1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Functions of Language
  4. Volume 23, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 23, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0929-998X
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9765
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This study proposes NSM semantic explications for a cross-section of the English verbal lexicon of ‘doing and happening’. The twenty-five verbs are drawn from about a dozen verb classes, including verbs for non-typical locomotion (, , ), other intransitive activities (, ), manipulation (), activities that affect material integrity (, , ), creation/production (, , ), actions that affect people or things (, , ) or cause a change of location (, , , ), bodily reactions to feelings (, ), displacement (,) and weather phenomena (, ). Though the verbs explicated are specifically English verbs, they have been chosen with an eye to their relevance to lexical typology and cross-linguistic semantics (many are drawn from the Verb Meanings List of the Leipzig Valency Patterns project) and it is hoped that the analytical strategy and methodology exemplified in this study can be a useful model for research into other languages. The study demonstrates the application of the NSM concept of semantic templates, which provide a clear “skeletal” structure for explications of considerable internal complexity and which help account for shared semantic and grammatical properties of verbs of a given subclass.

© 2016 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23.2.03god
2016-10-07
2024-12-01

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/fol.23.2.03god
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alexander, Dennis
    2006 Literal, figurative, metaphorical: A semantic inquiry into the semantic field of game and play in English. Armidale: University of New England PhD thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Apresjan, Juri D
    2000 Systematic lexicography. ( Kevin Windle , Trans.). Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. 2009 The theory of Lexical Functions: An update. In David Beck , Kim Gerdes , Jasmina Milićević & Alain Polguère (eds.), Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Meaning-Text Theory, 1–14. Montreal: OLST.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Barrios, Rodríguez , María Auxiliadora & Cliff Goddard
    2013 ‘Degrad verbs’ in Spanish and English: Collocations, Lexical Functions and contrastive NSM semantic analysis. Functions of Language20(2). 219–249. doi: 10.1075/fol.20.2.04bar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.20.2.04bar [Google Scholar]
  5. Boas, Hans C
    2011 A frame-semantic approach to syntactic alternations with build-verbs. In Pilar Guerrero Medina (ed.), Morphosyntactic alternations in English, 207–234. London: Equinox.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bowern, Claire
    2008 Linguistic fieldwork: A practical guide. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230590168
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230590168 [Google Scholar]
  7. Brown, Donald E
    1991 Human universals. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Comrie, Bernard & Andrej Malchukov
    (eds.) 2015 Valency classes in the world’s languages. Vols 1 and 2. Berlin: Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Comrie, Bernard & Norval Smith
    1977 Lingua Descriptive Series: Questionnaire. Lingua42. 1–72. doi: 10.1016/0024‑3841(77)90063‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(77)90063-8 [Google Scholar]
  10. Dixon, Robert M.W
    1991 A new approach to English grammar, on semantic principles. Oxford: Clarendon.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Fillmore, Charles J
    1982 Frame semantics. In Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm, 111–138. Seoul: Hanshin.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 1985 Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica6(2). 222–254.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Fillmore, Charles J. & Beryl T.S. Atkins
    1992 Toward a frame-based lexicon: The semantics of RISK and its neighbours. In Adrienne Lehrer & Eva Feder Kittay (eds.), Frames, Fields and Contrasts. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 2000 Describing polysemy: The case of ‘crawl’. In Yael Ravin & Claudia Leacock (eds.), Polysemy: Theoretical and computational approaches, 91–110. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Geeraerts, Dirk & Hubert Cuyckens
    (eds.) 2007 The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics. New York, NY: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Gladkova, Anna
    2010 Russkaja kul’turnaja semantika: ėmocii, cennosti, žiznennye ustanovki [Russian cultural semantics: Emotions, values, attitudes.] Moscow: Languages of Slavic Cultures.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Goddard, Cliff
    1996 Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara to English Dictionary, revised 2nd edn. Alice Springs: Institute for Aboriginal Development.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. 2003 ‘Thinking’ across languages and cultures: Six dimensions of variation. Cognitive Linguistics14 (2/3). 109–140. doi: 10.1515/cogl.2003.005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2003.005 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2010  A piece of cheese, a grain of sand: The semantics of mass nouns and unitizers. In Francis Jeffry Pelletier (ed.), Kinds, things and stuff: Mass terms and generics, 132–165. New York, NY: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. 2011 Semantic analysis: A practical introduction, 2nd edn. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 2012 Semantic primes, semantic molecules, semantic templates: Key concepts in the NSM approach to lexical typology. Linguistics50(3). 711–743. doi: 10.1515/ling‑2012‑0022
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2012-0022 [Google Scholar]
  22. 2015 Verb classes and valency alternations (NSM approach), with special reference to English physical activity verbs. In Bernard Comrie & Andrej Malchukov (eds.), Valency classes in the world’s languages, Vol.2, 1671–1702. Berlin: Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. 2016 Semantic molecules and their role in NSM lexical definitions. Cahiers de lexicologie 2016/4 (Special issue on “Lexical definitions”, edited by Alain Polguère & Dorota Sikora ).
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Goddard, Cliff & Andrea C. Schalley
    2010 Semantic analysis. In Nitin Indurkhya & Fred J. Damerau (eds.), Handbook of Natural Language Processing, 2nd edn., 92–120. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Goddard, Cliff & Anna Wierzbicka
    (eds.) 2002 Meaning and Universal Grammar: Theory and Empirical Findings, Vols. I and II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.60
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.60 [Google Scholar]
  26. 2009 Contrastive semantics of physical activity verbs: ‘cutting’ and ‘chopping’ in English, Polish, and Japanese. Language Sciences31. 60–96. doi: 10.1016/j.langsci.2007.10.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2007.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2014a Words and meanings: Lexical semantics across domains, languages and cultures. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 2014b Semantic fieldwork and lexical universals. Studies in Language38(1). 80–127. doi: 10.1075/sl.38.1.03god
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.38.1.03god [Google Scholar]
  29. Goddard, Cliff , Anna Wierzbicka & Jock Wong
    2016 “Walking” and “running” in English and German: The cross-linguistic semantics of verbs of human locomotion. Review of Cognitive Linguistics14(2).
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Hartmann, Iren , Martin Haspelmath & Bradley Taylor
    (eds.) 2013 Valency Patterns Leipzig. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available online atvalpal.info.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Jackendoff, Ray
    1990 Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 2002 Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford: OUP. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  33. Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria , Dagmar Divjak & Ekaterina V. Rakhilina
    2010 Aquamotion verbs in Slavic and Germanic: A case study in lexical typology. In Victoria Hasko & Renee Perelmetter (eds.), New approaches to Slavic verbs of motion, 315–342. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.115.18kop
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.115.18kop [Google Scholar]
  34. Levin, Beth
    1993 English verb classes and alternations. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Levin, Beth & Malka Rappaport Hovav
    2005 Argument realization. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511610479
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610479 [Google Scholar]
  36. Levisen, Carsten
    2012 Cultural semantics and social cognition: A case study on the Danish universe of meaning. Berlin: Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110294651
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110294651 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lyons, John
    1977 Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Masjak, Timur & Ekaterina Rakhilina
    (eds.) 2007 Glagoly dviženija v vode: Leksičeskaja tipologija [Aquamotion verbs: Lexical typology]. Moscow: Indrik.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Mel’čuk, Igor A
    2012 Semantics: From meaning to text. Vols 1 and 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.129
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.129 [Google Scholar]
  40. Pauwels, Paul
    2000 Put, set, lay, place: A cognitive linguistic approach to verbal meaning. München: Lincom.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Peeters, Bert
    (ed.) 2006 Semantic primes and universal grammar: Evidence from the Romance languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.81
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.81 [Google Scholar]
  42. Pustejovsky, James
    1995 The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 2013 Type theory and lexical decomposition. In James Pustejovsky , Pierrette Bouillon , Hitoshi Isahara , Kyoko Kanzaki & Chungmin Lee (eds.), Advances in Generative Lexicon theory, 9–38. Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑94‑007‑5189‑7_2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5189-7_2 [Google Scholar]
  44. Rappaport Hovav, Malka & Beth Levin
    2010 Reflections on manner/result complementarity. In Malka Rappaport Hovav , Edit Doran & Ivy Sichel (eds.), Lexical semantics, syntax, and event structure, 21–38. Oxford: OUP. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199544325.003.0002
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199544325.003.0002 [Google Scholar]
  45. Ruppenhofer, Josef , Michael Ellsworth , Miriam R.L. Petruck , Christopher R. Johnson & Jan Scheffczyk
    2010 FrameNet II: Extended Theory and Practice. Available online atframenet.icsi.berkeley.edu./book/book.pdf.
  46. Sibly, Anne
    2008 The semantics of physical contact verbs: Lexicographic sketches of caress, fondle, hit, kick, kiss, punch, slap, smack, stroke and touch. Canberra: Australian National University BA Hons thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. 2010  Harry slapped Hugo, Tracey smacked Ritchie: The semantics of slap and smack . Australian Journal of Linguistics30(3). 323–348. doi: 10.1080/07268602.2010.498804
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2010.498804 [Google Scholar]
  48. Vendler, Zeno
    1967 Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Wierzbicka, Anna
    1975 Why ‘kill’ does not mean ‘cause to die’: The semantics of action sentences. Foundations of Language13(4). 491–528.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. 1980 Lingua mentalis: The semantics of natural language. Sydney: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. 1985 Lexicography and conceptual analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. 1996 Semantics: Primes and universals. New York, NY: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. 2007 NSM semantics versus Conceptual Semantics: Goals and standards (a response to Jackendoff). Intercultural Pragmatics4(4). 521–529.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. 2009 All people eat and drink: Does this mean that ‘eat’ and ‘drink’ are universal human concepts?In John Newman (ed.), The linguistics of eating and drinking, 65–89. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.84.05wie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.84.05wie [Google Scholar]
  55. 2014a Imprisoned in English: The hazards of English as a default language. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. 2014b. “Pain” and “suffering” in cross-linguistic perspective. International Journal of Language & Culture1(2). 149–173. doi: 10.1075/ijolc.1.2.02wie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijolc.1.2.02wie [Google Scholar]
  57. Wilks, Yorick
    1988 Reference and its role in computational models of mental representations. In Umberto Eco , Marco Santambrogio & Patrizia Violi (eds.), Meaning and mental representations, 221–237. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Ye, Zhengdao
    2010 Eating and drinking in Mandarin and Shanghainese: A lexical-conceptual analysis. In Wayne Christensen , Elizabeth Schier & John Sutton (eds.), ASCS09: Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the Australasian Society for Cognitive Science , 375–383. Sydney: Macquarie Centre for Cognitive Science.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. (ed.) In press. The semantics of nouns. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23.2.03god
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited

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