Chapter 7
Conceptual vs. inter-lexical polysemy
An LCCM theory approach
In this chapter I consider two types of polysemy that have not received wide attention in the cognitive linguistics literature. First, I argue that polysemy can arise from the non-linguistic knowledge to which words facilitate access. This phenomenon I refer to as conceptual polysemy. I illustrate this with an analysis of the lexical item book. Moreover, polysemy also arises from different word forms, which, at least on first blush, appear to share a common semantic representation. This phenomenon I refer to as inter-lexical polysemy. I illustrate with a detailed case study involving an analysis of the prepositional forms in and on. I draw on the Theory of Lexical Concepts and Cognitive Models to account for these phenomena.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Parametric vs. analogue concepts
- 3.Towards an account of meaning construction
- 3.1LCCM Theory
- 3.2The cognitive model profile
- 4.Conceptual polysemy
- 5.Inter-lexical polysemy
- 5.1‘State’ lexical concepts for in
-
[enclosure] and its parameters
- ‘state’ lexical concepts for in
-
derivation of the ‘state’ lexical concepts
- 5.2Lexical concepts for on
-
the [active state] lexical concept
- 5.3Discussion
- 6.Conclusion
-
Acknowledgements
-
Notes
-
References
References
Barsalou, L.
(
1999)
Perceptual symbol systems.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–660.
Barsalou, L.
(
2008)
Grounded cognition.
Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645.
Bergen, B. K.
(
2012)
Louder than words. New York: Basic Books.
Cruse, D. A.
(
1986)
Lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, V.
(
2006)
Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning-construction.
Cognitive Linguistics, 17(4), 491–534.
Evans, V.
(
2009)
How words mean: Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Evans, V.
(
2010)
From the spatial to the non-spatial: The ‘state’ lexical concepts of in, on and at
. In
V. Evans &
P. Chilton (Eds.),
Language, cognition & space (pp. 215–248). London: Equinox.
Evans, V.
(
2013)
Language and time: A cognitive linguistics approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, V.
(
2014)
The language myth: Why language is not an instinct. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, V.
(
2015a)
A unified account of polysemy in LCCM Theory.
Lingua, 157, 100–123.
Evans, V.
(
2015b)
What’s in a concept? Analogue versus parametric concepts in LCCM Theory. In
E. Margolis &
S. Laurence (Eds.),
Concepts: New directions (pp. 251–290). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Evans, V.
(
2015c)
The crucible of language: How language and mind create meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, V.
(
2016)
Design features for linguistically-mediated meaning construction: The relative roles of the linguistic and conceptual systems in subserving the ideational function of language.
Frontiers in Psychology 19th February,
Evans, V. & Green, M.
(
2006)
Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Fischer, M. H., & Zwaan, R. A.
(
2008)
Grounding cognition in perception and action.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(6), 825–850.
Gallese, V. & Lakoff, G.
(
2005)
The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in reason and language.
Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22, 455–479.
Glenberg, A. M.
(
1997)
What memory is for.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 1–55.
Glenberg, A. & Robertson, D. A.
(
1999)
Indexical understanding of instructions.
Discourse Processes, 28(1), 1–26.
Hurford, J.
(
2007)
The origins of meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Langacker, R. W.
(
1987)
Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA.: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R. W.
(
2008)
Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Levinson, S. C. & Gray, R. D.
(
2012)
Tools from evolutionary biology shed new light on the diversification of languages.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(3), 167–173
Pustejovsky, J.
(
1995)
The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ruhl, C.
(
1989)
On monosemy: A study in linguistic semantics. New York: State University of New York Press.
Talmy, L.
(
2000)
Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Taylor, L. J. & Zwaan, R. A.
(
2008)
Motor resonance and linguistic focus.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 896–904.
Taylor, L. J. & Zwaan, R. A.
(
2009)
Action in cognition: The case of language.
Language and Cognition, 1(1), 45–58.
Tyler, A. & Evans, V.
(
2001)
Reconsidering prepositional polysemy networks.
Language, 77(4), 724–765.
Tyler, A. & Evans, V.
(
2003)
The semantics of english prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied experience and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zwaan, R. A.
(
2004)
The immersed experiencer: Toward an embodied theory of language comprehension. In
B. H. Ross (Ed.),
The psychology of learning and motivation, (pp. 35–62). New York: Academic Press.
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
Romain, Laurence
2022.
Putting the argument back into argument structure constructions.
Cognitive Linguistics 33:1
► pp. 35 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.