Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

Encyclopedia

In linguistics, cognitive linguistics (CL) refers to the branch of linguistics that interprets language in terms of the concepts, sometimes universal, sometimes specific to a particular tongue, which underlie its forms. It is thus closely associated withsemantics but is distinct from psycholinguistics, which draws upon empirical findings from cognitive psychology in order to explain the mental processes that underlie the acquisition, storage, production and understanding of speech and writing. Cognitive linguistics is characterized by adherence to three central positions. First, it denies that there is an autonomous linguistic faculty in the mind; second, it understands grammar in terms of conceptualization; and third, it claims that knowledge of language arises out of language use. Cognitive linguists deny that the mind has any module for language-acquisition that is unique and autonomous. This stands in contrast to the stance adopted in the field of generative grammar. Although cognitive linguists do not necessarily deny that part of the human linguistic ability is innate, they deny that it is separate from the rest of cognition. They thus reject a body of opinion in cognitive science which suggests that there is evidence for the modularity of language. They argue that knowledge of linguistic phenomena i.e., phonemes, morphemes, and syntax is essentially conceptual in nature. However, they assert that the storage and retrieval of linguistic data is not significantly different from the storage and retrieval of other knowledge, and that use of language in understanding employs similar cognitive abilities to those used in other non-linguistic tasks. Departing from the tradition of truth-conditional semantics, cognitive linguists view meaning in terms of conceptualization. Instead of viewing meaning in terms of models of the world, they view it in terms of mental spaces. Finally, cognitive linguistics argues that language is both embodied and situated in a specific environment. This can be considered a moderate offshoot of the SapirWhorf hypothesis, in that language and cognition mutually influence one another, and are both embedded in the experiences and environments of its users.

Areas of study
Cognitive linguistics is divided into three main areas of study:

Cognitive semantics, dealing mainly with lexical semantics Cognitive approaches to grammar, dealing mainly with syntax, morphology and other traditionally more grammar-oriented areas. Cognitive phonology.

Aspects of cognition that are of interest to cognitive linguists include:

Construction grammar and cognitive grammar. Conceptual metaphor and conceptual blending. Image schemas and force dynamics. Conceptual organization: Categorization, Metonymy, Frame semantics, and Iconicity. Construal and Subjectivity. Gesture and sign language. Linguistic relativity. Cultural linguistics.

Related work that interfaces with many of the above themes:

Computational models of metaphor and language acquisition. Conceptual semantics, pursued by generative linguist Ray Jackendoff is related because of its active psychological realism and the incorporation of prototype structure and images.

Cognitive linguistics, more than generative linguistics, seeks to mesh together these findings into a coherent whole. A further complication arises because the terminology of cognitive linguistics is not entirely stable, both because it is a relatively new field and because it interfaces with a number of other disciplines.

Insights and developments from cognitive linguistics are becoming accepted ways of analysing literary texts, too. Cognitive Poetics, as it has become known, has become an important part of modern stylistics.

General references

Evans, Vyvyan & Melanie Green (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Evans, Vyvyan (2007). A Glossary of Cognitive Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Further reading

Evans, Vyvyan & Melanie Green (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Evans, Vyvyan (2007). A Glossary of Cognitive Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Evans, Vyvyan; Benjamin Bergen & Joerg Zinken (2007). The Cognitive Linguistics Reader. London: Equinox. Evans, Vyvyan, Benjamin K. Bergen and Jrg Zinken. The Cognitive Linguistics Enterprise: An Overview. In Vyvyan Evans, Benjamin K. Bergen and Jrg Zinken (Eds). The Cognitive Linguistics Reader. Equinox Publishing Co. Geeraerts, D. & H. Cuyckens, eds. (2007). The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press. Geeraerts, D., ed. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Kristiansen et al., eds. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: Current Applications and Future Perspectives. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Rohrer, T. Embodiment and Experientialism in Cognitive Linguistics. In the Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Dirk Geeraerts and Herbert Cuyckens, eds., Oxford University Press, forthcoming. Gilles Fauconnier has written a brief, manifesto-like introduction to Cognitive linguistics, which compares it to mainstream, Chomsky-inspired linguistics. See Introduction to Methods and Generalizations. In T. Janssen and G. Redeker (Eds). Scope and Foundations of Cognitive Linguistics. The Hague: Mouton De Gruyter. Cognitive Linguistics Research Series. (on-line version) Grady, Oakley, and Coulson (1999). "Blending and Metaphor". In Metaphor in cognitive linguistics, Steen and Gibbs (eds.). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. (online version) Schmid, H. J. et al. (1996). An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. New York, Longman. Fauconnier, G. (1997). Mappings in Thought and Language. Taylor, J. R. (2002). Cognitive Grammar. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Croft, W. & D.A. Cruse (2004) Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a Language. A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Harvard University Press. Fauconnier, Gilles and Mark Turner (2003). The Way We Think. New York: Basic Books. Lakoff, George (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-46804-6.

External links

International Cognitive Linguistics Association UK Cognitive Linguistics Association Annotated Cognitive Linguistics Reading List (Vyv Evans) JohnQPublik's Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics is an overview of the field, comparing it to traditional Chomskian linguistics. Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics (Mark Turner). The Gestalt Theory and Linguistics Page deals with the relationship between Gestalt theory and cognitive linguistics.

The Center for the Cognitive Science of Metaphor Online is a collection of numerous formative articles in the fields of conceptual metaphor and conceptual integration. Study Cognitive Linguistics (Bangor University, UK) Cognitive Linguistics Degree (Case Western Reserve University, USA)

The source of this article is wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The text of this article is licensed under the GFDL.

Cognitive linguistics: the experiential dynamics of metaphor. by F. Elizabeth Hart In the first half of this century, literary critics brought to the fore at least three ways in which the concept of metaphor seemed crucial to the act of interpretation: first, the difference between literal and metaphorical language usage; second, the relationship between ordinary and literary language; and third, the need for better methods to evaluate semantic multiplicity and complexity. Poststructuralist theorists have responded to these issues by attempting to reconfigure our understanding of the rhetorical tradition from which our notions of language have sprung, specifically by shifting the position of metaphor within the generally accepted model of language that privileges the literal - the discourse of reason - over the metaphorical - the discourse of the imagination. Jacques Derrida's deconstruction of Aristotelian rhetoric in "White Mythology," Paul de Man's revision of Jacobsonian semiotics in "Semiology and Rhetoric," and his critique of Lockean "idea"based epistemology in "The Epistemology of Metaphor" are only a few of the important challenges, launched relatively early in the history of poststructuralism, that helped shape the way that contemporary scholars from a diverse range of critical interests have thought, spoken and written about language. Yet despite deconstruction's efforts to dislodge the binarisms of "literal" and "metaphorical" or of "literary" and "ordinary" language, an important question remains, a hold-over from the formalist concerns of earlier criticism: how might a post-structuralist model of language, emphasizing, as it does, the instability of metaphor over the alleged objectivity of the literal, account for the general level of cognitive coherence that undeniably occurs across texts and between diverse readers of texts? How, in other words, do readers arrive at even the broadest consensus about what a text "says" if the ground of language is no ground at all but rather a form of de Manian "rhetoric" that "radically suspends logic and opens up vertiginous possibilities of referential aberration"? (de Man, "Semiology" 10). Not unlike de Man, who begins his discussion of these matters with a nod to the methods of transformational-generative linguistics, I will appeal in this essay to the ideas of a Berkeley-based group of linguists and cognitive scientists who call their discipline "cognitive linguistics." Developed chiefly by the linguist George Lakoff, the philosopher Mark Johnson, and the literary critic Mark Turner, cognitive linguistics offers a new method for examining

and perhaps explaining the workings of metaphor in language. By the nature of its claims, cognitive linguistics results not just in new understandings of metaphor but in reconsiderations of language itself. Though as yet little known in literary studies, cognitive linguistics (and "cognitive rhetoric," its extension by Turner into literary analysis) offers useful insights into questions about interpretation, coherence and referentiality. In addition, and to an extent unrecognized even by its own developers, cognitive linguistics provides literary theory with a new, metaphor-centered model of language, but one that situates the subject within its material world both inside and outside the text. It does this by positing the nature of language as a cognitive and not a transcendental phenomenon, and by showing language to be imaginatively embodied, in the sense that it is "subject" to construction by the environment surrounding the human mind and body. In the process of thus defining language, cognitive linguistics effectively demystifies the figurative moment relative to formalist treatments of tropes. It does so in a way, however, that turns out to be less apocalyptic in its tone and more in tune with the actual practice involved in reading texts than are similar demystifying efforts by poststructuralist critics. The result is a model, culled from the various discourses of linguistics, philosophy and literary criticism, that addresses what would seem to be a contradiction within contemporary literary theory: the simultaneous presence of both structural coherence and structural instability within language and in particular within the literary text. In this essay, I will first attempt to place cognitive linguistics within the context of its disciplinary relationships to linguistics and psychology and in the process outline some of the philosophical problems raised by an examination of cognitive linguistics' differences from the mainstreams of these two disciplines. Then I will describe some of the theory behind cognitive linguistics, using, for the most part, examples taken directly from its developers. Next I will consider the uses already made of cognitive linguistics in the cognitive rhetoric of Mark Turner: I will examine Turner's methods first through a critique of his own claims for the method and then by my own applications of ...
Read this entire Journal Article and more with a FREE trial.

Source: http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst?docId=5001647129

Cognitive linguistics
In linguistics and in cognitive sciences, cognitive linguistics refers to a linguistic school which estimates that creation, the training and the use of the language find their best explanation by reference to cognition human in general.

Synopsis

1 Presentation 2 Fields of studies 3 See too 4 References

5 Bibliography 6 External bonds 7 Sources

Presentation
cognitive linguistics is characterized by its adhesion with three basic postulates. Initially, it denies that there is one autonomous linguistic faculty in the spirit; then, it considers grammar in terms of conceptualization; and finally, it affirms that the knowledge of the language comes from the use of the language. [1] The linguists cognitivists reject the idea that the human spirit would have any modulates single and autonomous dedicated to the training of the language. This attitude is opposed to the work completed in the field of generative grammar. Although the linguists cognitivists do not deny inevitably that part of the human linguistic capacity is innate, they refuse the idea that it is separated remainder of cognition. Thus, they affirm that the knowledge of the linguistic phenomena - i.e. phonemes, morphemes, and syntax - is primarily conceptual by nature. Moreover, they affirm that the storage and the access mode are not fundamentally different for the linguistic data and other knowledge, and that the use of the language for comprehension makes use of cognitive capacities similar to those which are implemented for other nonlinguistic tasks. While breaking with the tradition of vriconditionnelle semantics, the linguists cognitivists consider the direction in terms of conceptualization. Instead of apprehending the direction by the means of models of the world, they see it in terms of mental spaces. Lastly, the linguists cognitivists affirm that the language is at the same time incarnated (embodied) and located in a specific environment. This can be regarded as a moderate divergence of withSapir-Whorf assumption, in which the language and cognition are influenced mutually, and are both integrated in the experiment and the environment of the subjects. Among the principal linguists belonging to this current of thought, one can quote Wallace Chafe, Charles Fillmore, George Lakoff, Ronald Langacker and Leonard Talmy.

Fields of studies
Cognitive linguistics includes/understands three principal fields of studies:

the cognitive semantics, which deals mainly with lexical semantics the approaches cognitivists of grammar, concerned especially by syntax, morphology and other fields more directed traditionally towards grammar phonology cognitive.

Among the aspects of cognition which interest the linguists cognitivists, one can quote:

grammar of construction and cognitive grammar conceptual metaphors and the theory of mental spaces (conceptual blending) diagrams of images and dynamics of the forces

the conceptual organization: categorization, metonymy, semantics of frames and iconicity the theory of interpretation (construal) and subjectivity gestures and it sign language linguistic relativism neurosciences cognitive.

Work in connection with the various topics above:


computational models of metaphor and ofacquisition of the language research psycholinguistics the conceptual semantics, to which the linguist generativist stuck Ray Jackendoff, because of sound psychological realism credit and of the incorporation of the structure and images of prototype.

The linguists cognitivists, more than them linguists generativists, seek to assemble all these discoveries in a coherent whole. An additional complication comes owing to the fact that the terminology of cognitive linguistics is not entirely stabilized, at the same time because it is a relatively new field and because it is interfaced with many other disciplines. The outlines and the developments of cognitive linguistics also start to be recognized on the level of the analysis of the literary texts. cognitive poetry, name under which it was made known, became a great part of stylistics modern. , The best seen this discipline up to now was provided by Peter Stockwell.[2]

See too

Cognition | Cognitive sciences | Psycholinguistics | Cognitive grammar Gilles Falconer | Charles Fillmore | Ronald Langacker | George Lakoff | Leonard Talmy

References
1. Cognitive Linguistics, Croft, William and D. Alan Cruse, Cambridge University Near, 2004 2. Stockwell, Peter (2002). Cognitive poetics: Year Introduction. London and New York: Routledge.

Bibliography

Geeraerts, D., ED. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: BASIC Readings. Berlin/New York: Sheep of Gruyter. Kristiansen and Al, eds. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: Future Current and Applications Outlines. Berlin/New York: Sheep of Gruyter. Gilles Falconer a short introduction in the proclamation shape wrote to cognitive linguistics, by comparing it with the current dominating linguistics inspired by Chomsky. See Introduction to Methods and Generalizations. In T. Jansen and G. Redeker (Eds). Scope and Foundations off Cognitive Linguistics. The La Hague: Sheep De Gruyter. Cognitive Linguistics Research Series. (Version on line) Grady, Oakley, and Coulson (1999). Blending and Metaphor. In Metaphor in cognitive linguistics, Steen and Gibbs (eds.). Philadelphia: John Youngest children. (Version on line)

Schmid, H. J. and Al (1996). Year Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. New York, Longman. Falconer, G. (1997). Mappings in Thought and Language. Taylor, J. R. (2002). Cognitive Grammar. Oxford, Oxford University Near. Croft, W. & D.A. Cruse (2004) Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Near. Tomasello, Mr. (2003). Constructing has Language. With Use-Based Theory off Language Acquisition. Harvard University Near. Falconer, Gilles and Mark Turner (2003). The Way We Think. New York: BASIC Books.

External bonds

International association of Cognitive Linguistics JohnQPublik' S Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics constitute an overall picture of the subject, by comparison with traditional linguistics chomskyenne. Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics (Turner Mark). This site be interested in the relation between the theory of Gestalt and cognitive linguistics. Center on line for the Cognition of the Metaphor propose a great number of formative articles in the fields of the conceptual metaphor and conceptual integration.

Sources

(in) This article results partially or entirely from a translation of the article from Wikipdia in English heading Cognitive Linguistics . Gate of linguistics Gate of psychology
The original article is from Wikipedia. To view the original article please click here. Creative Commons Licence

Source : http://www.multilingualarchive.com/ma/frwiki/en/Linguistique_cognitive#Pr.C3.A9sentation

Charles J. Fillmore
Charles J. Fillmore (born in 1929) is one linguist American, highly skilled professor of Linguistics withThe University of California (Berkeley). It obtained its Doctorate in Linguistics withUniversity of Michigan in 1961. After having spent ten years withUniversity of the State of Ohio, it joined the Department of Linguistics of Berkeley in 1971. He was Membre of the Center for the Research advanced in Behavioural sciences. It had a considerable influence in the fields of syntax and of lexical semantics; it was one of the founders of cognitive linguistics, and developed the theories of Case grammar (Put Grammar, 1968), and of the Semantics of the executives (Frame Semantics, 1976). Throughout its research it clarified the fundamental importance of semantics, and its role in the motivation of the syntactic phenomena and morphological. Its initial work, in collaboration with Paul Kay and George Lakoff, were generalized in the form of the theory of Grammar of construction

(Grammar construction). Among his many students, one can mention Laura Michaelis, Chris Johnson, Miriam R. L. Petruck, Leonard Talmy and Eve Sweetser. Its principal project in progress [in 2005] is called FrameNet; it is about an ambitious description on line of the lexicon of English. In this project, the words are described according to the executives (frames) that they evoke. The data are gathered starting from British National Corpus, annotated in terms of relations semantic and syntactic, and stored in one base data organized at the same time by lexical entries and frameworks. The project is influential: the 16th edition of the International Newspaper off Lexicography was entirely devoted to him. It also inspired by the parallel projects, which study other languages, like Spanish, German and Japanese. Among the publications of Charles Fillmore, one can raise:

The Puts for Case (1968). In Bach and Harms (ED.): Universals in Linguistic Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1-88 [1]. Natural Frame semantics and the off language (1976): . In Asses off the New York Academy off Sciences: Conference one the Origin and Development off Language and Speech. Volume 280: 20-32.

Cognitive linguistics

Movement in linguistics since the late 1980s, whose defining slogan is that the ability to speak and understand a language is continuous with other mental, or in a broad sense cognitive, abilities. Opposed especially to the view of Chomsky and his followers that knowledge of language forms an independent mental system interfacing with others. Characterized in practice by a range of favoured types of investigation, including Frame Semantics, the study of prototypes and the conceptual representation of meanings, and Construction Grammar. Leading proponents have included R. W. Langacker and G. P. Lakoff, both advocates, in their early careers, of Generative Semantics. Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/cognitive-linguistics#ixzz1mGAwXDWr

Вам также может понравиться