1,721,340 research outputs found
Illocutionary constructions and conceptual metonymies
No full textThis chapter aims to contribute to the discussion of indirect speech acts by describing how constructionist approaches to language (Boas 2003; Goldberg 2006; Ruiz de Mendoza and Galera 2014) are suitable to depict the interplay of illocutions with Idealised Cognitive Models (Lakoff 1987), in particular with conceptual metonymy. I conceive of speech acts as illocutionary constructions, which are “entrenched, productive and replicable form-function pairings characterised as constructional procedures capable of jointly activating parts of illocutionary scenarios in connection with relevant elements from the context of situation” (Baicchi 2012)
Conceptual metaphor in the complex dynamics of illocutionary meaning.
No full textThis article illustrates the role that conceptual metaphor plays in the complex dynamics of interpersonal communication, with the focus being placed upon the synergistic relationship that metaphor holds with other Idealized Cognitive Models (Lakoff, 1987) in the construction of illocutionary meaning. This goal is pursued under the scope of the Cost-Benefit Cognitive Model (Baicchi & Ruiz de Mendoza, 2010), which has been elaborated to overcome the shortcomings of traditional relevance-theoretic approaches and to ground illocutionary activity within the constructionist strand of Cognitive Linguistics. The qualitative analysis of Webcorp data retrieved for the suggesting high-level situational cognitive model offers an exemplification of the interplay that metaphor holds with frames, image schemas, and metonymy
Illocutionary constructions and conceptual metonymies
No full textThis chapter aims to contribute to the discussion of indirect speech acts by describing how constructionist approaches to language (Boas 2003; Goldberg 2006; Ruiz de Mendoza and Galera 2014) are suitable to depict the interplay of illocutions with Idealised Cognitive Models (Lakoff 1987), in particular with conceptual metonymy. I conceive of speech acts as illocutionary constructions, which are “entrenched, productive and replicable form-function pairings characterised as constructional procedures capable of jointly activating parts of illocutionary scenarios in connection with relevant elements from the context of situation” (Baicchi 2012)
The subsumption process of the intransitive-transitive migration
No full textThe Lexical Constructional Model (LCM henceforth; Ruiz de Mendoza & Mairal 2007, 2009; Baicchi 2008) is a robust framework which has recently developed a usage-based comprehensive theory of meaning construction, which includes a fine-grained treatment of the syntax-semantics interface. Stemming from the claim that syntax is by no means autonomous but motivated with respect to semantics and pragmatics, the paper offers a variationist account of motion verbs in two typologically unrelated languages (Talmy 2000; Slobin 2003) -English and Italian- and describe how such verbs participate in motion constructions such as the caused-motion, the resultative, and the way-construction (Boas 2003, 2008; Goldberg 1995; Israel 1996; Ruiz de Mendoza & Mairal 2007; Baicchi 2009). It demonstrates how the LCM reveals particularly relevant in this respect since it proposes a theory of semantic interpretation which is constructed on the basis of two representational mechanisms –lexical and constructional templates– and two basic cognitive operations –subsumption and conceptual cueing– that specify how meaning representations from different levels may interact (Ruiz de Mendoza & Mairal Usón 2008: 355). Dipping on the LCM, English and Italian motion lexical templates are discussed when subsumed into motion constructional templates
Figurativeness all the way down
No full textFigurative language is the outcome of our figurative thought, which derives from the ever-present interconnection between our physical experience and the relation we set up with the cultural context in which we live. Not only are the mind and the body inseparable, but they cannot be reduced to mechanical brain activity or abstract mental representations separated from the whole personhood
The subsumption process of the intransitive-transitive migration
No full textThe Lexical Constructional Model (LCM henceforth; Ruiz de Mendoza & Mairal 2007, 2009; Baicchi 2008) is a robust framework which has recently developed a usage-based comprehensive theory of meaning construction, which includes a fine-grained treatment of the syntax-semantics interface. Stemming from the claim that syntax is by no means autonomous but motivated with respect to semantics and pragmatics, the paper offers a variationist account of motion verbs in two typologically unrelated languages (Talmy 2000; Slobin 2003) -English and Italian- and describe how such verbs participate in motion constructions such as the caused-motion, the resultative, and the way-construction (Boas 2003, 2008; Goldberg 1995; Israel 1996; Ruiz de Mendoza & Mairal 2007; Baicchi 2009). It demonstrates how the LCM reveals particularly relevant in this respect since it proposes a theory of semantic interpretation which is constructed on the basis of two representational mechanisms –lexical and constructional templates– and two basic cognitive operations –subsumption and conceptual cueing– that specify how meaning representations from different levels may interact (Ruiz de Mendoza & Mairal Usón 2008: 355). Dipping on the LCM, English and Italian motion lexical templates are discussed when subsumed into motion constructional templates
The cognitive grounding of illocutionary constructions within the theoretical perspective of the Lexical-Constructional Model
No full textThis article develops previous research carried out by Ruiz de Mendoza and Baicchi (2007) on the notion of illocutionary construction with a view to integrating this notion into the illocutionary layer of the Lexical Constructional Model (LCM; cf. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez & Mairal Usón 2008; Mairal Usón & Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez 2009; see also Baicchi 2009a, 2010; Butler, 2009; Ruiz de Mendoza & Gonzálvez-García 2010, inter alia). So far this layer has only paid attention to a limited set of directive constructions (especially Can You X?), which it discusses in terms of the restrictions of the fixed elements of the construction on the kind of conceptual material that can saturate the variable part. In order to fill this gap, the present article makes a complementary analysis of the way illocutionary meaning is modeled in our minds and studies how speakers make use of illocutionary cognitive models to motivate the conventionalized illocutionary value of linguistic expressions. We will assume, following the general trend in constructionist approaches to language (especially the Goldbergian strand, within which the LCM is circumscribed), that illocutionary constructions are form-meaning pairings like other kinds of construction. However, what distinguishes these constructions from others is the relatively fixed nature of their form (e.g. Can You X?, Will You X?, You Must X, etc.) and the special situational and generic (or high-level) nature of the meaning part of the pairing.
The article will thus first introduce the LCM with a focus on its overall architecture. Then it will offer an overview of previous proposals of the treatment of illocutionary meaning from a Cognitive Linguistics perspective, which will include the developments in Ruiz de Mendoza and Baicchi (2007), since they are of special interest for the LCM. We will further discuss cognitive model types and argue that illocutionary meaning is based on the activation of high-level situational cognitive models or illocutionary scenarios. Finally, we will describe the traditional speech acts of requesting, ordering, advising, offering, warning, thanking and apologizing in connection to their corresponding illocutionary scenarios and we will argue that it is possible to generalize further and use the Cost-Benefit Cognitive Model, as developed by Ruiz de Mendoza and Baicchi (2007), to account for all essential aspects of illocutionary interpretation
The cognitive grounding of illocutionary constructions within the theoretical perspective of the Lexical-Constructional Model
No full textThis article develops previous research carried out by Ruiz de Mendoza and Baicchi (2007) on the notion of illocutionary construction with a view to integrating this notion into the illocutionary layer of the Lexical Constructional Model (LCM; cf. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez & Mairal Usón 2008; Mairal Usón & Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez 2009; see also Baicchi 2009a, 2010; Butler, 2009; Ruiz de Mendoza & Gonzálvez-García 2010, inter alia). So far this layer has only paid attention to a limited set of directive constructions (especially Can You X?), which it discusses in terms of the restrictions of the fixed elements of the construction on the kind of conceptual material that can saturate the variable part. In order to fill this gap, the present article makes a complementary analysis of the way illocutionary meaning is modeled in our minds and studies how speakers make use of illocutionary cognitive models to motivate the conventionalized illocutionary value of linguistic expressions. We will assume, following the general trend in constructionist approaches to language (especially the Goldbergian strand, within which the LCM is circumscribed), that illocutionary constructions are form-meaning pairings like other kinds of construction. However, what distinguishes these constructions from others is the relatively fixed nature of their form (e.g. Can You X?, Will You X?, You Must X, etc.) and the special situational and generic (or high-level) nature of the meaning part of the pairing.
The article will thus first introduce the LCM with a focus on its overall architecture. Then it will offer an overview of previous proposals of the treatment of illocutionary meaning from a Cognitive Linguistics perspective, which will include the developments in Ruiz de Mendoza and Baicchi (2007), since they are of special interest for the LCM. We will further discuss cognitive model types and argue that illocutionary meaning is based on the activation of high-level situational cognitive models or illocutionary scenarios. Finally, we will describe the traditional speech acts of requesting, ordering, advising, offering, warning, thanking and apologizing in connection to their corresponding illocutionary scenarios and we will argue that it is possible to generalize further and use the Cost-Benefit Cognitive Model, as developed by Ruiz de Mendoza and Baicchi (2007), to account for all essential aspects of illocutionary interpretation
- …
