“Do You See and Hear More? A Study on Telugu Perception Verbs”

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Phani Krishna ◽  
S. Arulmozi ◽  
Ramesh Kumar Mishra
Keyword(s):  
Perception Verbs

scholarly journals Object-oriented perception: towards a contrastive approach to evidentiality in media discourse

Kalbotyra ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (69) ◽  
pp. 82
Author(s):  
Elena Domínguez Romero
Keyword(s):  
Object Oriented ◽  
Media Discourse ◽  
Contrastive Analysis ◽  
Analysis Methodology ◽  
Perception Verbs ◽  
Similarities And Differences

This paper is a corpus-based study of the evidential realisations of object-oriented perception verbs in English and Spanish written and oral media discourse. The main aim of the study is to analyse and compare the different uses and complementation patterns taken by the English words look and sound and their Spanish counterparts se ve and suena. The procedure followed involves a contrastive analysis methodology: (i) description of data, (ii) juxtaposition and (iii) contrast. The data has been taken from oral and written media discourse corpora in English and Spanish. The study has revealed interesting similarities and differences in the uses and complementation patterns adopted by object-oriented perception verbs in both written and oral English and Spanish, thus making a contribution to a debate in which Spanish has been obviated to date.

scholarly journals Elision and Translation of Perception Verbs in Tang Poems

2014 ◽  
Vol null (66) ◽  
pp. 207-225
Author(s):  
Sung Seo ◽  
조성천
Keyword(s):  
Perception Verbs

See / Witness and the ‘setting-subject construction’

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-301
Author(s):  
Christelle Lacassain-Lagoin
Keyword(s):  
Human Subject ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Cognitive Schemas ◽  
Theoretical Concepts ◽  
Grammatical Subject ◽  
Perception Verbs

Abstract Perception verbs prototypically occur with a grammatical subject NP referring to a person. However, see and witness also license an inanimate grammatical subject, more precisely a spatial or temporal setting, in a “setting-subject construction” (Langacker 1991, 2008). The present study addresses this kind of variation, and demonstrates how the two alternate constructions reveal shifts from an egocentric perspective to an anthropocentric perspective. It sets out to accomplish three main goals: first, to establish whether each construction aligns perfectly with one particular perspective; second, to identify the semantic and syntactic characteristics of setting-subject constructions and explain how an inanimate subject NP can be favored over a human subject NP; third, to determine what can motivate speakers’ choices between the two alternate constructions licensed by see and witness. To achieve this, a qualitative, corpus-based analysis is carried out, which helps to understand to what extent the grammatical coding embodies a specific way of viewing the scene. First, the cognitive theoretical concepts (e.g., the Extended Animacy Hierarchy (Croft, 2003), egocentric and canonical viewing arrangements, cognitive schemas and models) that are helpful for the proper characterization of the two structures are presented, as well as the methodology employed to collect data for the present study. I then focus on prototypical, human subject NP constructions which reveal either an egocentric or an anthropocentric point of view of the scene. Finally, setting-subject constructions are addressed: not only are the characteristics of such structures highlighted but also the parameters and factors that contribute to their occurrence are identified. The study shows that such constructions convey the conceptualizer’s assessment of a situation, as the viewing relationship is construed subjectively. A setting-subject construction thus reveals a perspective that indirectly turns out to be more anthropocentric than ‘setting-centric’, as the inanimate locative subject, ranking at the bottom of the Animacy hierarchy, winds up alluding to any possible human being, including the speaker, the addressee and the Other.

The grammaticalization of Dutch klinken

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 190-212
Author(s):  
Marjolein Poortvliet
Keyword(s):  
17Th Century ◽  
16Th Century ◽  
Intransitive Verb ◽  
Middle Dutch ◽  
Subjective Interpretation ◽  
Perception Verbs ◽  
History Of ◽  
Verb Meaning ◽  
Diachronic Development

Abstract This article demonstrates the diachronic development of present-day Dutch klinken as an evidential copular verb meaning ‘to seem, based on (auditory) evidence’ from the Middle Dutch intransitive verb klinken meaning ‘to give off a clear sound’. I identify four semantic stages in the history of klinken, which are divided by processes of semantic bleaching (14th–16th century, 16th–17th century) and subjectification and copularization (during the 16th century). I claim that the process of copularization is the trigger of both the evidential meaning and the subjective interpretation that copular constructions with klinken receive. Furthermore, I show that, unlike the development of eruitzien ‘look’ and voelen ‘feel’ from cognitive perception verbs, klinken has developed much like the Dutch copular verbs schijnen ‘seem’ and blijken ‘turn out’: from an intransitive verb with a sensory-related meaning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document