scholarly journals Metonymy in Mind, Language, and Communication

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Xitao Fu
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Developmental Psychology ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Specific Aspect ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Forming Process ◽  
Dialogic Discourse ◽  
Cognitive Mechanism ◽  
Domain Mapping

<p>The typical view considers metonymy as an intra-domain mapping which involves the source providing mental access to the target within the domain, with PART-WHOLE as the prototypical relation. This commonly held view of metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics pays attention to what happens after the domain, or rather, the WHOLE, has been established. How the WHOLE is formed seems to be missing. Based on the research results of cognitive science, especially in cognitive psychology, developmental psychology, and neuroscience, metonymy is tentatively argued to be an innate cognitive mechanism involving PART-WHOLE FORMING, PART-WHOLE/PART RELATING processes. The PART-WHOLE FORMING process establishes the WHOLE from the PART: It picks up some prominent element(s) in an interactive process to form a patterned experience, and the PART-WHOLE/PART RELATING process relates PART to PART, relating PART to the WHOLE and vice versa. The PART-WHOLE/PART RELATING process is made possible by the PART-WHOLE FORMING process. Metonymic operations usually precede metaphoric operation. Metaphor is essentially grounded on metonymy. Metonymy as a cognitive mechanism is most noticeably realized in language. It operates in various aspects of language and language use. The experience pattern (i.e. the WHOLE) formulated through the PART-WHOLE FORMING process is found to underpin the process of grammaticalization, the development of meaning prototype, and to motivate such daily language use as football nicknaming and to bring in certain cognitive and communicative functions. In the light of this view of metonymy, grammaticalization is considered from the conceptual perspective as a process from the general/global to the specific/local, or from focus on one specific aspect to focus on another particular aspect within the global WHOLE, rather than the usually held concrete-to-abstract process. This also applies to word meaning prototypes. Word meaning develops due to the dynamic of meaning prototypes. When considered from the conceptual perspective, meaning prototypes generally develop from the general/global to the specific/local with the change and specification of contextual situations. The cognitive analysis of football nicknames also suggests that metonymy is overwhelming and provides the requisite basis for metaphor. The PART-WHOLE FORMING and the PART-WHOLE/PART RELATING processes of metonymy as an inherent cognitive mechanism often interact in the mind, which is evidenced in language and may be best illustrated through analysis of interactive communication in general, and dialogic discourse in particular. Metonymy in interaction is embodied in its functions and operations in dialogue and its contribution to the dialogue as a discourse entity. Metonymy operates in dialogic discourse in various patterns of GENERAL-SPECIFIC scheme. It operates in the development of dialogue and helps structure the dialogic discourse, making it a coherent discourse entity; it makes meaning out of the local utterance and relates it to the whole dialogue; it underlies the decision-making process, helping make a final decision among alternatives. It also motivates the problem-solving process, helping formulate and organise replies to the questions posed by the counterpart in dialogic discourse, and facilitating the solution of daily problems.</p>

scholarly journals Metonymy in Mind, Language, and Communication

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Xitao Fu
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Developmental Psychology ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Specific Aspect ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Forming Process ◽  
Dialogic Discourse ◽  
Cognitive Mechanism ◽  
Domain Mapping

<p>The typical view considers metonymy as an intra-domain mapping which involves the source providing mental access to the target within the domain, with PART-WHOLE as the prototypical relation. This commonly held view of metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics pays attention to what happens after the domain, or rather, the WHOLE, has been established. How the WHOLE is formed seems to be missing. Based on the research results of cognitive science, especially in cognitive psychology, developmental psychology, and neuroscience, metonymy is tentatively argued to be an innate cognitive mechanism involving PART-WHOLE FORMING, PART-WHOLE/PART RELATING processes. The PART-WHOLE FORMING process establishes the WHOLE from the PART: It picks up some prominent element(s) in an interactive process to form a patterned experience, and the PART-WHOLE/PART RELATING process relates PART to PART, relating PART to the WHOLE and vice versa. The PART-WHOLE/PART RELATING process is made possible by the PART-WHOLE FORMING process. Metonymic operations usually precede metaphoric operation. Metaphor is essentially grounded on metonymy. Metonymy as a cognitive mechanism is most noticeably realized in language. It operates in various aspects of language and language use. The experience pattern (i.e. the WHOLE) formulated through the PART-WHOLE FORMING process is found to underpin the process of grammaticalization, the development of meaning prototype, and to motivate such daily language use as football nicknaming and to bring in certain cognitive and communicative functions. In the light of this view of metonymy, grammaticalization is considered from the conceptual perspective as a process from the general/global to the specific/local, or from focus on one specific aspect to focus on another particular aspect within the global WHOLE, rather than the usually held concrete-to-abstract process. This also applies to word meaning prototypes. Word meaning develops due to the dynamic of meaning prototypes. When considered from the conceptual perspective, meaning prototypes generally develop from the general/global to the specific/local with the change and specification of contextual situations. The cognitive analysis of football nicknames also suggests that metonymy is overwhelming and provides the requisite basis for metaphor. The PART-WHOLE FORMING and the PART-WHOLE/PART RELATING processes of metonymy as an inherent cognitive mechanism often interact in the mind, which is evidenced in language and may be best illustrated through analysis of interactive communication in general, and dialogic discourse in particular. Metonymy in interaction is embodied in its functions and operations in dialogue and its contribution to the dialogue as a discourse entity. Metonymy operates in dialogic discourse in various patterns of GENERAL-SPECIFIC scheme. It operates in the development of dialogue and helps structure the dialogic discourse, making it a coherent discourse entity; it makes meaning out of the local utterance and relates it to the whole dialogue; it underlies the decision-making process, helping make a final decision among alternatives. It also motivates the problem-solving process, helping formulate and organise replies to the questions posed by the counterpart in dialogic discourse, and facilitating the solution of daily problems.</p>

The meaning of time: polysemy, the lexicon and conceptual structure

2005 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
VYVYAN EVANS
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Memory ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Semantic Network ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Significant Degree ◽  
Cognitive Mechanisms ◽  
Conceptual Processing ◽  
Distinct Sense ◽  
Generative Approach

In this paper I argue that the lexeme time constitutes a lexical category of distinct senses instantiated in semantic memory. The array of distinct senses constitutes a motivated semantic network organised with respect to a central sense termed the SANCTIONING SENSE. The senses associated with time are derived by virtue of the interaction between the Sanctioning Sense, conceptual processing and structuring, and context. Hence, semantic representations, cognitive mechanisms, and situated language use are appealed to in accounting for the polysemy associated with time. The model adduced is termed PRINCIPLEDPOLYSEMY. The conclusion which emerges, in keeping with recent studies in lexical semantics, most notably Lakoff (1987), Pustejovsky (1995), Tyler & Evans (2003) and Evans (2004), is that the lexicon is not an arbitrary repository of unrelated lexemes; rather, the lexicon exhibits a significant degree of systematicity, and productivity. In order to adduce what constitutes a distinct sense, I introduce three criteria: (1) a meaning criterion, (2) a concept elaboration criterion and (3) a grammatical criterion. A further claim is that the lexicon exhibits significant redundancy. This position is at odds with SINGLE-MEANINGAPPROACHES to polysemy, which posit highly underspecified lexical META-ENTRIES, such as the generative approach of Pustejovsky (1995) or the monosemy position of Ruhl (1989). That is, I propose that lexical items constitute highly granular categories of senses, which are encoded in semantic memory (=the lexicon). This necessitates a set of criteria for determining what counts as a distinct sense without deriving a proliferation of unwarranted senses, a criticism which has been levelled at some studies of word-meaning in cognitive linguistics (e.g. Lakoff 1987).

Zur Entstehung und Entwicklung des begriffes „Konzept“ in der kognitiven Semantik

2021 ◽  
pp. 251-259
Author(s):  
Nedas Jurgaitis ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Middle Ages ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Cognitive Semantics ◽  
Subjective Perception ◽  
Scientific Discussion ◽  
European Languages ◽  
The One ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Linguistic Units

The present article deals with the genesis of the notion “concept” in German cognitive semantics. The aim of the study is to present the origin and development of the notion “concept” from a diachronic perspective. The genesis of the notion “concept” in linguistics, particularly cognitive semantics, is an object of discussion. It reveals a connection between ancient ideas about word meaning and trends in modern linguistics. The roots of the notion can be traced back to ancient Greek philosophy – the concept debuts as a primal notion of mental experiences in Aristotle’s writings. However, the controversial translation of ancient works leaves room for scientific discussion regarding the prototype of the notion. In the Middle Ages, the word concept originated in European languages from Latin, later establishing itself in scientific discourse through the influence of Neo-Scholasticism, Frege’s conception of logic and the semiotic triangle, as well as the principle of the arbitrariness of linguistic signs. Finally, the notion concept gains importance in the transition from objective to the subjective perception of the meaning of linguistic units (the shift from structuralism to cognitivism) and becomes under the influence of cognitive psychology, the central term in cognitive linguistics in the 1970s and 1980s. The unconventional use of the notion in linguistic studies, on the one hand, makes meta-analyses of the semantics of certain concepts more difficult; on the other hand, it favours disciplinary and methodological diversity in today’s linguistic research.

scholarly journals Hyperbolic markers in modeling hyperbole: a scenario-based account

2021 ◽  
Vol 85 ◽  
pp. 61-71
Author(s):  
Carla Ovejas Ramírez
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Meaning Construction ◽  
The Other ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Real Situation ◽  
Source Domain ◽  
The Real ◽  
Theoretical Context ◽  
Hypothetical Scenario

This article discusses hyperbolic markers in modeling hyperbole from the perspective of a scenario-based account of language use within the framework of Cognitive Linguistics. In this view, hyperbole is seen as a mapping across two conceptual domains (Peña y Ruiz de Mendoza, 2017), a source domain, here relabeled as the magnified scenario, which contains a hypothetical unrealistic situation based on exaggeration, and a target domain or observable scenario which depicts the real situation addressed by the hyperbolic expression. Since the hypothetical scenario is a magnified version of the observable scenario, the mapping contains source-target matches in varying degrees of resemblance. Within this theoretical context, the article explores resources available to speakers for the construction of magnified scenarios leading to hyperbolic interpretation. Among such resources, we find hyperbole markers and the setting up of domains of reference. Finally, the article also discusses hyperbole blockers, which cancel out the activity of the other hyperbolic meaning construction mechanisms.

scholarly journals Metaforikus névadás

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 9-28
Author(s):  
Katalin Reszegi
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Place Names ◽  
Psychological Reality ◽  
Cognitive Mechanism ◽  
Human Thought ◽  
Proper Nouns ◽  
Cognitive Metaphor ◽  
Metaphor Theory ◽  
The Creation

The paper discusses the cognitive mechanics of metaphorical name-giving with a focus on place names, following an overview of cognitive metaphor theory and the questions of metaphorically used proper nouns. In cognitive linguistics, the use of metaphors is a cognitive mechanism that plays a fundamental role in human thought and understanding, and the creation of our social, cultural and psychological reality. A particular form of this also manifests in name-giving, creating a small but influential category of names. The category of place names also influences the application of this name-giving method: it is generally used in more informal names and name types. The creation of such a name requires the speaker to detach themselves from the conventional norms of direct descriptionand metonymic name-giving, and relies on their lingual creativity and ability to detach themselves from dominant name-giving models. However, names in the category can also be divided into subcategories. Beyond the typical common-noun-based metaphorical name-giving, more complex parallels can also be found, resulting in the associations connecting the names of several nearby locations. Place names can also serve as the base of metaphorical name-giving, supporting the complex meaning of these names. Despite the fact that the majority of metaphorical names are available from contemporary data collection, it is obviously a long-standing and ancient method of name-giving, as it is based on a cognitive mechanics that seem to be as old as humanity itself.

Temporal-magnitudinal construal coding

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-151
Author(s):  
Mikołaj Deckert ◽  
Marek Molenda
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Meaning Construction ◽  
Major Objective ◽  
Use Patterns ◽  
Naturally Occurring ◽  
Coding Variants ◽  
Linguistic Coding ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract This article looks into the interface of temporality and quantification. Drawing on the principles of Cognitive Linguistics, we use experimental as well as corpus methods to provide evidence on how the conceptual organisation and linguistic coding of content can play a role in meaning construction. With that broad agenda in mind, a major objective is to shed light on the construct of conventionalisation. For that purpose, construal coding variants are examined with a focus on nominal phrases that express time quantities. The examination involves two construal types (termed “cumulative” and “fractional”) that differ primarily in their prominence configurations, across three granularity levels of time conceptualisation. Our main finding – that the fractional and cumulative constructions are asymmetrically conventionalised – is contextualised through a qualitative analysis of naturally-occurring data to identify additional language use patterns and offer explanatory hypotheses.

Typology and the future of Cognitive Linguistics

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 587-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Croft
Keyword(s):  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Historical Linguistics ◽  
Linguistic Variation ◽  
Theory Of Language ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Individual Speaker

AbstractThe relationship between typology and Cognitive Linguistics was first posed in the 1980s, in terms of the relationship between Greenbergian universals and the knowledge of the individual speaker. An answer to this question emerges from understanding the role of linguistic variation in language, from occasions of language use to typological diversity. This in turn requires the contribution of discourse analysis, sociolinguistics, and evolutionary historical linguistics as well as typology and Cognitive Linguistics. While Cognitive Linguistics is part of this enterprise, a theory of language that integrates all of these approaches is necessary.

scholarly journals A Cognitive Linguistics Study of the Conceptual Derivation of Word Meaning

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raghad Fahmi Aajami
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
English Language ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
New Horizons ◽  
New Vision ◽  
The University ◽  
Lexical Concepts

To maintain understanding, usage, and interrelations of English vocabularies by Iraqi second language learners (L2) is a challenging mission. In the current study, the cognitive linguistic theory of domains by Langacker (1987) is adopted to provide new horizons in learning vocabulary and qualify Iraqi students with a deep knowledge analysis of the meanings of lexical concepts. This paper aims to test the validity of expanding the English language vocabulary for second language learners from Iraq through domains theory. It also attempts to find how the domains theory supports L2 learners in identifying meanings related to lexical concepts. Accordingly, an experimental study is conducted on fifty-eight university students of the second year level from the University of Baghdad, Iraq. The pre and post-tests are analyzed by using the Editor for the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). The results show the following: First, a progression of more than (0.05≤) is discovered in terms of students' understanding of the interrelationships between lexical concepts. Second, a new vision is dealt with to connect lexical concepts with their meanings according to the focus of the speakers using Langacker's theory. Third, domains theory (profile/ base organization, active zone, and the perceptual basis for knowledge representation) has proven effective in expanding Iraqi students' treatment and perception of semantic domains of English lexical concepts precisely.

Algorithms as Structural Metaphors: Reflections on the Digital-Cultural Feedback Loop

Leonardo ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-177
Author(s):  
Romy Achituv
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Loop ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Conceptual Domain ◽  
Cross Domain ◽  
Domain Mapping

The author argues that the application of digital algorithmic structures to analog media may illuminate hidden values and perceptions inherent in the digital technologies themselves. The paper sets out the understanding of metaphor in contemporary cognitive linguistics, in which metaphor is perceived as a conceptual device that creates meaning through cross-domain mapping—that is, partially mapping (projecting) one conceptual domain onto another. While the projected domain is intended to elucidate the target domain, the author argues that metaphor itself is self-reflexive—drawing attention to characteristics of the projected domain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document