1887
Volume 5, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper seeks to provide a new analysis of punctuation marks in English. To do so, it substantiates two claims of Cognitive Grammar. One claim is that the meaning of a linguistic expression is best understood in terms of the domain to which it belongs. In light of this claim, the paper argues that punctuation marks form sets in which they highlight similarities in general but differences in specifics. The other claim is that the use of a linguistic expression is governed by the particular construal imposed on its content. In view of this claim, the paper argues that the use of a punctuation mark stems from the particular construal the speaker chooses to describe a situation. The occurrence of two or more punctuation marks gives rise to semantic contrast, in which each mark represents a different construal, and so a different meaning. The aim of the analysis is to emphasise the roles which punctuation marks play in the interpretation of sentences, namely in conveying meaning.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00018.ham
2019-02-14
2019-08-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Casagrande, June
    (2014) The best punctuation book, period. Berkley: Ten Speed Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Hamawand, Zeki
    (2007) Suffixal rivalry in adjective formation. A cognitive-corpus analysis. London: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. (2008) Morpho-lexical alternation in noun formation. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230584013
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230584013 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2009) The semantics of English negative prefixes. London: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. (2011) Morphology in English. Word formation in Cognitive Grammar. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. (2016) Semantics: A cognitive account of linguistic meaning. Sheffield: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Langacker, Ronald
    (1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (1991) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 2. Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (2008) Cognitive Grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  10. Lukeman, Noah
    (2007) A dash of style: The art and mastery of punctuation. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Terban, Marvin
    (2000) Punctuation power: Punctuation and how to use It. New York: Scholastic, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Trask, Larry
    (2004) Penguin guide to punctuation. Penguin
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Truss, Lynne
    (2003) Eats, shoots & leaves: The zero tolerance approach to punctuation. London: Profile Books.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00018.ham
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00018.ham
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): construal , domain , facet , perspective and punctuation
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error