Affixal Contronymy in English
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Unlike previous literature on contronymy, which has primarily focused on lexemes, the present study aims to determine and explore such phenomena in derivational affixes from a cognitive linguistic perspective. This is in agreement with earlier observations by Klégr (2013), who also reported that contronymy is not restricted to one-word lexemes. Based on the basic tenets of construction grammar and traditional semantic criteria, I present three types of affixal contronymy, namely binary contronyms (e.g., de-), converse contronyms (e.g., -er, -ee, -ant/-ent, fore-), and reverse contronyms (e.g., be-, un-). I also describe under what cognitive mechanisms a given contronym could derive two opposite meanings. This study’s findings are significant in two respects. First, it provides additional evidence that contronymy occurs not only at the word level, but also at the affix level. This suggests that contronymy should be further investigated within and beyond the field of lexical semantics. Second, this study offers a cognitive-based account of how contronymy is motivated and represented in human cognition. Thus, it confirms that contronymy is a cognitively motivated phenomenon in language
Abstract
Unlike previous literature on contronymy, which has primarily focused on lexemes, the present study aims to determine and explore such phenomena in derivational affixes from a cognitive linguistic perspective. This is in agreement with earlier observations by Klégr (2013), who also reported that contronymy is not restricted to one-word lexemes. Based on the basic tenets of construction grammar and traditional semantic criteria, I present three types of affixal contronymy, namely binary contronyms (e.g., de-), converse contronyms (e.g., -er, -ee, -ant/-ent, fore-), and reverse contronyms (e.g., be-, un-). I also describe under what cognitive mechanisms a given contronym could derive two opposite meanings. This study’s findings are significant in two respects. First, it provides additional evidence that contronymy occurs not only at the word level, but also at the affix level. This suggests that contronymy should be further investigated within and beyond the field of lexical semantics. Second, this study offers a cognitive-based account of how contronymy is motivated and represented in human cognition. Thus, it confirms that contronymy is a cognitively motivated phenomenon in language
참고문헌 (40)
- Andrews, Edna, "A synchronic semantic analysis of de-and un-in American English", American Speech, 61(3), pp.221~232 (1986)[DOI]
- Baron, Dennis, "Declining grammar and other essays on the English vocabulary" (1989), National Council of Teachers of English
- Barker, Chris, "Episodic-ee in English : A thematic role constraint on new word formation", Language, 74(4), pp.695~727 (1998)[DOI]
- Blank, Andreas, "Polysemy: flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language", pp.267~294 (2003), Mouton de Gruyter
- Brugman, Claudia, "Story of over", M.A., pp.1981
- Brugman, Claudia, "The syntax and semantics of have and its complements", Ph.D., pp.1988
- Bryson, Bill, "Mother tongue: English and how it got that way" (1990), Penguin Books
- Croft, William, "Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective" (2001), Oxford University Press
- Cruse, D. A, "Lexical semantics" (1986), Cambridge University Press
- Fillmore, Charles J, "Cognitive linguistics: Basic readings", pp.373~400 (2006), Mouton de Gruyter
- Gentner, Dedre, "Is the future always ahead? Evidence for system-mappings in understanding space-time metaphors", Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.510~515 (1992)
- Goldberg, Adele E, "The inherent semantics of argument structure : The case of the English ditransitive construction", Cognitive Linguistics, 3, pp.37~74 (1992)[DOI]
- Goldberg, Adele E, "Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure" (1995), University of Chicago Press
- Gove, Philip B, "Self-explanatory words", American Speech, 41(3), pp.182~198 (1966)[DOI]
- Horn, Laurence, "Etymythology and taboo", Paper presented at International Society for the Linguistics of English (2011)
- Jones, Steven, "Antonymy: A corpus-based perspective" (2002), Routledge
- Karaman, Burcu I, "On contronymy", International Journal of Lexicography, 21(2), pp.173~192 (2008)[DOI]
- Klégr, A, "The limits of polysemy : Enantiosemy", Linguistica Pragensia, 2, pp.7~23 (2013)
- Lakoff, George, "Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind" (1987), University of Chicago Press
- Lakoff, George, "Metaphor and thought", pp.202~251 (1993), Cambridge University Press
- Lakoff, George, "Metaphors we live by" (1980), Chicago University Press
- Langacker, Ronald W, "Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. I: Theoretical Prerequisites" (1987), Stanford University Press
- Leech, Geoffrey, "Semantics" (1981), Penguin Books
- Lehrer, Adrienne, "Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language", pp.217~221 (2003), Mouton de Gruyter
- Levin, Beth, "English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation" (1993), University of Chicago Press
- Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, Barbara, "Dynamic perspective on antonymous polysemy", Language in Performance, 16, pp.121~137 (1998)
- Lieber, Rochelle, "Morphology and lexical semantics" (2004), Cambridge University Press
- Lieber, Rochelle, "Handbook of word-formation", pp.375~427 (2005), Springer
- 임지룡, "시점의 역전 현상", 담화와 인지, 14(3), pp.179~206 (2007), 담화·인지언어학회[DOI]
- Lyons, John, "Semantics, vol. 1" (1977), Cambridge University Press
- Marchand, Hans, "The categories and types of present-day English word-formation: A synchronic-dyachronic approach" (1969), Beck
- Murphy, M. Lynne, "Semantic relations and the lexicon: Antonymy, synonymy, and other paradigms" (2003), Cambridge University Press
- Panther, Klaus-Uwe, "Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast", pp.279~319 (2002), Mouton de Gruyter
- Panther, Klaus-Uwe, "Cognitive linguistics between universality and variation", pp.161~188 (2012), Cambridge Scholars
- Park, Jeong-Woon, "Morphological causatives in Korean: Problems in grammatical polysemy and constructional relations", Ph. D., pp.1994
- Ross, Alan S.C., "Meaningless ‘de-’ in English", Notes and Queries, 23, pp.310~311 (1976)[DOI]
- Ryder, Mary Ellen, "Bankers and blue-chippers : An account of-er formations in present-day English", English Language and Linguistics, 3(2), pp.269~297 (1999)[DOI]
- Shmelev, Alexei, "The lexical typology of semantic shifts", pp.67~94 (2016), De Gruyter
- Thomas, Macklin, "Interchangeable pairs in un-, in-, en-, etc", American Speech, 58(1), pp.78~80 (1983)[DOI]
- 왕난난, "한중 자기반의어의 의미 양상과 해석", 담화와 인지, 24(2), pp.53~72 (2017), 담화·인지언어학회[DOI]