außersprachliches Begriffssystem: Wie sind sprachliche und konzeptuelle Module verknüpft, und wie lässt sich ihr Zusammenhang theoretisch erfassen? Ich skizziere zwei alternative Ansätze zur Modellierung dieser Schnittstelle: das „Zwei-Ebenen-Modell“ und das Modell der „Conceptual Semantics“. Vor dem Hintergrund der beiden Ansätze diskutiere ich die Notwendigkeit eines vom konzeptuellen unterschiedenen „semantischen“ Systems, das sprachliche Aspekte der Bedeutung erfasst. Ich entwickele auf dieser Basis ein Modell, in dem die semantische Ebene als integrierter Teil des konzeptuellen Systems CS definiert ist: Semantische Repräsentationen werden durch einen Filter über CS generiert; sie etablieren eine Schnittstellen-Ebene, die CSElemente sprachlichen Strukturen zugänglich macht. Das Modell, das als Elaboration des „Tripartite Parallel Architecture“-Modells (Jackendoff 1997) verstanden werden kann, differenziert sprachliche und nicht-sprachliche Bedeutungsaspekte innerhalb eines komplexen Moduls (“2 in 1”-Ansatz).
Im Rahmen philosophisch-mathematischer Ansätze steht häufig der kardinale Aspekt natürlicher Zahlen im Vordergrund, auf den sprachlich mit Kardinal-Konstruktionen („sieben Zwerge“) referiert wird. Zahlen werden jedoch nicht nur in solchen quantitativen, sondern auch in ordinalen („der dritte Mann“) oder nominalen Kontexten („Bus Nr.129“) gebraucht. Bei einer umfassenden Analyse des Zahlkonzepts sind daher auch diese Komponenten zu berücksichtigen.
Ich werde im folgenden einige Überlegungen zur konzeptuellen und semantischen Struktur von Numeralkonstruktionen im Deutschen anstellen, in deren Rahmen ich sowohl die Repräsentation von Zahlen und die Modellierung von Numeralkonstruktionen diskutieren als auch einige Aspekte der Schnittstelle Syntax-Semantik erhellen will. Ich führe meine Untersuchung im Rahmen des „Zwei-Ebenen-Modells“ der Semantik durch (vgl. Bierwisch 1983;1987;1988; Lang 1987; Zimmermann 1987; 1992), nehme also neben dem semantischen System SEM ein autonomes konzeptuelles System CS an, das „die mentale Form dessen, was durch sprachliche Äußerungen wiedergegeben wird, [determiniert]“ (Bierwisch 1987:6).
Is language the key to number? This article argues that the human language faculty provides the cognitive equipment that enables humans to develop a systematic number concept. Crucially, this concept is based on non-iconic representations that involve relations between relations: relations between numbers are linked with relations between objects. In contrast to this, language-independent numerosity concepts provide only iconic representations. The pattern of forming relations between relations lies at the heart of our language faculty, suggesting that it is language that enables humans to make the step from these iconic representations, which we share with other species, to a generalised concept of number.
A cognição pode ser definida como um processo de aquisição de conhecimento que tem como material a informação do meio em que vivemos e o que já está registrado na nossa memória. Este processo envolve percepção, atenção, memória e ação, e nem sempre acontece de forma consciente. Mais do que simplesmente a aquisição de conhecimento, é um processo de conversão de tudo o que é captado pelo aprendiz de acordo com sua identidade e suas experiências. Com base nesse conceito, propõe-se um modelo teórico para o processamento cognitivo relacionado à produção em língua estrangeira, fundamentado em teorias recentes da neurociência sobre memória, aprendizagem e processamento de representações de seqüências freqüentes na língua (chunks) e ilustrado com dados referentes ao alemão como língua estrangeira. Como resultado, nota-se que o conhecimento teórico sobre a língua estrangeira e a capacidade de utilizá-la são habilidades complementares que interagem na aprendizagem da mesma, mas como saberes distintos, e não estágios do mesmo conhecimento determinados pelo tempo de aprendizagem ou armazenamento na memória, como sugerem alguns teóricos da área.
The aim of this article is to explore semantic relations within somatic phraseology using concepts from cognitive linguistics and prototype theory. The typicality or atypicality of representatives of the category of somatic phraseologisms is determined on the basis of 12 features of idiom irregularity according to Dobrovoľskij. The analysis results in a table of "good" and "bad" representatives of the category. Individual parameters are evaluated, but the value of individual criteria is also considered. This method makes it possible to determine the status of individual somatic phraseologisms with regard to each other, as well as the entire group of somatisms against other phraseologisms. The results enable conclusions to be drawn regarding the degree of motivatedness of somatisms.
Oppositeness, i.e. the relation between opposites or contraries or contradictories, has a fundamental role in human cognition. In the various domains of intellectual and psychological activity we find ordering schemas that are based, in one way or another, on the cognitive figure of oppositeness. It is therefore not surprising that the figure and its corresponding ordering schemas show their reflexes in the languages of the world. [...] We shall be dealing with oppositeness in the sense that a linguistically untrained native speaker, when asked what would be the opposite of 'long' can come up with some such answer as 'short', and likewise intuitively grasp the relation between 'man' and 'woman', 'corne' and 'go', 'up' and 'down', etc. Thinking that much of the vocabulary of a language is organized in such opposite pairs we must recognize that this is an important faculty, and we are curious to know how this is done, what are the underlying conceptual-cognitive structures and processes, and how they are encoded in the languages of the world. We shall leave out of consideration such oppositions as singular vs. plural. present vs. past, voiced vs. unvoiced, oppositions that the linguist states by means of a metalanguage which is itself derived from a concept of oppositeness as manifested by the examples which I gave earlier. Our approach will connect with earlier versions of the UNITYP framework. However, as a novel feature, and, hopefully, as an improvement, we shall apply some sort of a division of labor. We shall first try to reconstruct the conceptual-cognitive content of oppositeness and to keep it separate from the discussion of its reflexes in the individual languages. We shall find that a dimensional ordering of content in PARAMETERS and a continuum of TECHNIQUES is possible already on the conceptual-cognitive level. In order to keep it distinct from the level of linguistic encoding we shall use a separate terminology, graphically marked by capital 1etters.