1 / 35

TYPOLOGY OF LEXICAL SYSTEMS

TYPOLOGY OF LEXICAL SYSTEMS. OUTLINE. Language and culture Linguistic determinism Linguistic relativity Typological classification of words Semasiological and onomosiological approaches to the contrastive study of lexical units. Cognitive triangle. concept. symbol. denotatum referent.

titania-lyris
Télécharger la présentation

TYPOLOGY OF LEXICAL SYSTEMS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TYPOLOGY OF LEXICAL SYSTEMS

  2. OUTLINE • Language and culture • Linguistic determinism • Linguistic relativity • Typological classification of words • Semasiological and onomosiological approaches to the contrastive study of lexical units

  3. Cognitive triangle concept symbol denotatum referent

  4. Does Our Language Determine Our Culture? William von Humboldt Sapir and Whorf : Language controls a person’s thinking processes in some way.

  5. aput 'snow on the ground', • gana 'falling snow', • piqsirpoq 'drifting snow', • qimuqsuq 'a snow drift'.

  6. How many colours can you see?

  7. English Italian Rumanian Estonian Japanese Ukrainian hand mano minǎ käsi te ruka arm braccio brat, käsi(vars) ude foot piede picior jalg ashi noga leg gamba finger dito deget sõrm yubi palec’ toe varvas

  8. Different nations seem not only to see but also to hear the world differently • U. тук-тук • E. rat-a-rat • Jap. don-don • U.ква-ква • E. croak- croak • Jap. kero-kero • French coa-coa

  9. The concept that language limits perception has become known as the “Whorfian Hypothesis” or as “linguistic determinism”.

  10. The ideas of linguistic determinism in the XX c. In 1980 George Lakoff and Mark Johnson published Metaphors We Live By Our conceptual system plays a central role in defining our everyday realities: how we get around in the world and how we relate to other people. Language controls thought.

  11. Metaphors determine the way English speakers see the world Time • I spent time on that project. • I invested time on that project. • I saved time on that project “Time is a valuable Commodity”

  12. The concept of argument in English Argument • I shot down their arguments. • I blew them out of the water with my points. • I overcame each of their points. • I won. • I beat them (down) Argument is War

  13. Howard Rheingold’s 1988 book They have a Word for it The words of a language constrain how people perceive the world. ho’oponopono means “practice in which two people who have a disagreement are put in a room/hut until they agree” • change the English speaking thought processes.

  14. Other views 1986Eugene A. Nida: For the most part, language follows society rather than determining it.

  15. Hypothesis of “linguistic relativity”: “Language reflectsthe culture of its speakers rather than determining it. Language is an important index of cultural values, but does not necessarily constrain a speaker from seeing the world in another way.”

  16. 1997A. Wierzbicka: Every language has certain key words that reflect the core values of a given culture.

  17. Key terms shy AmericanversusFinnish being socially handicappedversus being reserved, observant, respectful of others’ privacy

  18. friend

  19. Are there any universal features in the lexical systems? Are there concepts that have word nominations in all languages of the world?

  20. Conceptual primitives Anna Wierzbicka: Conceptual primitivesbelong to the universal "alphabet of human thoughts"

  21. Universal semantic primitives • Substantives: I, YOU, SOMEONE (PERSON), SOMETHING (THING), PEOPLE, BODY • Determiners:THIS, THE SAME, OTHER • Quantifiers: ONE, TWO, SOME, ALL, MANY(MUCH) • Attributes: GOOD, BAD, BIG, SMALL • Mental predicates: THINK, KNOW, WANT, FEEL, SEE, HEAR • Existence and possession: THERE IS, HAVE • Life and death: LIVE(ALIVE), DIE • Time: WHEN(TIME), NOW, AFTER, BEFORE, A LONG TIME, A SHORT • Space: WHERE(PLACE), HERE, UNDER, ABOVE, TOUCH (CONTACT) • Etc.

  22. Typological classification of words • Universal layer • water, sky, ocean, day; brow, nose, live, eat, sleep; speak, mother, brother • Specific-national (realia) layer • терем, цимбали,гетьман, козак,писанка, вишиванка, рушник • public school, Chapel, Boxing Day, Black Friday beefeater • International layer • genuine internationalismscomputer, blue tooth • loan internationalisms article - стаття

  23. Universal layer. Different connotations. • Denotative (nominative) meaning • white – the colour of milk, salt or snow (COD) • black- the dark color of coal or night (Oxford) • Connotative meaning white lie, white dove black soul, black market, blackmail Cf. in Chinese white man, white glance black man

  24. International layer. Cultural Differences in International Words False cognates ‘actual’ come from Latin ‘actualis’ 1. real actual costs 2. (rare) important ‘актуальний’

  25. English-Ukrainian False cognates • data? • replica? • billet? • accurate? • intelligence? • aspirant? • сlay? • fabric? • complexion? • conservatory? • дата? • репліка? • білет? • акуратний? • інтелігентність? • аспірант? • клей? • фабрика? • комплекція? • консерваторія?

  26. Semi-False cognates • director 1. директор 2. режисер 3. диригент 4. духівник • Mercury • Планета Меркурій • р • директор 1. директор • Меркурій 1.Планета Меркурій

  27. Words may be compared from their semasiologicalside and from their onomasiologicalside.

  28. Comparing words from the semasiological side • Types of motivation • Semantic structure of words

  29. Motivation of words Motivationis relationship between form and meaning of the word. friend friend-ship Words may be non-motivated and motivated E - 1/14 U - 1/6 phonetic morphological semantic hisswisdomface (of the stone) 1,4% 88% 10% 0,8% 91% 7,4%

  30. Semantic structure of wordsin E and U • coat піджак, пальто, хутро, оперення, шар, оболонка, обшивка, покривати шаром • пливти ‘float’ ‘swim’ ‘sail’

  31. Comparison of language units from the onomasiological side Types of nomination are the same in the contrasted languages: • Simple words • Derivative words • Compound words • Phrases • Clauses • Sentences

  32. Comparing language units from the onomasiological sidein E and U • Onomasiological structure • may coincide: • rewrite - переписати • cal-breaker - вугледробарка • to make a decision - прийняти рішення • or may not coincide: • ski - кататися на лижах • fall in love - закохатися • merry-go-round - карусель

  33. Differences in Word Collocations • heavy traffic • heavy-handed • heavy-headed • to make friends • to make captain (to achievethe rank) • інтенсивний рух • неспритний • тупоголовый • подружитися • стати капітаном (дослужитися до капітана)

  34. Analyse the onomasiological structure • food processor - кухоннийкомбайн • brown cap - підберезовик • user-friendly - легкий (зручний) вроботі • energy-efficient - економічний • misuse - • sibling - • mistrial -

  35. HOME ASSIGNMENT I.Korunets. Contrastive typology of the English and Ukrainian Languages. Typology of the lexical systems p. 118 -120, 141 – 146, 165 - 172 p. 175-177 Ex-s. 6, 7, 8, 9

More Related