Validating the Lexical Network of Take:A Corpus-based Study
1
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The lexical network accounts for the relationship among a number of senses of a polysemous lexeme in the cognitive semantics, where each sense is connected to another by links. This study is an attempt to validate the lexical network of take proposed by Norvig and Lakoff (1987) via newly compiled corpora from an English-only local journal, and the outcome of a sentence-elicitation experiment. Under the assumption that the intuitive model of the lexical network theory would hold more explanatory adequacy in the native use of language than in the non-native one, the data were arranged into two comparable sets accordingly. While the model does not meet linguistic validation by means of measuring the sense frequency, the result of the saliency experiment was in concurrence with the model for the most central sense, take-1 (grab). There was no sign that the “lexical network theory” (LNT) applies differently between the native and non-native use of take. The result of this study which does not concur with the previous studies on the LNT model of take can be attributed to the different decoding of sense distinction in part; thus further clarification is needed to define the nature of centrality.
Abstract
The lexical network accounts for the relationship among a number of senses of a polysemous lexeme in the cognitive semantics, where each sense is connected to another by links. This study is an attempt to validate the lexical network of take proposed by Norvig and Lakoff (1987) via newly compiled corpora from an English-only local journal, and the outcome of a sentence-elicitation experiment. Under the assumption that the intuitive model of the lexical network theory would hold more explanatory adequacy in the native use of language than in the non-native one, the data were arranged into two comparable sets accordingly. While the model does not meet linguistic validation by means of measuring the sense frequency, the result of the saliency experiment was in concurrence with the model for the most central sense, take-1 (grab). There was no sign that the “lexical network theory” (LNT) applies differently between the native and non-native use of take. The result of this study which does not concur with the previous studies on the LNT model of take can be attributed to the different decoding of sense distinction in part; thus further clarification is needed to define the nature of centrality.
참고문헌 (39)
- Aijmer,K, "The semantic path from modality to aspect: 'be able to' in a cross-linguistic perspective, IN Corpus approaches to grammaticalization in English", pp.57~79 (2004), John Benjamins
- Altenberg, B, "On the phraseology of spoken English, IN Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and application", pp.101~122 (2001), Clarendon
- Altenberg, B, "The grammatical and lexical patterning of make in native and non-native student writing", Applied Linguistics, 22(2), pp.173~194 (2001)
- Altenberg, B, "The use of adverbial connectors in advanced Swedish learners’ written English, IN Learner English on computer", pp.80~93 (1998), Longman
- Amagawa,T, "Another look at taking in lexical network theory", Tsukuba English Studies, (15), pp.23~42 (1996)
- Aston, G, "Corpora and language teaching, IN Rethinking language pedagogy from a corpus perspective", pp.7~17 (2000), Peter Lang
- Brinton, L, "Subject clitics in English: A case of degrammaticalization, IN Corpus approaches to grammaticalization in English", pp.227~256 (2004), John Benjamins
- Brugman,C, "The very idea: A case study in polysemy and cross-lexical generalizations, IN Papers from the parasession on lexical semantics", pp.21~38 (1984), Chicago Linguistic Society
- Brugman, C, "Cognitive topology and lexical networks, IN Lexical ambiguity resolution: Perspectives from psycholinguistics, neuropsychology and artificial intelligence", pp.477~508 (1988), Morgan Kaufman
- Croft,W, "Linguistic evidence and mental representations", Cognitive Linguistics, 9(2), pp.151~173 (1998)
- Gilquin, G, "Taking a new look at lexical networks", Lexis, 1, pp.23~39 (2008)
- "What you think ain’t what you get: Highly polysemous verbs in mind and language"[URL]
- Granger, S, "Learner corpus data in the foreign language classroom: Form-focused instruction and data-driven learning, IN English on computer", pp.199~209 (1998), Longman
- Gries,S, "Corpus-based methods and cognitive semantics: The many senses of to run, IN Corpora in cognitive linguistics: Corpus-based Approaches to syntax and lexis", pp.57~99 (2006), Mouton de Gruyter
- Johns,T, "Should you be persuaded – two samples of data-driven learning materials", English Language Research Journal, 4, pp.1~16 (1991)
- 김형선, "A Study on the Incidental Development of English Competence in CMC, Focusing on Syntactic and Lexical Mastery", 응용언어학, 24(3), pp.105~128 (2008), 한국응용언어학회
- 김형선, "Native and Non-native Use of Existential There in CMC", 언어, 36(1), pp.69~91 (2011), 한국언어학회
- Lakoff,G, "Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind" (1987), University of Chicago
- Lam, P, "The use of multi-word verbs in advanced Chinese ESL learners, IN Proceedings of the first international symposium on computer learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching", pp.80~82 (1998), The Chinese University of Hong Kong
- 이용훈, "NLPTools를 이용한 코퍼스 분석과 활용" (2007), 케임브리지
- Lewis, M, "The lexical approach" (1993), Heinle ELT
- McEnery, T, "Epistemic modality in argumentative essays of second-language writers, IN Academic discourse", pp.182~195 (2002), Longman
- 나윤희, "Tracing L2 Learners’ Accuracy Development in CMC", 영어교육연구, 22(1), pp.195~221 (2010), 팬코리아영어교육학회
- Nevalainen,T, "Three perspectives on grammaticalization: Lexico-grammar, corpora and historical sociolinguistics, IN Corpus approaches to grammaticalization in English", pp.1~31 (2004), John Benjamins
- Nordlund,M, "From physical to mental acquisition: A corpus-based study of verbs", 박사, pp.2008
- "On defining polysemous words. In Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference on Theoretical Issues in Conceptual Information Processing"[URL]
- "Building a lexicon with lexical network theory. Proceedings of the First International Language Acquisition Workshop"[URL]
- Norvig, P, "Taking: A study in lexical network theory, IN Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society", pp.195~206 (1987), BLS
- Oh,S.-Y, "Actually and in fact in American English: A data-based analysis", English Language and Linguistics, 4, pp.243~268 (2000)
- 오 선 영, "A Corpus-based Study of Epistemic Modalityin Korean College Students’ Writings in English", 영어교육, 62(2), pp.147~175 (2007), 한국영어교육학회
- Palacios-Martinez, I, "Connecting linguistic description and language teaching: native and learner use of existential there", International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(2), pp.213~231 (2006)
- Radden,G, "The cognitive approach to natural language, IN Thirty years of linguistic evolution: Studies in honour of René Dirven on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday", pp.513~541 (1992), John Benjamins
- Rice,S, "Prepositional prototypes, in The construal of space in language and thought", pp.135~165 (1996), Mouton de Gruyter
- Selinker, L., "The role of extrinsic feedback in interlanguage fossilization: a discussion of “Rule fossilization: A tentative model", Language Learning, 29, pp.363~375 (1979)
- Stubbs,M, "Conrad in the computer: examples of quantitative stylistic methods", Language and Literature, 14(1), pp.5~24 (2005)
- Ungerer, F, "An introduction to cognitive linguistics" (1996), Longman
- Viberg,A, "The polysemy of Swedish ge “give” from a crosslinguistic perspective, in Proceedings of the Tenth Euralex International Congress", pp.669~682 (2002), Copenhagen University
- Vigil, N, "Rule fossilization: A tentative model", Language Learning, 26, pp.281~295 (1976)
- Williams,N, "Processing polysemous word in context: evidence for interrelated meanings", Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 21(3), pp.193~218 (1992)