Unit 5
WHAT IS
COGNITIVE
SEMANTICS?
5.1 Guiding principles
5.2 Phenomena investigated
within cognitive semantics
There is an objective No! We don’t agree!
world ‘out there’, which Language does not directly
language simply reflects reflect the world. Rather, it
(in formal semantics reflects our unique human
construal of the world
Four central assumptions of cognitive semantics
1. Conceptual structure is embodied.
2. Semantic structure is conceptual structure.
3. Meaning representation is encyclopaedic.
4. Meaning construction is conceptualisation.
5.1.1
Conceptual structure is embodied.
A fundamental concern for cognitive semanticists is the nature of the
relationship between conceptual structure and the external world of
sensory experience.
the underlying organization
of our knowledge and
understanding of the world
a. He’s in love.
b. We’re out of trouble now.
c. He’s coming out of the coma.
d. I’m slowly getting into shape.
e. He entered a state of euphoria.
f. He fell into a depression.
containment
image schema
a. He’s in love.
b. We’re out of trouble now.
states
c. He’s coming out of the coma.
d. I’m slowly getting into shape.
e. He entered a state of euphoria.
f. He fell into a depression.
container image schema
a. He’s in love.
b. We’re out of trouble now.
c. He’s coming out of the coma.
d. I’m slowly getting into shape.
e. He entered a state of euphoria.
f. He fell into a depression.
a. He’s in love.
b. We’re out of trouble now.
c. He’s coming out of the coma.
d. I’m slowly getting into shape.
e. He entered a state of euphoria.
f. He fell into a depression. STATES ARE CONTAINERS
Containers States
STATES ARE CONTAINERS
Containers States
Bodily experience gives rise to concrete concepts like the
CONTAINER image schema, which in turn serves to
structure more abstract conceptual domains like STATES.
5.1.2 Semantic structure is conceptual structure .
This principle asserts that language refers to
concepts in the mind of the speaker rather than
to objects in the external world.
5.1.2 Semantic structure is conceptual structure .
Cognitive semanticists claim that the meanings associated with
words form only a subset of possible concepts. We have many
more thoughts, ideas, and feelings than we can conventionally
encode in language.
For example
moustache/beard/eyebrow (concepts for the place on the face)
=> the concept of hair
Bachelor unmarried adult male
traditional concept
the Pope
a monk
a homosexual male
Cognitive semanticists reject the definitional or dictionary
view of word meaning in favour of an encyclopedic view.
5.1.3 Meaning representation is encyclopedic.
Words do not represent neatly packaged bundles of
meaning (the dictionary view) but serve as ‘points
of access’ to vast repositories of knowledge relating
to a particular concept or conceptual domain.
5.1.3 Meaning representation is encyclopedic.
It is ‘encyclopaedic’ knowledge of this kind that allows
us to interpret this otherwise contradictory sentence
‘Watch out Jane, your husband’s a right bachelor!’
5.1.3 Meaning representation is encyclopedic.
In order to understand what the speaker means, we
draw upon our encyclopaedic knowledge relating to
‘husband” and “bachelor”.
We then ‘construct’ a meaning by ‘selecting’
a meaning that is appropriate in the context
of the utterance.
5.1.4. Meaning construction is conceptualization.
Language itself does not encode meaning. Instead, words
(and other linguistic units) are only ‘prompts’ for the
construction of meaning.
Meaning is constructed at the conceptual level: meaning
construction is equated with conceptualization.
5.1.4. Meaning construction is conceptualization.
Meaning is a process rather than a discrete ‘thing’ that can
be ‘packaged’ by language.
Meaning construction draws upon encyclopaedic
knowledge, and involves inferencing strategies that relate
to different aspects of conceptual structure, organisation
and packaging.
5.1.4. Meaning construction is conceptualization.
In France, Bill Clinton wouldn’t have been harmed by his
relationship with Monica Lewinsky
counterfactuals
This sentence prompts us to imagine a scenario in which
Bill Clinton, the former US President, is actually the
President of France, and that the scandal that surrounded
him and the former Whitehouse intern, Monica Lewinsky,
took place not in the United States but in France.
Conceptual Blending Theory
5.1.4. Meaning construction is conceptualization.
In France, Bill Clinton wouldn’t have been harmed by his
relationship with Monica Lewinsky
one mental space, a ‘reality space’, in which Clinton is the US President, Lewinsky
is his intern, they have an affair, they are found out and scandal ensues.
a second ‘reality space’, which contains the President of France together with
knowledge about French culture which deems it permissible for French presidents to
have extra-marital relations, and ‘public’ and ‘private’ families.
a third blended space, Clinton is the President of France, he has an affair with
Lewinsky, they are found out, but there is no scandal.
=> We learn that the cultural and moral sensitivities regarding extramarital affairs
between politicians and members of their staff are radically different in the United
States and France.
5.1.4. Meaning construction is conceptualization.
This meaning is constructed on the basis of complex
mapping operations between distinct reality-based
scenarios, which combine to create a new
counterfactual scenario. The blended space, then,
gives rise to a new meaning, which is not available
from encyclopaedic knowledge.
5.2 Phenomena investigated within
cognitive semantics
5.2.1 The bodily basis of meaning
Conceptual metaphors give rise to systems of
conventional conceptual mappings, held in
long-term memory, which may be motivated
by image-schematic structure.
5.2 Phenomena investigated within
cognitive semantics
5.2.2 Conceptual structure
Talmy (2000) argues that these two systems encode our
Cognitive Representation (CR) in language.
The closed-class semantic system (grammatical constructions,
bound morphemes) provides scene-structuring representation.
The open-class semantic system (content words and
morphemes) provides the substantive content relating to a
particular scene.
5.2 Phenomena investigated within
cognitive semantics
5.2.3 Encyclopaedic semantics
The encyclopedic nature of meaning has mainly focused on the
way semantic structure is organized relative to conceptual
knowledge structures.
One proposal concerning the organisation of word meaning is
based on the notion of a frame against which word-meanings
are understood.
5.2 Phenomena investigated within
cognitive semantics
5.2.3 Encyclopaedic semantics
Frames are detailed knowledge structures or schemas emerging
from everyday experiences. According to this perspective,
knowledge of word meaning is, in part, knowledge of the
individual frames with which a word is associated.
A theory of frame semantics therefore reveals the rich network
of meaning that makes up our knowledge of words.
5.2.4 Mappings
Fauconnier (1997) has identified three kinds of
mapping operations:
(1)projection mappings;
(2) pragmatic function mappings;
(3) schema mappings.
5.2.4 Mappings
(1) projection mappings
A projection mapping projects structure from one
domain (source) onto another (target).
a. Summer has just zoomed by.
b. The end of term is approaching.
c. The time for a decision has come
The metaphor TIME IS THE MOTION OF OBJECTS
5.2.4 Mappings
(1) pragmatic function mappings
Pragmatic function mappings are established between
two entities by virtue of a shared frame of experience.
Metonymy
The ham sandwich has wandering hands.
(uttered by one waitress to another in a restaurant)
association between a particular customer and the
food he orders
5.2.4 Mappings
Schema mappings relate to the projection of a schema
(another term for frame) onto particular utterances.
For instance, an abstract frame for PURCHASING GOODS,
which represents an abstraction over specific instances of
purchasing goods; involves a purchaser, a vendor,
merchandise, money (or credit card) and so on.
5.2.4 Mappings
(16) The Ministry of Defence purchased twenty new
helicopters from Westland.
That the Ministry of Defence is the PURCHASER, the
contractor Westland is the VENDOR and the helicopters are
the MERCHANDISE.
