Category: 认知语言学

提 要：真实动作有载力的动力动作和不载力的非动力动作之分，因此动词也就可以分为动力动词和非动力动词。笔者发现动力动词和非动力动词有着句法的对立性，即非动力动词所构建的句子可以主宾对调而句意不变;动力动词所构建的句子主宾对调之后，或句意变更，或逻辑上不成立。因此，动力动词和非动力动词就可以成为汉语动词按力学特性的分类。

关键词：动力动词，非动力动词，两性动词

在客观世界里存在着两种动作，一种是受力驱使而产生的动作，因为负载着动力，所以叫动力动作;另一种不受力的驱使，纯粹是事物的运动表现，因为不负载动力，所以叫非动力动作。表述动力动作的词就叫动力动词;表述非动力动作的词就叫非动力动词。汉语动词的绝大部分都分属于这两种动词，但也有一小部分动词既表现了动力性，也表现了非动力性，这种动词便叫两性动词。下面就对这三种动词及其句法功能进行具体的优势分析。

认知语言学中值得思考的八个问题

摘 要：主要基于体验哲学之上建立起来的认知语言学已成主流学派，对语言理论作出了重大发展，但笔者也发现认知语言学研究中存在的一些不足之处，本文将其归纳成八点，期望大家能解决这些值得思考的问题，不断完善认知语言学，或在此基础上再向前走，做到有所发展。

关键词：认知语言学 体验哲学 问题

主要基于体验哲学之上形成的认知语言学，对传统语言学理论进行了一系列的反思和批判，提出了很多解释语言的新思路，令人深受启发，对语言理论作出了重大发展。但是我们也不能期望它能解决全部问题，像所有的语言理论，认知语言学也存在一些不足之处，有待我们进一步思考。

语法标记的功能扩展是一种重要的语言现象，不论从语言发展的历史还是从跨语言的角度看，这种扩展往往具有很高的规律性。其背后存在着深刻的认知动因。本文以人类语言的基本语法范畴之一¾工具格为例来探讨这一问题。工具格是一种重要的语法范畴，是语言表达必不可少的功能之一，不同的语言用不同的手段来表示它，有的语言用屈折形态表示

英汉形容词概念化的差别对其有无标记用法的影响

摘要：人类语言在形容词的有无标记用法上表现出了高度的一致性，但是局部也存在着明显的差别。本文以汉语和英语为例说明，这种差别主要来于不同语言的有关概念化方式的不同。概念化涉及一个民族认识外界事物的特点，不同民族对同一现象的认知视点的差异，可能造成不同语言的对应词语的表义范围的不同，从而影响到有关词语的句法行为。本文的研究除了具有一定的理论意义以外，还对英语教学和对外汉语教学有参考价值。

关键词：概念化 形容词 无标记 英语教学 对外汉语教学

第六届中国认知语言学研讨会正式通知

尊敬的先生/女士：

经中国认知语言学研究会同意，第六届全国认知语言学研讨会将于2009年7月5-6日在北国春城长春召开(会议之前7月2-4日举办认知语言学讲习班)，会议由东北师范大学外国语学院承办。有关事项如下：

1. 大会中心议题：认知语言学在中国的发展：理论探索与应用研究

2. 具体议题：

(1) 认知语言学理论研究进展(包括范畴化理论、原型理论、隐喻及转喻理论、概念整合理论、框架理论、理想化认知模型、构式语法，等);

Moral Politics:How Liberals and Conservatives Think

An excerpt from

Moral Politics

How Liberals and Conservatives Think

George Lakoff

Chapter Two

The Worldview Problem for American Politics

Puzzles for Liberals

Conservatives are fond of suggesting that liberals don’t understand what they say, that they just don’t get it. The conservatives are right. The ascendancy of conservative ideology in recent years and, in particular, the startling conservative victory in the 1994 congressional elections have left liberals mystified about a great many things. Here are some examples.

The best collections about CL and second language acquisition are the Achard & Niemeier (2004) edited volume, Cognitive Linguistics, Second Language Acquisition & Foreign Language Teaching and the Putz, Dirven & Niemeier (2001) two volume set Applied Cognitive Linguistics. Vol.1 deals with theory & acquisition. Vol.2 with language pedagogy.

Surface Generalizations: an alternative to alternations

2002. Cognitive Linguistics.

Surface Generalizations: an alternative to alternations[1]

Adele E. Goldberg

University of Illinois

Abstract

Since the earliest days of generative grammar, there has existed a strong tendency to consider one argument structure construction in relation to a particular rough paraphrase. Initially this was a result of the emphasis on transformations that derived one pattern from another. While today there exist many non-derivational theories for which this motivation no longer exists, the traditional outlook has not completely lost its grip, as can be seen from continuing focus on partial or incomplete generalizations such as the “dative” construction or the “locative” alternation. This paper argues that it is profitable to look beyond alternations and to consider each surface pattern on its own terms. Differences among instances of the same surface pattern are often most naturally attributed directly to the different verbs and arguments involved.

Embodiment and Cognitive Science

Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr

Introduction

Embodiment in the field of cognitive science refers to understanding the role of an agent’s own body in its everyday, situated cognition. For example, how do our bodies influence the ways we think and speak? Consider the following narrative written by a 23-year-old woman, Sandra, who was asked to describe a recent, important life event. Sandra began her narrative by noting that she was engaged to be married to an older man who worked in the computer industry in northern California. Quite recently, Sandra’s fiancé asked her to sign a prenuptial agreement and this request evoked many feelings that Sandra struggled to deal with.

UNDERSTANDING FIGURATIVE AND LITERAL LANGUAGE: THE GRADED SALIENCE HYPOTHESIS

Rachel Giora

Linguistics

Tel Aviv University

Tel Aviv 69978

Israel

ABSTRACT

In this study I test the prevalent claims among contemporary psycholinguists that understanding metaphor does not involve a special process, and that it is essentially identical to understanding literal language. Particularly, I examine the claims that figurative language does not involve processing the surface literal meaning (e.g., Gibbs, 1984), and that its comprehension is not processing-intensive, because it does not involve a trigger (e.g., Keysar, 1989). A critique, review and reinterpretation of a number of contemporary researches on literal and figurative language reveal that figurative and literal language use are governed by a general principle of salience: Salient meanings (e.g., conventional, frequent, familiar, enhanced by prior context) are processed first. Thus, for example, when the most salient meaning is intended (as in e.g., the figurative meaning of conventional idioms), it is accessed directly, without having to process the less salient (literal) meaning first (Gibbs, 1980).