A Study on the Fuzziness of Linguistic Categorization
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this paper is to examine the fuzziness of linguistic categorization. Categories do not have clear boundaries, but appear to be fuzzy in nature, suggesting that some members of a category appear to be more central and others are more peripheral. In this sense categories are argued to exhibit fuzziness and family resemblance. This means that some members are more or less like other members of a category rather than sharing a single trait. It is argued that the property of fuzziness of categories which applies to physical objects like cup can be extended to distinctive features, sonority, diminutives, genitive constructions, and grammatical categories like nouns and verbs in syntax. According to the classical view of categorization, distinctive features are regarded as binary features in nature. However, they are not seen as binarity but as graded or fuzzy categories. Furthermore, sonority behaves like a fuzzy matter rather than clear-cut distinction between classes of sounds. The category of diminutives shares a related but different meanings which are linked by a common meaning attribute. This also suggests that the category exhibits fuzziness and family resemblance. Finally, it is argued that parts of speech such as noun and verb are not uniform in nature, but are graded or fuzzy.
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to examine the fuzziness of linguistic categorization. Categories do not have clear boundaries, but appear to be fuzzy in nature, suggesting that some members of a category appear to be more central and others are more peripheral. In this sense categories are argued to exhibit fuzziness and family resemblance. This means that some members are more or less like other members of a category rather than sharing a single trait. It is argued that the property of fuzziness of categories which applies to physical objects like cup can be extended to distinctive features, sonority, diminutives, genitive constructions, and grammatical categories like nouns and verbs in syntax. According to the classical view of categorization, distinctive features are regarded as binary features in nature. However, they are not seen as binarity but as graded or fuzzy categories. Furthermore, sonority behaves like a fuzzy matter rather than clear-cut distinction between classes of sounds. The category of diminutives shares a related but different meanings which are linked by a common meaning attribute. This also suggests that the category exhibits fuzziness and family resemblance. Finally, it is argued that parts of speech such as noun and verb are not uniform in nature, but are graded or fuzzy.
참고문헌 (24)
- Berlin, B., "Basic Color Terms" (1969), University of California Press
- Bolinger, D., "Meaning and Form" (1977), Longman
- Evans, V., "Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction" (2006), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers
- Geeraerts, D., "Introduction: Prospects and Problems of Prototype Theory", Linguistics, 27, pp.587~612 (1989)
- Geeraerts, D., "Cognitive Linguistics, in Handbook of Pragmatics: A Manual", pp.111~116 (1995), John Benjamins
- Giegerich, H., "English Phonology" (1992), Cambridge University Press
- Jaeger, J., "On the Structure of Phonetic Categories", Proceedings of the 10th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics, pp.15~26 (1984), Berkeley Linguistics Society
- Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M., "On the Fuzziness of Nominal Determination", 석사, pp.2005
- Labov, W., "The Boundaries of Words and Their Meanings, in New Ways of Analyzing Variation in English", pp.340~373 (1973), Georgetown University Press
- Lakoff, G., "Irregularity in Syntax" (1970), Holt, Rinehart & Winston
- Lakoff, G., "Women, Fire and Dangerous Things; What Categories Reveal About the Mind" (1987), University of Chicago Press
- Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B., "Polysemy, Prototypes, and Radial Categories, in The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics", pp.139~169 (2007), Oxford University Press
- Rice, S., "Towards a Transitive Prototype: Evidence from Some Atypical English Passive", BLS, 13, pp.422~434 (1987)
- Rosch, E., "Cognitive Representations of Semantic Categories", Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, pp.192~233 (1975)
- Rosch, E., "Human Categorization, in Studies in Cross-Cultural Psychology 1", pp.1~49 (1977), Academic Press
- Rosch, E., "Principles of Categorization, in Cognition and Categorization", pp.27~48 (1978), Erlbaum
- Rosenbach, A., "Genitive Variation in English, in Conceptual Factors in Synchronic and Diachronic Studies" (2002), Mouton de Gruyter
- Rosenbach, A., "The English s-genitive - a Case of Degrammaticalization?, in Up and down the cline - The Nature of Grammaticalization", pp.73~96 (2004), Benjamins
- Ross, J., "A Fake NP Squish, in New Ways of Analyzing Variation in English", pp.96~140 (1973), Georgetown University Press
- Taylor, J., "Linguistic Categorization" (1995), Oxford University Press
- Taylor, J., "Possessives in English: An Exploration in Cognitive Grammar" (1996), Clarendon
- Taylor, J., "Syntactic Constructions as Prototype Categories, in New Ways of Analyzing Variation in English", pp.177~202 (1998), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers
- Wittgenstein, L., "Philosophical Investigations" (1953), Macmillan
- Zadeh, L., "Fuzzy Sets", Information and Control, 8, pp.338~353 (1965)