WINK, MBA, NIC MASTER
WWW.WINKASL.COM @WINKASL
COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS ANSWERS
I DON’T EXPECT YOU TO BECOME A
LINGUIST!
I’M NOT TRAINING YOU TO BE ONE
EITHER!
WHAT WE WILL EXPERIENCE TODAY
▸ What is “Cognitive Linguistics?
▸ The mind and language
▸ Schematic Units: Giving you scientific answers to questions
▸ The real message equivalency: Content and Construal
▸ The Creative Mind: Metonymy, metaphor, and polysemy
▸ Recap and closure
WHAT IS COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS?
COGNITIVE LINGUISTIC ENTERPRISE
▸ Usage base approach to language
▸ Studies languages with items that are actually produced in the language
▸ How acquisition is explained: Knowledge of language emerges from
language use
▸ Language is not an autonomous cognitive faculty
▸ A commitment to providing a characterization of general principles for
language that accords with what is known about the mind and brain from other
disciplines.
▸ Cognitive Semantics and Cognitive approaches to grammar
LOOK AT ALL THOSE DUCKS
THERE ARE AT LEAST TEN.
LANGUAGE AND
THE MIND
THE MIND AND LANGUAGE
EMOBODIED EXPERIENCES
▸ The mind processes experiences and abstracts them
▸ Creation of knowledge is dynamic from myriad of sources
▸ Categorization: A mug vs. A cup.
Evans & Green, 2006
THE MIND AND LANGUAGE
DOMAINS
▸ Information you have stored provide
you background knowledge. This can
be used to project new information
towards for comparison:
▸ You know, he is a bachelor
▸ I went to the store with my dad
▸ He considers himself an “artist”
“A DOMAIN IS A MORE
GENERALIZED ‘BACKGROUND’
KNOWLEDGE CONFIGURATION AGAINST
WHICH CONCEPTUALIZATION IS
ACHIEVED”
Taylor, 2002:195
THE MIND AND LANGUAGE
DOMAINS
Cat
House lord
THE MIND AND LANGUAGE
“A MAJOR TASK FOR THE SPEAKER IS TO
DEVISE AN UTTERANCE THAT WILL LEAD
TO THE DESIRED INTERPRETATION
FORMING IN THE HEARER’S MIND.”
Croft and Cruse, 2004
THE MIND AND LANGUAGE
THE CONCEPTUAL UNIVERSE
▸ To communicate our embodied abstractions (either from reality or make
believe) we attempt to reconstruct in the receiver’s mind the same domains
▸ This is accomplished by the use of symbolic assemblies “words” that are
conventionally tested (more on that later)
▸ The string of words we assemble and utter will “call out” similar conceptual
structures that allow the receiver to interpret meaning
▸ Therefore words are access points to domains of conceptualization, rather than
objectively stating meaning or only deriving meaning by compositional word
ordering
THE MIND AND LANGUAGE
SYMBOLIC UNITS
FORM
▸ Symbols = Form/Meaning pairing
▸ Symbols = Words
MEANING
Symbol
▸ Words after frequency of use in a community become fixed units in the lexicon
(Conventionalized)
▸ Also conjugations, idioms, and other phrases are stored as one unit , you do not
need to recreate it “on-line” every time
▸ Words form a semantic and pragmatic continuum as almost always utterances
are not produced in a vacuum
▸ Each unit is abstracted for meaning, phonology, and structure (more on this later)
SCHEMATIC
UNITS
SCHEMATIC UNITS: GIVING YOU SCIENTIFIC ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
SCHEMAS IN LANGUAGE
▸ One can describe language as an inventory of units that are conventional
within a speech community (Langacker: 2008:222). These units are
schematized from usage events from speakers and abstracted for semantic,
phonological, and schematic content which is categorized for possible further
use. Meaning, we have schemas in our mind that assist in symbolic assemblies.
These schemas have been acquired from attending to and creating usage
events. English speakers acquired the schema [VERB + ER] and instantiate it as
an agent form. Further, the more a schema is instantiated the more likely it is to
become entrenched and be productive in the language (Wink, 2016).
SCHEMATIC UNITS: GIVING YOU SCIENTIFIC ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
ENGLISH SCHEMAS
▸ Verb + ER = Agent
▸ Be verb + Participle = past tense
▸ Location + Event = Name of tragedy
▸ Noun + [S] = Plural (Not always)
▸ X + Management “Time Management” etc
▸ Adj + Noun…. Noun + [SMART]?… Extensions!
SCHEMATIC UNITS: GIVING YOU SCIENTIFIC ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
ENGLISH SCHEMAS
▸ Verb + ER = Agent
▸ Be verb + Participle = past tense
▸ Location + Event = Name of tragedy
▸ Noun + [S] = Plural (Not always)
▸ X + Management “Time Management” etc
▸ Adj + Noun…. Noun + [SMART]?… Extensions!
EXERCISE:
SMALL GROUPS, DISCUSS AND
CREATE AT LEAST 3 ENGLISH
EXAMPLES OF EACH OF THESE
ENGLISH SCHEMAS.
SCHEMATIC UNITS: GIVING YOU SCIENTIFIC ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
ENGLISH SCHEMAS
▸ Verb + ER = Agent
▸ Be verb + Participle = past tense
▸ Location + Event = Name of tragedy
▸ Noun + [S] = Plural (Not always)
▸ X + Management “Time Management” etc
▸ Adj + Noun…. Noun + [SMART]?… Extensions!
EXERCISE:
SMALL GROUPS, DISCUSS
WHAT POSSIBLE ASL SCHEMAS
COULD BE USED IN PLACE OF
THESE ENGLISH SCHEMAS
SCHEMATIC UNITS: GIVING YOU SCIENTIFIC ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
ENGLISH SCHEMAS
ASL SCHEMAS
▸ Verb + ER = Agent
▸ Verb + ER (BUT NOT PRODUCTIVE)
▸ Be verb + Participle = Passives
▸ DISCUSSION TO COME
▸ Location + Event = Name of tragedy
▸ Seem same “ALL KNOW MILIAN”
▸ Noun + [S] = Plural (Not always)
▸ X + Management “Time Management”
etc
▸ Noun + [Smarts]
▸ Different Schemas
▸ Different Schemas ▸ Different Schemas (EXPERT, KNOW-HOW, […]
SCHEMATIC UNITS: GIVING YOU SCIENTIFIC ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
ASL PASSIVES
▸ No [Be] verbs in ASL, nor no participles
▸ Remember, language is creative and as we will see we construe certain situations in
our mind therefore changing the sentence to active could be a mistake
▸ What are passives?
▸ A form of profiling
▸ Agent defocusing
▸ Agentless
▸ For more read: Miako Rankin “Form, Meaning, and Focus in American Sign Language”
SCHEMATIC UNITS: GIVING YOU SCIENTIFIC ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
SCIENTIFIC ANSWERS
▸ How important is it to LIVE
the Deaf community?
▸ If languages are an
“inventory of units” we
could lessen the
deployment of “it depends”
and discuss the possible
schemas that could be
substituted and still provide
the same conceptual
universe prompts
“…TRANSLATION IS NOT A MERE
INTERCHANGE OF LINGUISTIC STRUCTURES, AN
APPLIED VERSION OF THE LINGUISTICS PRINCIPLES THAT
RULE A LANGUAGE AND THAT CAN BE JUDGED IN TERMS OF RIGHT
AND WRONG, DEPENDING ON HOW FAITHFUL THEY CAN BE
REPRODUCED FROM THE SOURCE LANGUAGE INTO THE TARGET
LANGUAGE… COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS SUPPORTS THE COGNITIVE
NATURE OF TRANSLATION AS A MEDIATING PROCESS
BETWEEN TWO DIFFERENT CONCEPTUAL WORLDS”
ROJO, 2013:19
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
“THE TERM CONSTRUAL REFERS TO OUR
MANIFEST ABILITY TO CONCEIVE AND
PORTRAY THE SAME SITUATION IN
ALTERNATE WAYS.”
Langacker, 2008
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
EXAMPLE
▸ “The content in question is the conception of a glass containing water
occupying just half of its volume. At the conceptual level, we are presumably
able to evoke this content in a fairly neutral manner. But as soon as we encode
it linguistically, we necessarily impose a certain construal.” Langacker, 2008
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
INDEED, THE MEANING OF MANY LINGUISTIC ELEMENTS —
ESPECIALLY THOSE CONSIDERED “GRAMMATICAL”— CONSISTS
PRIMARILY IN THE CONSTRUAL THEY IMPOSE, RATHER THAN ANY
SPECIFIC CONTENT. YET EVERY ELEMENT EVOKES SOME CONTENT
(HOWEVER SCHEMATIC IT MIGHT BE), AND CONVERSELY, ANY
CONTENT EVOKED IS CONSTRUED IN SOME FASHION.
Langacker, 2008
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
▸ In other words, language is rarely ‘neutral’, but usually represents a particular
perspective, even when we are not consciously aware of this as language users.
▸ Construal can be thought of as the way a speaker chooses to ‘package’ and
‘present’ a conceptual representation, which in turn has consequences for the
conceptual representation that the utterance evokes in the mind of the hearer. For
example, as we have already seen, the active construction focuses attention upon
the AGENT of an action (e.g. George hid Lily’s slippers), while the passive
construction focuses attention upon the PATIENT (e.g. Lily’s slippers were hidden
by George). Each of these constructions conventionally encodes a distinct
construal
Evans and Green, 2006
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
TYPES OF CONSTRUAL: SPECIFICITY
▸ The level of precision and detail at which a situation is characterized.
Schematic
HOT
ANIMAL
THING
OBJECT
ITS IN THE 90S
DOG
CARTOON DOG
ABOUT 95 DEGREES
GOLDEN RETRIEVER
Specific/
high resolution
95.2 DEGREES
DOUG
TOOL
HAMMER
CLAW HAMMER
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
TYPES OF CONSTRUAL: SPECIFICITY
▸ Higher order schematic items “superordinates” can cause us problems as some
schematic items may not be units in another language:
▸ Jewelry
▸ Fruit
▸ Weapon
▸ We may just use the more specific items that are conventional in the target
language, as these more schematic units are not
This leads us to scope…
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
TYPES OF CONSTRUAL: SCOPE
▸ Even specific information includes information outside of what is uttered, by
the domains.
▸ body>arm>hand>finger>knuckle
▸ body > head > face > eye > pupil
▸ This can be compartmentalized by an immediate scope and a maximal scope
▸ The Florida Hotel may have an immediate scope of the building and fountain
out front, but maximal could include the mall.
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
WHAT DOES THIS TELL US?
▸ If the construal is too specific, we may elicit the help of the maximal scope that
gives us permission to incorporate content within it
▸ Remember symbolic units bring forth content domains in our conceptual
universe, if we use symbolic units in a community that bring forth different
domains, we may fall short in communication
▸ My brother is the father at that church
▸ Expansion features may help with bringing in maximal scope information also
depiction as well
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
TYPES OF CONSTRUAL: FOREGROUND VS. BACKGROUND
▸ Forcing the hearing to focus on an object:
▸ The farmer caught the rabbit
▸ The rabbit was caught by the farmer
▸ The perp was caught
▸ The police caught the suspect
▸ The lamp over the table
▸ The table under the lamp
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
EVEN DITRANSITIVE VERBS
▸ Focusing attention stole vs robbed
▸ The thieves robbed the princess of her diamonds
▸ The thieves stole the diamonds from the princess
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
TYPES OF CONSTRUAL: PROFILING
▸ Profiling defined in three different ways:
▸ A portion of the object (the base) that is put “on-stage”
▸ It selects a certain body of conceptual content (Langacker, 2008)
▸ Attention is directed to a particular substructure, called the profile.
THE REAL MESSAGE EQUIVALENCY: CONTENT AND CONSTRUAL
PRACTICE
▸ For the following examples define the:
▸ Specificity level
▸ Scope
▸ Whats foregrounded vs. backgrounded
▸ Profiled and base
RECOMMENDED READINGS:
▸ Cognitive Linguistics An Introduction, Vyvyan Evans and
Melanie Green
▸ Cognitive Grammar, John Taylor
▸ The Bloomsbury Companion to Cognitive Linguistics,
Jeannette Littlemore and John Taylor
▸ Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Learning,
Andrea Tyler
▸ Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction, Ronald Langacker
(NOTE: The term “basic” is grossly erroneous, the texts
above are much more accessible and I recommend reading
them first before attempting Langacker. However, when you
do you will find Langacker is quite hilarious)
▸ Cognitive linguistics Overview: http://www.vyvevans.net/
CogLingReview.pdf
REFERENCES
▸ Evans, V., and Green, M. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Mahwah,
NJ and Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
▸ Langacker, R. (2008). Cognitive Grammar A Basic Introduction. New York:
Oxford University Press.
▸ Rojo, A. (2013). Applications of Cognitive Linguistics [ACL]: Cognitive
Linguistics and Translation: Advances in Some Theoretical Models and
Applications. Hawthorne, NY, USA: Walter de Gruyter. Retrieved from http://
www.ebrary.com
▸ Taylor, J. (2002). Cognitive Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.
▸ William Croft and D. Alan Cruse (February, 2004),“Cognitive Linguistics”,
Cambridge University Press.