به نام آنکه او نامی ندارد

1. به نام آنکه او نامی ندارد

2. توجه؟ • هرآنچه در اینجا آمده است، برداشتی است از کتاب های زیر که به همراه مثال های انگلیسی ارائه شده اند. • Croft, William, and Cruse, D. Alan. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. • Evans, Vyvian, and Green, Melanie. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics. An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. • Geeraerts, Dirk and Cuyckens, Hubert. (2007). The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press • Geeraerts, Dirk. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: basic readings. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. • Saeed, John, I. (2009). Semantics. Blackwell Publishing. (chapter 11)

3. What is Cognitive Linguistics? • Cognitive linguistics is not a specific theory! Language is a system that directly reflects conceptual organisation.

4. Embodiment • the human mind – and therefore language – cannot be investigated in isolation from human embodiment. • we have a species-specific view of the world due to the unique nature of our physical bodies

5. Embodied Experience:visual system Embodiment • human has three kinds of photoreceptors or colourchannels • squirrels, rabbits have two; goldfish and pigeons have four. • Rattlesnakes can see in the infrared range.

6. Embodied Experience:gravity and motion Embodiment • hummingbirds are able to rise directly into the air without pushing off from the ground • hummingbirds can stop almost instantaneously, experiencing little momentum. • Fish experience very little gravity, because water reduces its effect.

7. Embodied Cognition:Image Schema Embodiment • CONTACT, CONTAINER and BALANCE, which are meaningful because they derive from and are linked to human pre-conceptual experience (1) a. George is in love. b. Lily is in trouble. c. The government is in a deep crisis.

8. Experiential realism Embodiment language does not directly reflect the world.

9. Generalisation Commitment • There are common structuring principles that hold across different aspects of language

10. Categorisation: fuzziness and family resemblance Generalisation Commitment (1) Some members of the category CUP

11. Categorisation in morphology:the diminutive in Italian: -ino,-etto, and -ello Generalisation Commitment • Small size: paese → village; paesino → small village • Affection: mamma → mum; mammina →mummy • Short temporal duration, reduced strength or reduced scale: sinfonia→symphony; sinfonietta→ashorter symphony • To reduce intensity or extent: bello → beautiful; bellino → pretty/cute • Aprocess of intermittent or poor quality: lavorare→ work; lavoricciare→ work half-heartedly’

12. Categorisation in syntax: parts of speech Generalisation Commitment 1. agentive nominalisation of transitive verbs: a. John imports rugs → John is an importer of rugs b. John knew that fact → *John was the knower of that fact 2. ‘be V-able’ construction,: a. His handwriting can be read → His handwriting is readable b. The lighthouse can be spotted → *The lighthouse is spottable 3. passivisation: a. John kicked the ball → The ball was kicked by John b. John owes two pounds → *?Two pounds are owed by John 4. tag question: a. Some headway has been made. → Some headway has been made, hasn’t it? b. Little heed was paid to her. → ?*Little heed was paid to her, was it?

13. Categorisation in phonology:distinctive features Generalisation Commitment • Jaeger and Ohala (1984): ← most voiced least voiced → / r,m,n//v,ð,z//w,j//b,d,//f,θ,s,h,ʃ//p,t,k/

14. Polysemy Generalisation Commitment • Polysemy is not restricted to word meaning but is a fundamental feature of human language

15. Polysemy in morphology:agentive -er suffix Generalisation Commitment (2) a. teacher b. villager c. toaster d. best-seller • Despite these differences, these senses are intuitively related in terms of sharing, to a greater or lesser degree, a defining functional ability or attribute:

16. Polysemy in syntax:ditransitive construction Generalisation Commitment • SENSE 1: AGENT successfully causes recipient to receive PATIENT (e.g. give, pass, hand, serve, feed): Mary gave John the cake. • SENSE 2: conditions of satisfaction imply that AGENT causes recipient to receive PATIENT (e.g. guarantee, promise): Mary promised John the cake. • SENSE 3: AGENT causes recipient not to receive PATIENT (e.g. refuse, deny): Mary refused John the cake. • SENSE 4: AGENT acts to cause recipient to receive PATIENT at some future point in time (e.g. leave, bequeath, allocate, reserve, grant): Mary left John the cake. • SENSE 5: AGENT enables recipient to receive PATIENT (e.g. permit, allow): Mary permitted John the cake. • SENSE 6: AGENT intends to cause recipient to receive PATIENT (e.g. bake, make, build, cook, sew, knit): Mary baked John the cake.

17. metaphor Generalisation Commitment • Cognitive linguists argue that metaphor-based meaning extension can also be identified across a range of ‘distinct’ linguistic phenomena,

18. Metaphor in the lexicon: over Generalisation Commitment (3) a. The picture is over the sofa. ABOVE b. The picture is over the hole. COVERING c. The ball is over the wall. ON-THE-OTHER-SIDE-OF d. The government handed over power. TRANSFER e. She has a strange power over me. CONTROL Control Is Up (4) a. I’m on top of the situation. b. She’s at the height of her powers. c. His power rose. (5) a. Her power is on the decline. b. He is under my control. c. He’s low in the company hierarchy.

19. Metaphor in the syntax: the ditransitive Generalisation Commitment (6) a. Mary gave us the cake. (Volitional Agent) b. [The rain] gave us some time. c. [The missed ball] handed him the victory. CAUSAL EVENTS ARE PHYSICAL TRANSFERS . (7) She gave me a headache.

20. Cognitive Commitment • language and linguistic organisation should reflect general cognitive principles rather than cognitive principles that are specific to language. • That means: ‘there is no distinct language module’

21. Attention! Cognitive Commitment • language provides ways of directing attention to certain aspects of the scene being linguistically encoded. This is called profiling (Langacker1987) or attentional windowing (Talmy’s 2000) (8) a. The boy kicks over the vase. (ACTIVE) b. The vase is kicked over. (PASSIVE) c. The vase smashes into bits. (SUBJECT-VERB-COMPLEMENT) d. The vase is in bits. (SUBJECTCOPULA-COMPLEMENT)

22. Cognitive Commitment

23. Characteristics of Meaning • Linguistic meaning is perspectival • Linguistic meaning is dynamic and flexible • Linguistic meaning is encyclopedic and non-autonomous

24. Linguistic meaning is perspectival Characteristics of Meaning Where is the girl? • She’s behind the house. • She’s in front of the house.

25. Linguistic meaning is dynamic and flexible Characteristics of Meaning • Meaning is shaping our world. • The world changes. • Our experience changes. • So meaning changes

26. Linguistic meaning is encyclopedic and non-autonomous Characteristics of Meaning • We are embodied beings. • We also have a cultural and social identity.

27. What Is Cognitive Linguistics?In Two Words! • Recontextualization • Conceptualization:

28. Recontextualization • Saussure’s ‘langue’ and ‘parole’ • Chomsky’s ‘competence’ and ‘performance’ • Emphasis on competence (deletes social context) • Emphasis on genetic (deletes cognitive context) • Emphasis on rules (deletes situational context)

29. Conceptualization subjectivity/objectivity: [said by mother to child:] • Don’t lie to me! b. Don’t lie to your mother!

30. Conceptualization • Possible trajectories for The cat jumped over the wall • we walk over a bridge • a hummingbird is over a flower • a plane flies over a city

31. Conceptual Processes:Metaphors • HAPPY IS UP; SAD IS DOWN: • I’m feeling up. My spirits roses. You’re in high spirits. I’m feeling down. • CONSCIOUS IS UP; UNCONSCIOUS IS DOWN: • Wake up. He feel sleep. He’s under hypnosis • HEALTH AND LIFE ARE UP; SICKNESS AND DEATH ARE DOWN: • He’s in top shape. He fell ill. He’s sinking fast. He came down with the flu. • HAVING CONTROL OR FORCE IS UP; BEING SUBJECT TO CONTROL OF FORCE IS DOWN: • I have control over her. He fell from power. He’s under my control. • GOOD IS UP; BAD IS DOWN: • Things are looking up. He does high-quality work.

32. Conceptual Processes: Metonymy • PART FOR WHOLE: • There are some good heads in this class. • WHOLE FOR PART: • Brazil won the world cup. • CONTAINER FOR CONTENT: • I don’t drink more than two bottles. • MATERIAL FOR OBJECT: • She needs a glass. • PLACE FOR EVENT: • Hiroshima changed our view of war.

34. Journals of Cognitive Linguistics • Cognitive Linguistics • The Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics • Cognitive Systems Research • Topics in Cognitive Science • Pragmatics & Cognition • Language and Cognition • Cognitextes • Voprosykognitivnojlingvistiki

35. George Lakoff • Born 1941 • University of California Berkeley • Conceptual Metaphor Theory • Metaphors we live by (1980)

36. Ronald W. Langacker • Born 1942 • University of Calinfornia, san Diego • Cognitive Grammar • Foundations of Cognitive Grammar (1987)

37. Gilles Fauconnier • Born 1944 • University of Calinfornia, san Diego • Mental Spaces • Conceptual Blending Theory • Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language (1994) • The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities (2003)

38. Adele Goldberg • Born 1963 • Princeton University • Construction Grammar • Constructions: a new theoretical approach to grammar (2003)

39. Charles J. Fillmore • Born 1929 • University of California Berkeley • Frame Semantics • "Frame semantics and the nature of language" (1976): . In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Conference on the Origin and Development of Language and Speech. Volume 280: 20-32.

40. با تشکر