- •Origin of Cognitive Linguistics
- •Purposes of Cognitive Linguistics
- •Conceptualization of models of the world
- •Main areas of Cognitive Linguistics
- •Aspects of cognition
- •The first guiding principle of cognitive semantics
- •The second guiding principle of cognitive semantics
- •The third guiding principle of cognitive semantics
- •The fourth guiding principle of cognitive semantics
- •What are the most significant theories in cognitive semantics?
- •What is Mental Spaces Theory?
- •What is Blending Theory?
- •Two guiding principles of cognitive approaches to grammar
- •What is symbolic thesis of Leonard Talmy?
- •Talmy’s closed subsystem
- •Critics of Cognitive Linguistics
- •Lakoff’s view on commitments
- •Notion of generalization commitments
- •Notion of cognitive commitment
- •The area of cognitive semantics
- •How does Mandler describe the process of forming image schemas?
- •How can meaning be divided in formal linguistics by the traditional view?
- •What is an encyclopedic approach to meaning?
- •Describe two relatively well developed theories of encyclopedic semantics
- •Who found the theory of Idealized Cognitive Models (icm)?
- •Talmy’s open-class subsystem
- •Ronald Langacker’s Cognitive Grammar
- •Symbolic structure of symbolic unit (simplex, complex)
- •Constructional approaches to grammar
- •Fillmore’s Construction Grammar
- •The object of cognitive semantics
- •Notions of cognitive psychology and cognitive anthropology
- •Ways of traditional theories
- •The notion of framing
- •What are the four guiding principles of cognitive semantics
- •Speak about the classical theory of human categorization
- •Lakoff’s view point on the classical theory of human categorization
- •Notion of metonymic Idealized Cognitive Models
- •Describe cognitive lexical semantics
- •What is conceptual metaphor theory?
- •Goldberg’s Construction Grammar
- •Radical Construction Grammar
- •Embodied Construction Grammar
- •Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics
- •Effects of idealized cognitive models by Lakoff
-
The notion of framing
As we have seen, the frame semantic account is by no means limited to the study of lexemes—with it, researchers may examine expressions at more complex levels, including the level of the sentence (or, more precisely, the utterance). The notion of framing is regarded as being of the same cast as the pragmatic notion ofbackground assumptions. Philosopher of language John Searle explains the latter by asking readers to consider sentences like "The cat is on the mat". For such a sentence to make any sense, the interpreter makes a series of assumptions: i.e., that there is gravity, the cat is parallel to the mat, and the two touch. For the sentence to be intelligible, the speaker supposes that the interpreter has an idealized or default frame in mind.
An alternate strain of Fillmore's analysis can be found in the work of Ronald Langacker, who makes a distinction between the notions of profile and base. The profile is the concept symbolized by the word itself, while the base is the encyclopedic knowledge that the concept presupposes. For example, let the definition of "radius" be "a line segment that joins the center of a circle with any point on its circumference". If all we know of the concept radius is its profile, then we simply know that it is a line segment that is attached to something called the "circumference" in some greater whole called the "circle". That is to say, our understanding is fragmentary until the base concept of circle is firmly grasped.
When a single base supports a number of different profiles, then it can be called a "domain". For instance, the concept profiles of arc, center, and circumference are all in the domain of circle, because each uses the concept of circle as a base. We are then in a position to characterize the notion of a frame as being either the base of the concept profile, or (more generally) the domain that the profile is a part of.
-
What are the four guiding principles of cognitive semantics
In this section we consider in a little more detail the first of these two best-developed areas of cognitive linguistics. Cognitive semantics, like the larger enterprise of which it is a part, is not a single unified framework. Those researchers who identify themselves as cognitive semanticists typically have a diverse set of foci and interests. However, there are a number of guiding principles that collectively characterize a cognitive approach to semantics. In this section we identify these guiding principles (as we see them). In Section 5 we explore some of the major theories and research areas which have emerged under the ‘banner’ of cognitive semantics. The four guiding principles of cognitive semantics are as follows:
-
Conceptual structure is embodied (the ‘embodied cognition thesis’).
-
ii) Semantic structure is conceptual structure.
-
iii) Meaning representation is encyclopaedic.
-
iv) Meaning construction is conceptualization.
-
Speak about the classical theory of human categorization
In the 1970s the classical theory of human categorization – so called because it had endured since the time of the ancient Greek philosophers– was called into question. The new ideas that contributed to this development emerged from the research of Eleanor Rosch and her colleagues on prototypes and basic level category research (e.g., Rosch, 1975, 1977, 1978; Rosch & Mervis, 1975; Rosch et al., 1976). Rosch’s work on categorization, known as prototype theory, was, in fact, less a theory of knowledge representation than a series of findings which provided new insights into human categorization. In so far as the findings led to a theory, Rosch proposed that humans categorize not by means of the necessary and sufficient conditions of the classical theory but with reference to a prototype, a relatively abstract mental representation that assembles the key attributes or features that best represent instances of a given category.