语言、意义与概念化

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (7)

Download: PDF (441 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Language is used to express meaning, and meaning is the core of linguistic research. In cognitive linguistics, meaning is conceptualization in which bodily experiences play an important role. But what is conceptualization? How about its properties? And what is involved in the study of conceptualization? As to such questions, cognitive linguistics has not given systemic answers. Conceptualization is the cognitive process and neural activity of meaning construction. In a broad sense, conceptualization focuses on the conceptual representation of the whole human behavior system, including verbal behavior; while in a narrow sense, conceptualization focuses on conceptual systems related to verbal behavior. Conceptualization has the characteristics of noninsularity, dynamicity, interactivity, imagisticity, imaginativeness, subjectivity, and embodiment. The core issue of cognitive linguistics is semantics, and “meaning is conceptualization”. Therefore, the research content of conceptualization basically covers all aspects of cognitive linguistics. The research on conceptualization is mainly carried out from the two dimensions: cognitive psychology and social cognition theory. The former focuses on psychological experiences and the processing activities that constitute psychological experiences, while the latter focuses on the universality and variability of conceptualization in different social and culture backgrounds. Through sorting out the essence, characteristics and main research content of conceptualization, we can have a clearer idea of conceptualization and the meaning of cognitive linguistics.

Key words： cognitive linguistics conceptualization embodied cognition linguistic representation conceptual representation meaning

Received: 03 July 2021

PACS:

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	WEN Xu

Cite this article:

WEN Xu. Language, Meaning and Conceptualization[J]. , 2022, 39(1): 32-39.

URL:

https://xb.szu.edu.cn/EN/ OR https://xb.szu.edu.cn/EN/Y2022/V39/I1/32

[1] J. Lyons.Linguistics[M].London: Oxford University Press,1987.152.
[2] R.Jackendoff.Languages of the Mind[M].Cambridge,MA: The MIT Press,1995.21-52.
[3] S.C.Dik.Linguistically motivated knowledge presentation [A].M.Nagao(ed).Language and Artificial Intelligence[C].Amsterdam: Elsevier,1987.145-170.
[4] S. C. Dik.The Theory of Functional Grammar,Part I:The Structure of the Clause[M].Dordercht:Foris,1989.125.
[5] J. Nuyts.Aspects of a Cognitive Pragmatic Theory of Language[M].Amsterdam: Benjamins,1992.64.
[6] R.W.Langacker.Foundations of Cognitive Grammar(Vol. II): Descriptive Application[M].Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter,1991.2.
[7] R.W.Langacker.Cognitive Grammar:A Basic Introduction[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2008.
[8] R.W.Langacker.Essentials of Cognitive Grammar[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2013.30.
[9] F. Sharifian.Cultural Conceptualisations and Language [M].Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company,2011.3.
[10] V. Evans,M. Green.Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction[M].Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press,2006.
[11] V.Evans.A Glossary of Cognitive Linguistics[M].Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press,2007.38.
[12] L.Talmy.Rubber sheet cognition in language[A].W.A. Beach et al.(eds).Papers from the Thirteenth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society[C].Chicago:Chicago Linguistic Society,1977.612-628.
[13] L.Talmy.The relation of grammar to cognition:A synopsis [A].D.Waltz(ed).Proceedings of TINLAP-2:Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing[C].Urbana:University of Illinois Coordinated Science Laboratory,1978. 14-24.
[14] L.Talmy.The relation of grammar to cognition[A].B.Rud-zka-Ostyn(ed).Topics in Cognitive Linguistics[C].Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1988a.165-205.
[15] L.Talmy.Force dynamics in language and cognition[J]. Cognitive Science,1988b,12(1):49-100.
[16] L.Talmy.Toward a Cognitive Semantics (Vol. I & Vol. II) [M].Cambridge,MA:The MIT Press,2000.128.
[17] W.Croft and D.A.Cruse. Cognitive Linguistics[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2004.
[18] 文旭. 语言的认知基础[M].北京:科学出版社,2014.
[19] 陈嘉映. 语言哲学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2006.44-45.
[20] D.Casasanto.Relationships between language and cognition[A].B.Dancygier(ed).The Cambridge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics[C].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2017.19-37.
[21] R. Jackendoff.Semantics and Cognition[M].Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press,1983.183.
[22] G.Lakoff and M.Johnson.Metaphors We Live by[M].Chi-cago/London:The University of Chicago Press,1980.44-47.
[23] G.Lakoff and M.Turner.More than Cool Reason[M].Chicago/London:The University of Chicago Press,1989.1-56.
[24] X.Wen and K.Yang.Systematicity and complexity of IDEA metaphors in Chinese[J].Metaphor and Symbol,2016,31(4): 230-249.
[25] N. Yu.The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: A Perspective from Chinese[M].Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company,1998.61.
[26] Z.K vecses.Metaphor:A Practical Introduction(2nd edi-tion) [M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2010.97.
[27] G. Lakoff and M. Johnson. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought[M].New York: Basic Books,1999.497.
[28] L. A. Janda.Cognitive Linguistics:The Quantitative Turn[M].Berlin:De Gruyter Mouton,2013.1-32.
[29] L.A.Janda.The quantitative turn[A].B.Dancygier(ed). The Cambridge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics[C].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2017.496-514.
[30] T. Gijssels and D. Casasanto. Conceptualizing time in terms of space:Experimental evidence[A].B.Dancygier (ed).The Cambridge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics[C].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2017.651-668.
[31] S. Coulson and V. Patten. Conceptual integration and metaphor: An event-related potential study[J].Memory and Cognition,2002,30(6):958-968.
[32] F.M.M.Citron,J.Güsten,N.Michaelis,and A.E Goldberg. Conventional metaphors in longer passages evoke an affective fMRI response[J].NeuroImage,2016,139:218-230.
[33] P. Harder.Meaning in Mind and Society: A Functional Contribution to the Social Turn in Cognitive Linguistics[M].Berlin:Walter de Gruyter,2010.9.
[34] G. Kristiansen and D. Dirven. Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation,Cultural Models,Social Systems[M].Berlin/New York:Mouton de Gruyter,2008.1-12.
[35] D.Geeraerts,G.Kristiansen,and Y.Peirsman.Advances in Cognitive Sociolinguistics[M].Berlin/New York:Mouton de Gruyter,2010.1-17.
[36] M.Pütz,J. A. Robinson,M. Reif.Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Social and Cultural Variation in Cognition and Language Use[M].Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benja-mins Publishing Company,2014.1-18.
[37] R. M. Frank, R. Dirven, T. Ziemke,E. Bernárdez. Body,Language and Mind(Vol. II):Sociocultural Situatedness[M].Berlin/New York:Mouton de Gruyter,2008.1-18.
[38] W.Croft.Toward a social cognitive linguistics[A].V.Evans and S.Pourcel(eds).New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics[C].Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company,2009.395-420.
[39] 文旭. 基于“社会认知”的社会认知语言学[J].现代外语,2019,(3):293-305.
[40] Z.K vecses.Where Metaphors Come from: Reconsidering Context in Metaphor[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2015.73-96.
[41] F. Sharifian.Advances in Cultural Linguistics[M].Singapore:Springer,2017.49-64.
[42] F. Sharifian,R. Dirven,N. Yu,and S. Niemeier. Culture, Body,and Language:Conceptualizations of Internal Body Organs across Cultures and Languages[M].Berlin/New York:Mouton de Gruyter,2008.3-23.
[43] F. Sharifian and G. B. Palmer. Applied Cultural Linguistics: Implications for Second Language Learning and Intercultural Communication[M].Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company,2007.65-85.
[44] Z.K vecses.Metaphor in Culture:Universality and Variation[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2005.67-87.
[45] W.Zhang.Variation in Metonymy[M].Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter,2016.97-180.