Transcript Document 7240051

Language and the Mind
Prof. R. Hickey
SS 06
Cognitive Linguistics
Olga Zajatchkovskaja
Introduction
Cognitive linguistics emerged in the 1970s
-is an approach to language that is based on our experience
of the world and the way we perceive and conceptualize it.
3 major hypotheses guide cognitive linguistics:
-language is not an autonomous cognitive faculty
-grammar is conceptualization
-knowledge of language emerges from language use
I. Language is not an autonomous cognitive faculty
The processes of speaking and understanding language
are not different from other cognitive tasks such as
visual perception, reasoning, motor activity.
- Memory is involved in the organization of linguistic
knowledge into categories.
- Attention is involved in activation of conceptual
structures
- Judgment /comparison is involved in the process of
categorization
Language is not an autonomous cognitive faculty
The act of Categorization is mental process of
classification; its products are the cognitive
categories.
- Applying a word, morpheme or construction to a
particular experience to be communicated, it
involves comparison of the prior experience, judging
it to belong to the class of prior experiences to which
the linguistic expression has been applied (W. Croft
& D.A.Cruse, 2004).
Language is not an autonomous cognitive faculty
Categories of animals, plants, man-made objects...
Birds: parrot, sparrow, canary, hawk, ostrich, penguin…
…the best example – is a prototype (E. Rosch, 1972)
Furniture? Chair? Vehicle? Fruit?...
Levels of categorization: …animal-dog-spaniel…
Are categories universal or culture-specific?
“fuzzy category boundaries”
Linguistic knowledge is conceptual structure
Conceptual structure is a single level of mental
representation at which linguistic, sensory and motor
information are compatible (R. Jackendoff, 1985).
Concept is a unit of meaning (Langacker, 1987);
it is not equivalent with the meaning of words:
color vs. political parties, cup vs. trophy, chair
(furniture) vs. position…
Other terms
Frame – any system of concepts related in such a way that
to understand any one of them you have to understand
the whole structure in which it fits (C. Fillmore, 1982).
Domain is a semantic structure that functions as the base
for at least one concept (W. Croft & D.A. Cruse, 2004).
Domain TRADE includes the concepts of CUSTOMER,
MONEY, SHOP ASSISTANT…
II. Grammar is conceptualization
This slogan refers to a hypothesis that conceptual
structure can not be reduced to a simple truthconditional correspondence with the world.
A major aspect of human cognitive ability is the
conceptualization of the experience to be
communicated
Conceptual metaphor
Figure of speech: “Juliet is the sun” (Shakespeare);
Conventional metaphor: head of state, eye of a potato
Conceptual metaphor:
Try to pack more thoughts into fewer words
Her anger boiled over.
How do you spend your time?
He knows where he is going in life.
Conceptual metaphor
-
Involves a relationship between a SOURCE
DOMAIN, the source of the literal meaning of the
metaphorical expression, and a TARGET DOMAIN, the
domain of the experience actually being described by the
metaphor:
Pack thoughts into words – WORDS (target domain) ARE
CONTAINERS (source domain)
Anger boiled over – EMOTION/ANGER (target domain) IS HOT
FLUID (IN A CONTAINER) (source domain)
Spend time – TIME (target domain) IS MONEY (source domain)
Life is going – LIFE (target domain) IS JOURNEY (source
domain)
Other examples
- She trembled in fear.
- He went white in anger.
IN
- He jumped back in terror.
EMOTIONAL STATES ARE CONTAINERS
Russian:
Ona drozhala v strahe /ot straha = out of fear.
On pobelel ot zlosti = out of anger.
Ot=out of
On otprygnul v uzhase / ot uzhasa =out of terror.
v
Other examples
- He exploded with laughter.
with
- She trembled with fear.
ATTENDANT EMOTION/EMOTION IS A COMPANION
Russian:
- On razrazilsa smechom.
-om is instrumental case =with
- Ona trozhala v strache / ot stracha.
Conceptual Metonymy
-
Involves a relation of contiguity (nearness, neighborhood)
between what is denoted by the literal meaning of a
word and its figurative counterpart.
WHOLE FOR PART: to fill up the car
PRODUCER FOR PRODUCT: buy a Ford
PLACE FOR INSTITUTION: talks between Moscow and
Berlin
MATERIAL FOR OBJECT: a glass, an iron
Other examples
- She heard the piano (INSTRUMENT STANDS FOR
SOUND)
- That french fries is getting impatient (ORDER STANDS
FOR CUSTOMER)
- There are a lot of good heads in the University (HEAD
STANDS FOR INTELLEGENCE)
- We need a couple of strong bodies in our team (BODY
STANDS FOR PHYSICAL STRENGTH)
- Don’t get hot under the collar (INCREASE IN BODE
TEMPERATURE STANDS FOR EMOTION/ANGER)
III. Knowledge of language emerges from
language use
Categories and structures in semantics, syntax,
morphology and phonology are build up from our
cognition of specific utterances on specific
occasion of use.
Usage-based model (Langacker, 1987, Barlow & Kemmer,
2000, Bybee & Hopper, 2004)
1. The frequency of the occurrence of particular
grammatical forms and structures;
2. The meaning of the words and constructions in
use.
Conclusion
1.
2.
3.
What the words of a given language mean and
how they can be used in combinations depends on
the perception and categorization of the real world
around us.
Conceptualization can be found on all the levels of
a language.
The rate of learning and generalization is
influenced by the frequency of the constructions in
the input.
References
1. Ungerer F., Schmidt H.-J. An Introduction to Cognitive
Linguistics. Longman, 1996.
2. Croft. W., Cruse D.A. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge
Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge University Press, 2004.
3.Jackendoff R. Semantics and Cognition. The MIT Press, 1984.