Atnaujinkite slapukų nuostatas

El. knyga: Lexical meaning as a testable hypothesis: The case of English look, see, seem and appear

5.00/5 (2 ratings by Goodreads)
Kitos knygos pagal šią temą:
Lexical meaning as a testable hypothesis: The case of English look, see, seem and appearDidesnis paveikslėlis
Kitos knygos pagal šią temą:

DRM apribojimai

  • Kopijuoti:

    neleidžiama

  • Spausdinti:

    neleidžiama

  • El. knygos naudojimas:

    Skaitmeninių teisių valdymas (DRM)
    Leidykla pateikė šią knygą šifruota forma, o tai reiškia, kad norint ją atrakinti ir perskaityti reikia įdiegti nemokamą programinę įrangą. Norint skaityti šią el. knygą, turite susikurti Adobe ID . Daugiau informacijos  čia. El. knygą galima atsisiųsti į 6 įrenginius (vienas vartotojas su tuo pačiu Adobe ID).

    Reikalinga programinė įranga
    Norint skaityti šią el. knygą mobiliajame įrenginyje (telefone ar planšetiniame kompiuteryje), turite įdiegti šią nemokamą programėlę: PocketBook Reader (iOS / Android)

    Norint skaityti šią el. knygą asmeniniame arba „Mac“ kompiuteryje, Jums reikalinga  Adobe Digital Editions “ (tai nemokama programa, specialiai sukurta el. knygoms. Tai nėra tas pats, kas „Adobe Reader“, kurią tikriausiai jau turite savo kompiuteryje.)

    Negalite skaityti šios el. knygos naudodami „Amazon Kindle“.

This book offers an original treatment of the lexical form look. The work is innovative in that it establishes that the Columbia School conception of an invariant meaning – hitherto found primarily in grammar – is equally operative in core vocabulary items like look and see. The upshot is that grammar and lexicon are both amenable to synchronic monosemic analysis. The invariant meaning proposed for look explains the full range of its distribution, without the need to posit as linguistic units ‘look-noun’ and ‘look-verb’, ‘look-visual’ and ‘look-intellectual’, or constructions such as have-a-look, look-like, etc. The analysis places look in opposition with see , seem and appear for which tentative meanings are posited as well. The hypotheses are supported through qualitative analyses of attested examples and quantitative predictions tested in a massive corpus. These predictions offer new knowledge about the distribution of look, see and other forms that may provide useful for other scholars.
Acknowledgements ix
List of tables
xi
List of figures
xv
Chapter 1 The problem, methodology and theoretical background
1(24)
1 Introduction
1(5)
2 The problem of the identification of linguistic units
6(12)
2.1 The problem of identifying linguistic units based on syntactic categories
7(6)
2.2 The problem of identifying linguistic units based on cognitive status
13(1)
2.2.1 The problem of stored sequences
13(3)
2.2.2 The problem of polysemy
16(2)
3 Methodology
18(5)
3.1 Qualitative support
18(2)
3.2 Quantitative support
20(3)
4 Preview of upcoming chapters
23(2)
Chapter 2 Attention, Visual as the explanation for the choice of look
25(22)
1 Introduction
25(5)
2 The fit with messages involving acts of visual attention
30(1)
3 The fit with messages where a visual stimulus is absent
31(1)
4 The fit with messages involving the communication of one's thoughts or feelings
32(1)
5 The fit with messages involving attention-grabbing visual features
33(1)
6 The fit with messages involving attribution based on visual attention
34(3)
7 The fit with messages involving either visual or intellectual attention
37(5)
8 The fit with messages of searching
42(1)
9 Look in combination with directional terms: up, down, forward, back and after
43(2)
10 Conclusion
45(2)
Chapter 3 Using big data to support the hypothesized meaning attention, visual
47(30)
1 Introduction
47(1)
2 Methodology
48(7)
2.1 Quantitative predictions test the generality of communicative strategies
49(4)
2.2 Justification of the inductive approach
53(2)
3 Supporting ATTENTION in the meaning of look
55(16)
3.1 Using carefully to support ATTENTION
56(4)
3.2 Using this to support ATTENTION
60(3)
3.3 Using but to support ATTENTION
63(1)
3.4 Using at to support ATTENTION
64(3)
3.5 Using deliberately to support ATTENTION
67(1)
3.6 Using think to support ATTENTION
68(3)
4 Supporting visual in the meaning of look
71(4)
4.1 Using eye to support VISUAL
71(1)
4.2 Using painting to support VISUAL
72(2)
4.3 Using see to support VISUAL
74(1)
5 Conclusion
75(2)
Chapter 4 ATTENTION, Visual in competition with the meanings of see, seem, and appear
77(34)
1 Introduction
77(3)
2 Look and see -- ATTENTION, VISUAL versus EXPERIENCING VISUALLY
80(11)
2.1 The hypothesis for see as a monosemic sign
80(1)
2.2 ATTENTION as the explanation for the choice of look over see
81(1)
2.2.1 Using turn to to support ATTENTION
81(3)
2.2.2 Using notice to support ATTENTION
84(1)
2.3 Experiencing as the Explanation for the Choice of see over Look
85(1)
2.3.1 Using believe to support EXPERIENCING
85(2)
2.3.2 Using understand to support EXPERIENCING
87(2)
2.3.3 Using less control to support EXPERIENCING
89(2)
3 Look and seem -- ATTENTION, VISUAL versus PERSPECTIVE DEPENDENCY
91(9)
3.1 The hypothesis for seem as a monosemic sign
91(1)
3.2 VISUAL as the explanation for the choice of look over seem
92(1)
3.2.1 Using green to support VISUAL
92(2)
3.3 PERSPECTIVE DEPENDENCY as the explanation for the choice of seem over look
94(1)
3.3.1 Using logical to support PERSPECTIVE
94(3)
3.3.2 Using to me to support PERSPECTIVE
97(2)
3.3.3 Using at the time to support PERSPECTIVE
99(1)
4 Look and appear -- ATTENTION, VISUAL versus INITIATION OF PERCEPTION
100(10)
4.1 The hypothesis for appear as a monosemic sign
100(1)
4.2 INITIATION as the explanation for the choice of appear over look
100(1)
4.2.1 Using introduce to support INITIATION
100(2)
4.2.2 Using first to support INITIATION
102(2)
4.2.3 Using comparative adjectives to support INITIATION
104(2)
4.2.4 Using but to support Initiation
106(1)
4.3 Messages involving visual features: look versus appearance
107(3)
5 Conclusion
110(1)
Chapter 5 Competing analyses of the meaning of look
111(14)
1 Introduction
111(1)
2 A componential analysis
111(5)
3 A construction analysis
116(4)
4 A markedness analysis
120(5)
Chapter 6 Theoretical excursus: A critique of William Diver's approach to the grammar-lexicon divide and a recapitulation of analytical assumptions and findings
125(14)
1 Introduction
125(1)
2 The linguistic status of the categories of grammar and lexicon
126(6)
2.1 The a priori assumption of a grammar-lexicon continuum
127(1)
2.2 The a priori assumption of polysemy in the lexicon
128(2)
2.3 The a priori assumption that only grammatical forms constrain one another
130(1)
2.4 The a priori assumption that lexical meanings are based on real-world categorizations
130(1)
2.5 Conclusion
131(1)
3 Recapitulations
132(7)
References 139(4)
Index 143
Daugiau apie elektronines knygas Daugiau apie elektronines knygas
Pastovi nuoroda: https://www.kriso.lt/db/97890272643432e.html
Raktažodžiai: