This article is a contribution to a theory of lexical semantics and situated sense-making which aims at explaining how meaning is constituted in and across contexts, in a dialogical interplay between lexical resources and aspects of situations.
We propose that the semantics of words or grammatical constructions are not just abstract schemas, to be filled in by pragmatic enrichment in situated uses. Nor are words associated with simple lists of different usages. Instead, we propose a theory of meaning potentials. The basic assumptions of such a theory are that linguistic resources provide language users with semantic resources to understand, say and mean specific things in particular usage events, and that this always involves an interplay with contextual factors.
The study reported here is an exercise in empirical pragmatics, using authentic data from language use. We explore the meaning potential of the Swedish adjective ny ‘new’ by examining its interplay with a specific grammatical construction, x-och-x (‘x-and-x’: in English roughly ‘x, it depends on what you mean by x’). X-och-x is a conventionalised and (largely) conversational practice, by which language users activate and negotiate parts of the meaning potential of a word x, such as ny, in order to establish a local situated meaning of it. In doing so, they exploit their knowledge of what x can mean, performing what can be seen as users´ semantic analyses in authentic communicative interaction.
Our study can also be read as a contribution to Construction Grammar, attempting to develop a more dynamic, interactional interpretation of this theory than has previously been put forward in the literature.
Allwood, J. (2003) Meaning potential and context. Some consequences for the analysis of variation in meaning. In H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven & J.R. Taylor (eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 29-65.
Bezuidenhout, A. (2002) Truth-conditional pragmatics. Philosophical Perspectives 161: 105-134. BoP
Blank, A. (2003) Polysemy in the lexicon and in discourse. In B. Nerlich, Z. Todd, V. Herman & D. Clarke (eds.), Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 267-293.
Butt, D., & C.M.I.M. Matthiessen (forthcoming) The meaning potential of language: Mapping meaning systemically. Centre for Language in Social Life, Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Cappelen, H., and E. Lepore (2005) Insensitive semantics. A defense of semantic minimalism and speech act pluralism. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Carston. R. (2002) Thoughts and utterances. The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford etc.: Blackwell.
Carston, R. (2005) Pragmatic inference – reflective or reflexive? Plenary lecture read at 9th International Pragmatics Conference, Riva del Garda, Italy, 10-15 July, 2005.
Ekberg, L. (2003) Transformations on image schemas and cross-linguistic polysemy. In Nordlund 24. Småskrifter från Institutionen för Nordiska språk, Lund University.
Evans, V. (2006) Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning construction. Cognitive Linguistics 171: 491-534. BoP
Fauconnier, G., and M. Turner (2003) Polysemy and conceptual blending. In Nerlich, et al. (2003), pp. 79-94.
Fillmore, Ch., P. Kay, and Mary K. O´Connor (1988) Regularity and idiomatiticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 641: 501-38.
Fillmore, Ch. (2005) FrameNet. Retrieved from [URL] January 29, 2006
Fretheim, T. (2005) Is there a rigid boundary between semantics and pragmatics? Working Papers ISK, 2/2005. NTNU; Trodheim: Department of Language and Communication Studies, pp. 113-129.
Fretheim, T. (2005/in press) English then and Norwegian da/så compared: A relevance-theoretic account. Ms. Trondheim: Dept of Linguistics.
Fried, M., and J.-O. Östman (2005) Construction grammar: A thumbnail sketch. In M. Fried & J.-O. Östman (eds.), Construction Grammar in a cross-language perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Gibson, J. (1966) The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Gibson, J. (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
Goldberg, A. (1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. BoP
Halliday, M. (1973) Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward Arnold. BoP
Hasan, R. (1996) Ways of saying: Ways of meaning. Edited by C. Cloran, D. Butt & G. Williams. London: Cassell. BoP
Kay, P. (2004) Pragmatic aspects of grammatical constructions. In L. Horn & G. Ward (eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 675-700.
Kilgariff, A. (2003) “I don´t believe in word senses”. In B. Nerlich, Z. Todd, V. Herman & D. Clarke (eds.), Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language.Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 361-391.
Lähteenmäki, M. (2004) Between relativism and absolutism: Towards an emergentist definition of meaning potential. In F. Bostad, C. Brandist, L.S. Evensen & H.C. Faber (eds.), Bakhtinian perspectives on language and culture: Meaning in language, art and new media.Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 91-113.
Langacker, R. (1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol.1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R. (2006) On the continuous debate about discreteness. Cognitive Linguistics 171: 107-151.
Lindström, J., & P. Linell (2007) Roli å roli: X-och-x som samtalspraktik och grammatisk konstruktion. (“Funny and funny: X-och-x as a conversational practice and a grammatical construction”). Forthc.in E. Engdahl & A.-M. Londen (eds.), Studier i svenskt samtalsspråk, 2. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Linell, P. (2006) Towards a dialogical linguistics. In M. Lähteenmäki, H. Dufva, S. Leppänen & P. Varis (eds.), Proceedings of the XIIth International Bakhtin Conference, Jyväskylä, Finland,18-22July, 2005. (e-book).Jyväskylä: Department of Languages, pp. 157-172.
Linell, P., and K. Norén (2005a) Vad man kan göra: Om den dialogiska bestämningen av pronomens användningsbetydelser. [“What man can do: On the dialogical determination of the meanings in use of pronouns”] In I. Bäcklund, et al.. (eds.), Text i arbete / Text at work. Festskrift till Britt-Louise Gunnarsson den 12januari 2005.Uppsala: Institutionen för nordiska språk vid Uppsala universitet, pp. 115-124.
Linell, P., and K. Norén (2005b) Ny och ny – en dialogisk analys av meningspotentialen hos lexemet ny i svenskan. [“New and new – a dialogical analysis of the meaning potential of the lexeme ny ’new’ in Swedish.”] In B. Melander, et al.. (eds.). Språk i tid. Studier tillägnade Mats Thelander på 60-årsdagen. (Skrifter utgivna av Institutionen för nordiska språk vid Uppsala universitet, 67.) Uppsala, pp. 231-242.
Marková, I. (1992) On structure and dialogicity in Prague semiotics. In A.H. Wold (ed.), The dialogical alternative: Towards a theory of language and mind. Oslo: Oslo University Press, pp. 45-63.
Mukařovský, J. (1977) On poetic language. In J. Burbank & P. Steiner (eds.), The word and verbal art. New Haven: Yale University Press. [Czech original published in 1940].
Nationalencyklopediens ordbok1995/96 (“Dictionary of the National Encyclopaedia”). Språkdata, Göteborgs universitet and Bra Böcker, Höganäs, Sweden.
Nerlich, B., Z. Todd, V. Herman, and D. Clarke (2003) (eds.) Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Norén, K. (2006) Både ork och lust. Om semantisk påverkan mellan ord i ordpar. [“Both ‘strength’ and ‘disposition’. On semantic influences between words in word pairs”]. In S. Ask, et al.. (eds.), Lekt och lärt: Festskrift till Jan Einarsson 2006. (Reports from Växjö University – Humanities), pp. 189-202.
Norman, D.A. (1990) The design of everyday things. New York: Doubleday.
Recanati, F. (2004) Literal meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BoP
Rieger, B. (2005) Semiotics and computational linguistics: On semiotic cognitive information processing. [URL]. Retrieved Dec. 18, 2005.
Rommetveit, R. (1974) On message structure. London: Wiley. BoP
Rommetveit, R. (1992) Outlines of a dialogically based social-cognitive approach to human cognition and communication. In A.H. Wold (ed.), The dialogical alternative: Towards a theory of language and mind.Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, pp. 19-44.
SAOB = Ordbok öfver svenska språket utgifven av Svenska Akademien, 1898-. Stockholm. [“Dictionary of the Swedish language by the Swedish Academy”].
Selting, M. (2005) Syntax and prosody as methods for the construction and identification of turn-constructional units in conversation. In Hakulinen & Selting (2005), pp. 17-44.
Sinclair, J. (2004) Trust the text. London: Routledge.
Teleman, U., S. Hellberg, & E. Andersson (1999) Svenska Akademiens Grammatik. Vol. 41. Stockholm: Norstedt.
Thibault, P. (2005) The interpersonal gateway to the meaning of mind: The inter-and intraorganism perspective on language. In R. Hasan, C. Matthiessen & J. Webster (eds.), Continuing discourse on language: A functional perspective.London: Equinox, pp. 117-156.
Zlatev, J. (2003) Polysemy or generality? Mu. In H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven & J.R. Taylor (eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 447-494.
Cited by (47)
Cited by 47 other publications
Becker, Israela
2024. Let my speakers talk: metalinguistic activity can indicate semantic change. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 20:2 ► pp. 289 ff.
Peltier, Joy P. G.
2024. Pragmatic Markers in Kwéyòl Donmnik, French, & English: Language Contact & Creole Emergence through the Lens of Powerful Little Words. Études créoles 41 | 1-2
Altohami, Waheed M. A. & Ayman Khafaga
2023. Exploring the referential range of etymologically-related lexical pairs in the language of the Qur’an: A cognitive-semantic approach. Cogent Arts & Humanities 10:1
2022. A corpus-based analysis of meaning variations in German tag questions Evidence from spoken and written conversational corpora. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 18:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
2022. Co-text and critical reading for international postgraduates in Australia. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 40:3 ► pp. 353 ff.
Deppermann, Arnulf & Simona Pekarek Doehler
2021. Longitudinal Conversation Analysis - Introduction to the Special Issue. Research on Language and Social Interaction 54:2 ► pp. 127 ff.
Mohr, Susanne
2021. You know and I think in English(es) in Zanzibar. World Englishes
Szczyrbak, Magdalena
2021. I’m thinkingandyou’re saying: Speaker stance and the progressive of mental verbs in courtroom interaction. Text & Talk 41:2 ► pp. 239 ff.
Adamczyk, Magdalena
2020. Unpacking the meaning of the DM now through its Polish translation equivalents. Journal of Pragmatics 161 ► pp. 28 ff.
Gregoromichelaki, Eleni, Gregory James Mills, Christine Howes, Arash Eshghi, Stergios Chatzikyriakidis, Matthew Purver, Ruth Kempson, Ronnie Cann & Patrick G. T. Healey
2020. Completability vs (In)completeness. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 52:2 ► pp. 260 ff.
2020. Sounds on the Margins of Language at the Heart of Interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 53:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
La Mantia, Francesco
2020. Semantics. In Glossary of Morphology [Lecture Notes in Morphogenesis, ], ► pp. 459 ff.
La Mantia, Francesco
2012. Du potentiel sémantique au signifié dialogique. Arts et Savoirs 2
TANTUCCI, Vittorio
2020. From Co-Actionality to Extended Intersubjectivity: Drawing on Language Change and Ontogenetic Development. Applied Linguistics 41:2 ► pp. 185 ff.
Tantucci, Vittorio
2021. Language and Social Minds,
Mohammadi, Ariana N.
2019. Meaning potentials and discourse markers: The case of focus management markers in Persian. Lingua 229 ► pp. 102706 ff.
Myrendal, Jenny
2019. Negotiating meanings online: Disagreements about word meaning in discussion forum communication. Discourse Studies 21:3 ► pp. 317 ff.
Bolly, Catherine T. & Dominique Boutet
2018. The multimodal CorpAGEst corpus: keeping an eye on pragmatic competence in later life. Corpora 13:3 ► pp. 279 ff.
Bücker, Jörg
2018. Gesprächsforschung und Interaktionale Linguistik. In Handbuch Pragmatik, ► pp. 41 ff.
Cigala, Ada, Tiziana Mancini, Elena Venturelli & Laura Fruggeri
2018. Family Exploration: The Contribution of Stability and Change Processes. Journal of Child and Family Studies 27:1 ► pp. 154 ff.
Ranger, Graham
2018. The Theory of Enunciative and Predicative Operations. In Discourse Markers, ► pp. 17 ff.
2018. The modal potential in the English present progressive. Brno studies in English :1 ► pp. [43] ff.
De Felice, Rachele
2016.
Karin Aijmer , Understanding pragmatic markers: A variational pragmatic approach. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2013. Pp. ix + 162.. English Language and Linguistics 20:1 ► pp. 168 ff.
Linell, Per & Jan Lindström
2016. Partial intersubjectivity and sufficient understandings for current practical purposes: On a specialized practice in Swedish conversation. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 39:2 ► pp. 113 ff.
Monzoni, Chiara M. & Markus Reuber
2016. Psychogenic Non-epileptic Seizures: How Doctors Use Medical Labels when They Communicate and Explain the Diagnosis. In The Palgrave Handbook of Adult Mental Health, ► pp. 209 ff.
Spieß, Constanze
2016. Der Leser als Trüffelschwein. Ein (text)linguistischer Zugang zum literarischen Textverständnis. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 46:3 ► pp. 439 ff.
Venturelli, Elena, Elena Cabrini, Laura Fruggeri & Ada Cigala
2016. The study of Triadic Family Interactions: the Proposal of an Observational Procedure. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science 50:4 ► pp. 655 ff.
2015. Mishearings are occasioned by contextual assumptions and situational affordances. Language & Communication 40 ► pp. 24 ff.
Linell, Per
2021. Languaging in Real Life: On Contexts and Communication Beyond Formal Linguistics and Conversation Analysis. In Dialogical Approaches and Tensions in Learning and Development [Social Interaction in Learning and Development, ], ► pp. 49 ff.
Aijmer, Karin
2014. Pragmatic markers. In Corpus Pragmatics, ► pp. 195 ff.
Aijmer, Karin
2015. Analysing Discourse Markers in Spoken Corpora: Actually as a Case Study. In Corpora and Discourse Studies, ► pp. 88 ff.
Aijmer, Karin
2015. Well in an English-Swedish and English-French Contrastive Perspective. In Researching Sociopragmatic Variability, ► pp. 201 ff.
2011. The Study of Formulations as a Key to an Interactional Semantics. Human Studies 34:2 ► pp. 115 ff.
Deppermann, Arnulf
2016. La définition comme action multimodale pour des enjeux pratiques : définir pour instruire à l’auto-école. Langages N° 204:4 ► pp. 83 ff.
Pekarek Doehler, Simona
2011. Emergent grammar for all practical purposes: the on-line formatting of left and right dislocations in French conversation. In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, ► pp. 45 ff.
Imo, Wolfgang
2010. Das Adverb jetzt zwischen Zeit- und Gesprächsdeixis. zfgl 38:1 ► pp. 25 ff.
Imo, Wolfgang
2011. Online changes in syntactic gestalts in spoken German. In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, ► pp. 127 ff.
Plug, L., B. Sharrack & M. Reuber
2010. Seizure, Fit or Attack? The Use of Diagnostic Labels by Patients with Epileptic or Non-epileptic Seizures. Applied Linguistics 31:1 ► pp. 94 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 december 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.