Cover not available
Article published In:
Historiographia Linguistica
Vol. 22:1/2 (1995) ► pp.123–162

19th and 20th century theories of case

A comparison of localist and cognitive approaches

 | Emory University
This article considers the similarities and differences between two types of semantically-based approaches to the study of grammatical case. One approach, which views the basic meanings of cases as spatial, stems from the localist hypothesis, which claims that spatial expressions serve as structural templates for other expressions. This view was most strongly espoused by certain German linguists in the 19th century, but has found support in the 20th century as well. The range of localist theories of case and the extent of the claims made by different localists are considered. These are compared and contrasted with contemporary approaches subsumed under the banner of ‘cognitive linguistics’. Research in this vein has focussed on the role of spatial notions in the semantics of case, but within a broader framework of human conceptualization. According to this view, space is only one of several domains which are basic to cognitive representation.
Published online: 1 January 1995
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.22.1-2.06cie
References (73)
Referencias bibliográficas
Agud, Ana. 1980. Historia y Teoría de los Casos. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Anderson, John M. 1971. The Grammar of Case: Towards a localistic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
1977. On Case Grammar: Prolegomena to a theory of grammatical relations. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
1987. “Case Grammar and the Localist Hypothesis”. Dirven & Radden 1987.103–121.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie & Winifred Boagey. 1977. Review of Anderson (1971). Linguistics and Philosophy 11.119–152.Google Scholar
Becker, Karl Ferdinand. 1827. Organism der Sprache. Frankfurt am Main: Ludwig Reinherz. (2nd ed., 1841.)Google Scholar
Berlin, Brent & Paul Kay. 1969. Basic Color Terms: Their universality and evolution. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
Blank, David L. 1987. “Apollonius and Maximus on the Order and Meaning of the Oblique Cases”. The History of Linguistics in the Classical Period ed. by Daniel J. Taylor, 67–83. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Blumenthal, Arthur L. 1987. “The Emergence of Psycholinguistics”. Synthese 721.313–323.Google Scholar
Bopp, Franz. 1833. Vergleichende Grammatik des Sanskrit, Zend, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Littauischen, Gothischen und Deutschen. Vol. I1. Berlin: Ferdinand Dümmler.Google Scholar
Brecht, Richard D. & Catherine V. Chvany, eds. 1974. Slavic Transformational Syntax. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Univ. of Michigan.Google Scholar
Brugman, Claudia M. 1981. The Story of over: Polysemy, semantics, and the structure of the lexicon. M.A. thesis, Univ. of California at Berkeley. (Repr., New York: Garland, 1988.)Google Scholar
1990. “What Is the Invariance Hypothesis?”. Cognitive Linguistics 1:2.257–266.Google Scholar
Bühler, Karl. 1934. Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Jena: Gustav Fischer. (Repr., Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer, 1965.) [Transl. by Donald Fraser Goodwin, Theory of Language: The representational function of language. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1990.]Google Scholar
Croft, William. 1991. Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations: The cognitive organization of information. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 1977. Review of Brecht & Chvany (1974). Language 531.228–232.Google Scholar
. 1979. “Case Grammar and Prototypes”. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 321.3–23. (Repr. in Dirven & Radden 1987.147–161.)Google Scholar
Deane, Paul D. 1991. “Syntax and the Brain: Neurological evidence for the spatialization of form hypothesis”. Cognitive Linguistics 2:4.361–367.Google Scholar
1992. Grammar in Mind and Brain: Explorations in cognitive syntax. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dirven, René & Günter Radden, eds. 1987. Concepts of Case. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Döleke, Wilhelm Heinrich. 1814. Ueber die Casus, die Tempora, das Pronomen und Verbum substantivum. Leipzig: J. A. Barth.Google Scholar
. 1826. Deutsch-lateinische Schul-Grammatik. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Fairbanks, Gordon H. 1977. “Case Inflections in Indo-European”. The Journal of Indo-European Studies 5:2.102–131.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1968. “The Case for Case”. Universals in Linguistic Theory ed. by Emmon Bach & Robert T. Harms, 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Freidhof, Gerd. 1978. Kasusgrammatik und localer Ausdruck im Russischen. Munich: Otto Sagner.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk. 1988. “Cognitive Grammar and the History of Lexical Semantics”. Rudzka-Ostyn 1988.647–677.Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. Jr. 1990. “Psycholinguistic Studies on the Conceptual Basis of Idiomaticity”. Cognitive Linguistics 1:4.417–451.Google Scholar
Hartung, Johann Adam. 1831. Ueber die Casus, ihre Bildung und Bedeutung, in der griechischen und lateinischen Sprache. Erlangen: J. J. Palm & Ernst Enke.Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, Louis. 1935–37. “La Catégorie des cas”. Acta Jutlandica 7:1 (i–xii, 1–184); 9:2 (i–vii, 1–78). Aarhus: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Holzweissig, Fr[iedrich]. 1877. Wahrheit und Irrthum der localistischen Casustheorie. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.Google Scholar
Hübschmann, H[einrich]. 1875. Zur Casuslehre. München: Theodor Ackermann.Google Scholar
Janda, Laura A. 1984. A Semantic Analysis of the Russian Verbal Prefixes za-, pere-, do-, and ot-. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of California at Los Angeles. (Published as volume 192 of Slavistische Beiträge , Munich: Otto Sagner, 1986.)Google Scholar
1990. “The Radial Network of a Grammatical Category – Its genesis and dynamic structure”. Cognitive Linguistics 1:3.269–288.Google Scholar
1993. A Geography of Case Semantics: The Czech dative and the Russian instrumental. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 1987. The Body in the Mind: The bodily basis of meaning of imagination, and reason. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltán. 1990. Emotion Concepts. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Kurlyowicz, Jerzy. 1964. The Inflectional Categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 1990. “The Invariance Hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on imageschemas?”. Cognitive Linguistics 11:11.39–74.Google Scholar
. 1993. “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor”. Metaphor and Thought ed. by Andrew Ortony, 2nd ed., 202–251. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. & Mark Turner. 1987. More Than Cool Reason: Afield guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald. 1973. Review of Anderson (1971). Journal of Linguistics 91.319–331.Google Scholar
. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. I1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
. 1988. “Case and Grammatical Relations in Cognitive Grammar (with special reference to Newari)”. Linguistic Notes from La Jolla 141.57–94.Google Scholar
. 1991a. “Transitivity, Case, and Grammatical Relations”. Concept, Image, and Symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar, 209–260. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 1991b. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. II1: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Lunn, Patricia V. 1987. The Semantics of Por and Para . Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana Univ. Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Vol. II1. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. 1977. “Starting Points”. Language 531.152–168.Google Scholar
Madvig, Johan Nikolai. 1875. Kleine philologische Schriften. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner. (Repr., Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1966.)Google Scholar
Marty, Anton. 1910. Zur Sprachphilosophie. Die “logische”, “lokalistische” und andere Kasustheorien. Halle/S.: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Michelsen, Conrad. 1843. Kasuslehre der lateinischen Sprache, vom kausallokalen Standpunkte aus. Berlin: T. Trautwein.Google Scholar
Miller, James. 1974. “A Localist Account of the Dative in Russian”. Brecht & Chvany 1974.244–261.Google Scholar
. 1985. Semantics and Syntax: Parallels and Connections. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
. 1986. “A Third Look at the Second Dative”. Case in Slavic ed. by Richard D. Brecht & James S. Levine, 296–311. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica.Google Scholar
Nikiforidou, Kiki. 1991. “The Meanings of the Genitive: A case study in semantic structure and semantic change”. Cognitive Linguistics 2:2.149–205.Google Scholar
Parret, Herman. 1989. “Cognition, the Localist Hypothesis, and back to Kant”. Worlds Behind Words ed. by F. J. Heyvaert & F. Steurs, 37–49. Leuven: Leuven Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Robins, Robert H. 1974. “The Case Theory of Maximus Planudes”. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Congress of Linguists ed. by Luigi Heilmann, Vol I1, 107–111. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor. 1973. “On the Internal Structure of Perceptual and Semantic Categories”. Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language ed. Timothy E. Moore, 111–144. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 1978. “Principles of Categorization”. Cognition and Categorization ed. by Eleanor Rosch & Barbara B. Lloyd, 27–48. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Rudzka-Ostyn, Brygida, ed. 1988. Topics in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rumpel, Theodor. 1845. Casuslehre in besonderer Beziehung auf die griechische Sprache. Halle/Saale: E. Anton.Google Scholar
Smith, Michael B. 1987. The Semantics of Dative and Accusative in German: An investigation in cognitive grammar. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of California at San Diego, La Jolla, Calif.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve E. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic sructure. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 1976. “Semantic Causative Types”. The Grammar of Causative Constructions ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani, 43–116. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 1988a. “Force Dynamics in Language and Cognition”. Cognitive Science 121.49–100.Google Scholar
. 1988b. “The Relation of Grammar to Cognition”. Rudzka-Ostyn 1988.165–205.Google Scholar
Turner, Mark. 1987. Death is the Mother of Beauty: Mind, metaphor, criticism. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Vandeloise, Claude. 1986. L’espace en français: Sémantique des prépositions spatiales. Paris: Seuil. (Transl. by Anna R. K. Bosch, Spatial Prepositions: A case study from French. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1991.)Google Scholar
Wüllner, Fr[anz] 1827. Die Bedeutung der sprachlichen Casus und Modi. Münster: Coppenrathsche Buch- und Kunsthandlung.Google Scholar
1831. Ueber Ursprung und Urbedeutung der sprachlichen Formen. Münster: Theissingsche Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
Wundt, Wilhelm. 1900. Völkerpsychologie. Vol. I1. Die Sprache. Part 2. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.Google Scholar
Cited by (13)

Cited by 13 other publications

Fortis, Jean-Michel
2018. Anderson’s case grammar and the history of localism. In Substance-based Grammar – The (Ongoing) Work of John Anderson [Studies in Language Companion Series, 204], ► pp. 113 ff. DOI logo
Bortone, Pietro
2010. Prepositions and cases in Hellenistic Greek. In Greek Prepositions, ► pp. 171 ff. DOI logo
Bortone, Pietro
2010. Epilogue. In Greek Prepositions, ► pp. 302 ff. DOI logo
Bortone, Pietro
2010. Prepositions and cases in Modern Greek. In Greek Prepositions, ► pp. 238 ff. DOI logo
Bortone, Pietro
2010. On the meaning of prepositions. In Greek Prepositions, ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo
Bortone, Pietro
2010. Prepositions and cases in Medieval Greek. In Greek Prepositions, ► pp. 195 ff. DOI logo
Bortone, Pietro
2010. On the function of prepositions. In Greek Prepositions, ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Cienki, Alan
1999. Cognitive Space and Linguistic Case. Journal of English Linguistics 27:1 ► pp. 70 ff. DOI logo
Cienki, Alan
2022. The study of gesture in cognitive linguistics: How it could inform and inspire other research in cognitive science. WIREs Cognitive Science 13:6 DOI logo
[no author supplied]
1997. Bibliography. In Cognitive Semantics and the Polish Dative, ► pp. 227 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2010. Copyright Page. In Greek Prepositions, ► pp. iv ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2010. Dedication. In Greek Prepositions, ► pp. ii ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2010. Foreword. In Greek Prepositions, ► pp. xii ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 november 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.