认知语言学课件 36页

AnIntroductiontocognitiveLinguistics6.Blending&relevance4.Figure&ground5.Frames&constructions7.Iconicity&lexicalchange&grammaticalizationEdition2\nKeywords:figure/groundsegregation(Rubin)（图形-背景分离）theprincipleofPragnanz（普雷格郎茨原则）trajector,landmark,path(Langacher)（射体，界标，路径）schemaimage（意象图式）elaboration（细化）4.Figure&ground\nTheface/vaseillusion\nShaped2.Moreprominent3.Morelikelytobeidentified&rememberedUnstructured2.Shapeless3.UniformFigureGround\nTheprincipleofPragnanz“普雷格郎茨原则”ThePrincipleofPragnanzisaguidingwhichreflectsthewaythatpeoplechoosesomethingasfigure.Anobjectismorelikelytobechosenasfigureifitisasmallormovedobject,orhasgestaltfeatures.\nThelinguisticexpressionssuchasprepositionsthatcanbeexplainedintermsoffigureandground,thathascaughttheattentionofcognitivelinguists.eg:1.Theballoonisflyingoverthehouse.2.Thebookisonthetable.3.Theboyclimbedupthewall.4.Shewentoutoftheroom.……\n※Trajector:Itstandsforthefigureormostprominentelementsinanyrelationalstructure.※Landmark:Itreferstotheotherentityinarelation.※Schemaimagesrepresentcognitiveconfigurationsconsistingofthreeelementsandtheirinterrelations,namely:atrajector,whichmovesalongapath,andisseenasbeingrelatedtoalandmark.Centralimageschemafor‘out’\nElaborations:Elaborationsaresuchvariantswhichonlyspecifycertaincomponentsofaschema,butdonotdivergefromitsgeneralconfiguration.\nP202\nAsimpleclausenormallyconsistsofthreekeyelements:asubject,averbelementandacomplement.Linguistically,thewaytomanifestprominenceistoputthepreferredelementsintosubjectposition.Inasimpletransitiveclause,thesubjectcorrespondstothefigure,theobjecttotheground,andtheverbexpressestherelationshipbetweenfigureandground.\n\n5.Frames&constructionskeywords:frame(Fillmore,Talmy,Slobin)（框架）scripttheory(R.Schank&R.P.Abelson)（图样理论）construction(A.E.Goldberg)（构式）\nframeItistobeseenasatypeofcognitivemodelwhichrepresentstheknowledgeandbeliefspertainingtospecificandfrequentlyrecurringsituations.Forexample,theactioncategoryBUYincludesareferencetoatleastfourothercategories,namelytoaBUYER,aSELLER,GOODSandMONEY.①commercialevent-frame\nItiseasytoseethatinthissentenceallfourcomponentsofthe[BUY]framearerenderedlinguistically,eachinadifferentsyntacticslot:theBUYER(David)assubject,theGOODS(anoldskirt)asdirectobject,theSELLER(john)asthefirstadverbialandtheMONEY(tenpounds)assecondadverbial.Thisassignmentofsyntacticroles,whichisofcoursetoalargeextentgovernedbythechoiceoftheverbBUY,thesyntacticperspectiveofthesentence.Anotherexamples:1.JohnsoldanoldshirttoDavidfortenpounds.2.JohnchargedDavidtenpoundsforanoldshirt.3.DavidpaidtenpoundstoJohnforanoldshirt.\nThefourdiagramsshowthatthetwoverbsbuyandpaydescribethecommercialeventfromtheBUYER’sperspective,whilesellandchargeperspectivethesituationfromtheSELLER’spointofview.\n②motionevent-framefiguremotion,MannerorcausepathgroundThepencilrolledoffThetableThepencilblewoffThetableLouisBleriotflewacrosstheEnglishChannelAttention:theexpressionofmotionevent-framesislanguage-specific.\nscriptKnowledgestructuresthatareparticularlydesignedforfrequentlyrecurringeventsequences.Therestaurantscript:Roles:customer,waiter,cook,cashier,owner.Props:restaurant,tables,menu,food,bill,money.Events:1.thecustomerenterstherestaurant.2.thecustomersitsdownonachair.3.thewaiterbringsthemenutothecustomer.4.thecustomerordersthefood.5.thefoodarrives.6.thecustomerhashismeal.7.thewaitersendsabill.8.thecustomerleavesatip.9.thecustomerpaysforhismeal.10.thecustomerexitstherestaurant.\nWhenweproduceorlistentolanguageweunconsciouslyfillinanincredibleamountofinformationtakenfromframesandscripts.Withoutsupplyingthisinformationwewouldcertainlynotbeabletounderstandeventhemostsimplepiecesofdiscourse.Johnwentintoarestaurant.Heaskedthewaitressforcoqanvin.Hepaidthebillandleft.Johnwentintoarestaurant.Hesawawaitress.Hegotupandwenthome.\nconstructionexampleThedraughtblewthepenciloffthetableFramestructureCAUSEMOTIONFIGUREPATHGROUNDSyntacticstructuresubjectverbobjectadverbialThefactthatthereisaveryclosecorrespondencebetweenframecomponentsandsyntacticconstituentshasledcognitivelinguiststotheideathatthesyntacticpatternitselfmayhaveashareintheencodingoftheparticulartypeofexperience.Constructionsarepairingsofmeaningsandformsthatarestoredinlong-termmemoryandspecifiedwithregardtotheirsemanticandsyntacticstructureaswellastheirpragmaticapplicability.\nThreeargumentation-structureconstructions:constructionBasicexperienceBasicclausestructureexampleCaused-motionconstructionSomeonecausingsomethingelsetomoveS-V-O-AFrankpushedthetissueoffthetable.Caused-receiveconstructionSomeonecausingsomeoneelsetoreceivesomethingS-V-OOJoegaveSallytheball.ResultativeconstructionSomeonecausingsomethingtochangestateS-V-O-CTerrypushedthedoorshut.\nComplexsentenceconstructions:anexample‘Shell-contentconstruction’SemanticstructureShellreification&perspectivizationLinkcontentSyntacticstructureNounφ/beThat-clause/infinitiveexamples(The)fact(The)aimisThataconferenceistakingplace……toopenstudenthostelsforguestsThestructureoftheshell-contentconstruction\nIdiomsasconstructions-constructionsasidioms‘letalone’TherearehardlytwohousessidebysideinShipley,letalonefive.Thepresidentdroppedthepretencethattherepublicswouldenjoygreaterequality-letalonesovereignty.Wehavenotbeenabletoagreeonanegotiatingpositionletalonestarttonegotiatewithalltheothergroups.Itwouldbeunacceptableiftheconjunctionandwereusedinthesentence,forthetwojuxtaposedelementsmustrepresent‘pointsonascale’.Whileformalidiomslikeletalonearebothsyntacticallyandsemanticallyidiosyncraticor‘irregular’,theystillseemtobesyntacticallyproductive,inthesensethattheyserveassyntacticmodelsfornewsentences.\n6.Blending&relevancekeywords:ConceptualBlendingtheory(G.Fauconnier)（空间合成理论）relevance（关联理论）\nConceptualblendingtheory\n\nAccordingtoFauconnierandTurner(2002)theprojectionfromtheinputspacesintotheblendedspaceinvolves3processes:composition组合,completion完善andelaboration阐述.Theinputspacesnotonlyfeedtheblendedspace,butarealsolinkedtoeachotherbycross-spacemappings,whicharebasedonvitalrelations.Identitymaybethemostimportantandmostfrequentvitalrelationcompressedinblends,butthereareotherrelations,includingvitalrelationsofspace,time,cause-effectandpart-whole.UngererandSchmidhascondensedthe9governingrulesofblendingproposedbyFauconnierandTurner(2002)intoasetoffiveforthepurposeofsimplification:thetopologyprinciple,theprincipleofintegration,theprincipleofunpacking,theprincipleofrelevanceandtheprincipleofhumanscale.\n4.Applicationsofthetheoryofconceptualblendingarenumerousandwide-ranging.Insidelinguistics,avarietyoflinguisticexamplesrangingfromlexicalbendstocompounds,acronyms,argument-structureconstructionsandcounterfactuals.What’smore,conceptualblendingtakesonaspecialformandachievesaspecialeffectintextsofadvertisement,riddlesandjokes.\nRelevanceCognitiveenvironment:Thesetofallassumptionsthataremanifesttospeakersandlistenersinaconversationbecausetheycanperceivethemintheirphysicalenvironmentorinferthemusingsuchcognitiveabilitiesasmemoryandreasoning.Eg:Peter:Doyouwantsomecoffee?Marry:Coffeewouldkeepmeawake.\n2.Ostensive-inferentialbehaviour:Whatsomeonesaid,togetherwithbodylanguage,facialexpression,andothernon-verbalcues,iscalled‘ostensive-inferentialbehaviour’.Intermsoffigure/groundsegregation:3.Cognitiveeconomy:Relevanceistobeunderstoodintermsofeffectsonaperson’scognitiveenvironmentandefficiencyofshort-terminformationprocessing.ThepositivecognitiveeffectsEffortreacquiredtoachievethesepositivecognitiveeffectsAnassumptionisrelevanttheostensive-inferentialstimulusallthepotentialassumptionsfigureground\n7.Otherissuesincognitivelinguisticskeywords:iconicity（象似性）lexicalchange（词汇演变）grammaticalization（语法化）\niconicityC.S.peircesignSymbol:Itrepresentsaconventionalizedrelationshipwithanobject.Index:Itisrealizedbyexpressingthepositioningofanobjectinspaceandtime.Icon:itconveysacertainsimilaritywithanobject.ImageDiagram\nDiagrammaticiconicity(iconicprinciples)Iconicsequencing1.Heopenedthebottleandpouredhimselfaglassofwine.2.Hepouredhimselfaglassofwineandopenedthebottle.Iconicproximity1.ThefamousdeliciousItalianpepperonipizza2.TheItaliandeliciousfamouspepperonipizza3.ThepepperonideliciousfamousItalianpizzaIconicquantity1.Thisguyisgettingonmynerves.2.Thisaggressivelyimpertinenteggheadisgettingonmynerves.\nLexicalchangeAccordingtoGeeraerts(1992,1997),thecoexistenceofstabilityandflexibilityinlexicaldevelopmentcanbestbeexplainedifwetakeacognitivestanceandunderstandlexicalmeaningintermsofprototypecategories.bird‘airplane,missile,spacecraft’1938-‘prisoner’(jail)1968-rarebird:‘strangeperson’1977-togetthebigbird:‘bebooed’,‘bedismissed’1845-\nGrammaticalizationInlinguistics,grammaticalizationisaprocessoflanguagechangebywhichwordsrepresentingobjectsandactions(i.e.nounsandverbs)transformtobecomegrammaticalmarkers(affixes,prepositions,etc.).认知语言学家偏重从人的认知规律来探索语法化的成因，认为这种语法化的机制与实义词从本义向其他意思转化的机制是一样的，是从一个认知域向另一个认知域的转移，人们在认识事物的时候总是从自身及自身的行为开始，然后到外界事物，再引申到外界空间、时间、性质等，这一认知域的发展可以用一个简单的图示来表示：人〉物〉事〉空间〉时间〉性质。人们在认识世界的时候认知域是从一个具体到抽象的等级，在这个等级中，前面的由人到空间是实词到虚词的过程，后面的由空间到性质是虚词进一步虚化的过程。（Heine,1991）这一过程投射出人们在认知世界时的一般规律。这既符合一词多义发展的规律，也符合实词虚化为语法成分的规律。\n\nThankyou!