Discourse-Driven Meaning Construction in Neosemantic Noun-to-Verb Conversions [Meaning Construction In Noun-To-Verb Conversions]

Rafał Augustyn

doi:10.2478/v10015-012-0026-4

Authors

Rafał Augustyn Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin, Poland

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2478/v10015-012-0026-4

Keywords:

conversion, cognitive linguistic, conceptual integration, discourse space

Abstract

Neosemantic noun-to-verb conversions such as beer → to beer, door → to door, pink → to pink, etc., constitute a particularly interesting field of study for Cognitive Linguistics in that they call for a discourse-guided and context-based analysis of meaning construction. The present article takes a closer look at the cognitive motivation for the conversion process involved in the noun-verb alterations with a view to explaining the semantics of some conversion formations in relation to the user-centred discourse context. The analysis developed in this article draws from the combined insights of Fauconnier and Turner’s (2002) Conceptual Integration Theory and Langacker’s (2005, 2008) Current Discourse Space.

Author Biography

Rafał Augustyn, Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin, Poland

The author is affiliated with the Department of Applied Linguistics at Maria Curie- Skłodowska University, Lublin. He has recently defended his Ph.D. dissertation entitled Context-Dependent Meaning. A Cognitive Linguistic Analysis of Noun-to-Verb Conversion Phenomena in English. His current research interest centres on the cognitive mechanisms of conversion and neosemantisation processes. However, he is also interested in contrastive and translation studies; his M.A. paper concerned the analysis of German and Polish translations of English science fiction neologisms.

References

Clark, Eve V. & Herbert H. Clark (1979). “When nouns surface as verbs”. Language, 55, 767-811.
Google Scholar

Clark, Herbert H. (1996). Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Coulson, Seana (2001). Semantic Leaps. Frame-shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao Paulo: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Croft, William & Alan D. Cruse (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Dirven, René & Marjolijn Verspoor (2004). Cognitive Exploration of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Google Scholar

Elsen, Hilke (2004). Neologismen. Formen und Funktionen neuer Wörter in verschiedenen Varietäten des Deutschen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Google Scholar

Evans, Vyvyan and Melanie Green (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Google Scholar

Fauconnier Gilles (1985). Mental Spaces. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Fauconnier, Gilles (1994). Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Fauconnier, Gilles (1997). Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner (1994). “Conceptual Projection and Middle Spaces”. San Diego: University of California, Department of Cognitive Science Technical Report 9401. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from http://markturner.org
Google Scholar

Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner (1998). “Principles of Conceptual Integration”. In J.- P. Koenig (Ed.), Discourse and Cognition (269-283). Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Google Scholar

Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner (2002). The Way We Think. Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
Google Scholar

Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner (2007). Conceptual integration networks. In V. Evans, B. K. Bergen & J. Zinken (Eds.), The Cognitive Linguistic Reader (360-419). London, Oakville: Equinox Publishing Ltd.
Google Scholar

Grabias, Stanisław (1980). O ekspresywności języka. Ekspresja a słowotwórstwo. Lublin: UMCS.
Google Scholar

Gumperz, John J. (1992). “Contextualization and understanding”. In Ch. Goodwin & A. Duranti (Eds.), Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon (229- 252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Herberg, Dieter & Michael Kinne (1998). Neologismen. Heidelberg: Groos.
Google Scholar

Kardela, Henryk (2006). “(Nie)podobieństwa w morfologii: amalgamaty kognitywne”. In H. Kardela, Z. Muszyński & M. Rajewski (Eds.), Kognitywistyka: Podobieństwo (195-210). Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.
Google Scholar

Kardela, Henryk (2007). “‘Good’ revisited: A mental space analysis”. In U. Magnusson, H. Kardela & A. Głaz (Eds.), Further Insights into Semantics and Lexicography (291-303). Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.
Google Scholar

Kemmer, Suzanne (2003). “Schemas and lexical blends”. In G. Radden & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Motivation in Language. Studies in Honor of Günter Radden (69-95). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press
Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. (1991). Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter
Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. (1999). Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. (2005). Wykłady z gramatyki kognitywnej. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS
Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar. A Basic Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press
Google Scholar

Langlotz, Andreas (2006). Idiomatic Creativity. A cognitive-linguistic model of idiomrepresentation and idiom-variation in English. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Google Scholar

Libura, Agnieszka (2007). Amalgamaty kognitywne w sztuce. Kraków: Universitas.
Google Scholar

Lieber, Rochelle (2004). Morphology and Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Roberts, Craige (2004). “Context in dynamic interpretation”. In L. R. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (197-220). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Google Scholar

Taylor, John R. (2002). Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Taylor, John R. (2003). Linguistic Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Twardzisz, Piotr (1997). Zero Derivation in English: A Cognitive Grammar Approach. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.
Google Scholar

Veale, Tony & Cristina Butnariu (2010). Harvesting and understanding of on-line neologisms. In A. Onysko & S. Michel (Eds.), Cognitive Perspectives on Word Formation (399-420). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Google Scholar

The Rice University Neologisms Database. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from http://neologisms.rice.edu/index.php
Google Scholar

Urban Dictionary. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from http://www.urbandictionary.com/
Google Scholar