CONSTRUAL AND ITS REPRESENTATIVE FORMS IN COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37569/DalatUniversity.11.3.697(2021)Keywords:
Construal, Fictive motion, Mental scanning, Profile, Viewpoint, Windowing of attention.Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to examine construal as a basic human cognitive operation and its representative forms in Cognitive Linguistics. To achieve this purpose, the paper focuses on two main points: (a) a brief introduction to construal and some of its classification models, (b) an examination of the representative forms of construal which we often see in the literature of Cognitive Linguistics.
Metrics
References
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge University Press.
Croft, W., & Wood, E. (2000). Construal operations in linguistics and artificial intelligence. In L. Albertazzi (Ed.), Meaning and cognition: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 51-78). John Benjamins.
Dương, H. B. (2016). Mô hình hệ thống ý niệm trong hệ hình Ngôn ngữ học Tri nhận. Trong H. B. Dương (Ed), Ngữ văn và Văn hóa học: Một chặng đường (pp. 466-493). Đại học Quốc gia Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh.
Evans, V. (2007). A glossary of cognitive linguistics. Edinburgh University Press.
Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh University Press.
Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Frame semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111-137). Hanshin Publishing Co.
Fillmore, C. J. (1997). Lectures on deixis. Cambridge University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites (Vol 1). Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1991). Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. De Gruyter Mouton.
Langacker, R. W. (1993). Universals of construal. Berkeley Linguistics Society,19, 447-463.
Langacker, R. W. (2005a). Construction grammars: Cognitive, radical, and less so. In F. J. R. de Mendoza Ibáñez & M. S. P. Cervel (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction (pp. 101-159). De Gruyter Mouton.
Langacker, R. W. (2005b). Dynamicity, fictivity, and scanning: The imaginative basis of logic and linguistic meaning. In D. Pecher & R. A. Zwaan (Eds.), Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking (pp. 164-197). Cambridge University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (2007). Cognitive Grammar. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 421-462). Oxford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford University Press.
MacLaury, R. E. (1995). Vantage theory. In J. R. Taylor & R. E. MacLaury (Eds.), Language and the cognitive construal of the world (pp. 231-276). De Gruyter Mouton.
Radden, G. (1992). The cognitive approach to natural language. In M. Pütz (Ed.), Thirty years of linguistic evolution (pp. 513-542). John Benjamins.
Radden, G. & Dirven, R. (2007). Cognitive English grammar. John Benjamins.
Rubin, E. (1958). Figure and Ground. In D. C. Beardslee & M. Wertheimer (Eds.), Readings in perception (pp. 194-203). Van Nostrand. (The original text published in 1915).
Talmy, L. (1978). Figure and Ground in complex sentences. In J. Greenberg, C. Ferguson, & J. Moravcsik (Eds.), Universals of human language (Vol. 4, pp. 625-649). Stanford University Press.
Talmy, L. (1988). The relation of grammar to cognition. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics (pp. 165-205). John Benjamins.
Talmy, L. (1996). Fictive motion in language and ‘ception’. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.), Language and space (pp. 211-276). MIT Press.
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics (Vol. 1). MIT Press.
Downloads
Published
Volume and Issues
Section
Copyright & License
Copyright (c) 2021 Duong Huu Bien.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
