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.
(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.
(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.
(2002) Thoughts and utterances. The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford etc.: Blackwell.
(2005) Pragmatic inference – reflective or reflexive? Plenary lecture read at 9th International Pragmatics Conference, Riva del Garda, Italy, 10-15 July, 2005.
(1966) The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
(1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
(1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. BoP
(1973) Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward Arnold. BoP
(1996) Ways of saying: Ways of meaning. Edited by C. Cloran, D. Butt & G. Williams. London: Cassell. BoP
(2004) Pragmatic aspects of grammatical constructions. In L. Horn & G. Ward (eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 675-700.
(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.
(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.
(1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol.1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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].
1995/96 (“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.
(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.
(1990) The design of everyday things. New York: Doubleday.
(2004) Literal meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BoP
(2005) Semiotics and computational linguistics: On semiotic cognitive information processing. [URL]. Retrieved Dec. 18, 2005.
(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”].
(2005) Syntax and prosody as methods for the construction and identification of turn-constructional units in conversation. In Hakulinen & Selting (2005), pp. 17-44.
(2004) Trust the text. London: Routledge.
Teleman, U., S. Hellberg, & E. Andersson
(1999) Svenska Akademiens Grammatik. Vol. 41. Stockholm: Norstedt.
(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.
(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 45 other publications
2020. Unpacking the meaning of the DM now through its Polish translation equivalents. Journal of Pragmatics 161 ► pp. 28 ff.
2014. Pragmatic markers. In Corpus Pragmatics, ► pp. 195 ff.
2015. Analysing Discourse Markers in Spoken Corpora: Actually as a Case Study. In Corpora and Discourse Studies, ► pp. 88 ff.
2015. Well in an English-Swedish and English-French Contrastive Perspective. In Researching Sociopragmatic Variability, ► pp. 201 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
2015. Mishearings are occasioned by contextual assumptions and situational affordances. Language & Communication 40 ► pp. 24 ff.
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.
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.
Mohammadi, Ariana N.
2019. Meaning potentials and discourse markers: The case of focus management markers in Persian. Lingua 229 ► pp. 102706 ff.
2021. You know and I think in English(es) in Zanzibar. World Englishes
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.
2019. Negotiating meanings online: Disagreements about word meaning in discussion forum communication. Discourse Studies 21:3 ► pp. 317 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.
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 10 november 2023. 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.