Article published in:
Studies in Language
Vol. 38:1 (2014) ► pp. 80–127

Semantic fieldwork and lexical universals

| Griffith University, Australian National University

The main goal of paper is to show how NSM findings about lexical universals (semantic primes) can be applied to semantic analysis in little-described languages. It is argued that using lexical universals as a vocabulary for semantic analysis allows one to formulate meaning descriptions that are rigorous, cognitively authentic, maximally translatable, and free from Anglocentrism. A second goal is to shed light on methodological issues in semantic fieldwork by interrogating some controversial claims about the Dalabon and Pirahã languages. We argue that reductive paraphrase into lexical universals provides a practical procedure for arriving at coherent interpretations of unfamiliar lexical meanings. Other indigenous/endangered languages discussed include East Cree, Arrernte, Kayardild, Karuk, and Maori. We urge field linguists to take the NSM metalanguage, based on lexical universals, into the field with them, both as an aid to lexicogrammatical documentation and analysis and as a way to improve semantic communication with consultants.

Keywords: linguistic fieldwork, endangered languages, lexical semantics, Anglocentrism, NSM, reductive paraphrase
Published online: 25 April 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.38.1.03god
References
Allan, Keith
2001 Natural language semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Amberber, Megistu
2008 Semantic primes in Amharic. In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Cross-linguistic semantics, 83-119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ameka, Felix
1994 Ewe. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Semantic and lexical universals: Theory and empirical findings, 57-86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 ‘When I die, don’t cry’: The ethnopragmatics of “gratitude” in West African languages. In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Ethnopragmatics: Understanding discourse in cultural context, 231-266. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2009 Access rituals in West African communities: An ethnopragmatic perspective. In Gunther Senft & Ellen B. Basso (eds.), Ritual Communication, 127-152. New York: Berg.Google Scholar
Ameka, Felix K., Alan Dench & Nicholas Evans
(eds.) 2006 Catching language: The standing challenge of grammar writing. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asano-Cavanagh, Yuko
2009 A semantic analysis of Japanese epistemic markers: chigainai and hazuda . Language Sciences 31(5). 837-852. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Semantic analysis of evidential markers in Japanese: rashii, yooda and sooda . Functions of Language 17 (2). 153-180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Austin, Peter K
(ed.) 2003-2010 Language documentation and description, vols. 1-91. London: Hans Rausing Endangered Languages Project, School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar
Bohnemeyer, Jürgen
1998 Temporal reference from a radical pragmatics point of view. Why Yucatec Maya does not need to express ‘after’ and ‘before’. Cognitive Linguistics 9(3). 239-282. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 NSM without the strong lexicalization hypothesis. Theoretical Linguistics 29(3). 223-226.Google Scholar
Bowern, Claire
2008 Linguistic fieldwork: A practical guide. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bromhead, Helen
2009 The reign of truth and faith: Epistemic expressions in 16th and 17th century English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011a Ethnogeographical categories in English and Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara. Language Sciences 33(1). 58-75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011b The bush in Australian English. Australian Journal of Linguistics 311. 445-471. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brotherson, Anna
2008 The ethnogeometry of Makasai (East Timor). In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Cross-linguistic semantics, 259-276. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bugenhagen, Robert D
2001 Emotions and the nature of persons in Mbula. In Jean Harkins & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Emotions in crosslinguistic perspective, 69-114. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002 The syntax of semantic primitives in Mangaaba-Mbula. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Meaning and universal grammar – Theory and empirical findings, vol. I1, 1-64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chappell, Hilary
2002 The universal syntax of semantic primes in Mandarin Chinese. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Meaning and universal grammar – Theory and empirical findings, vol. I1, 243-322. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard & N. Smith
1977 Lingua descriptive series questionnaire. Lingua 421. 1-72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crowley, Terry
2007 Field linguistics: A beginner’s guide (edited and prepared for publication by Nick Thieberger). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, R.M.W. & A.Y. Aikhenvald
2002 Word: A typological framework. In R.M.W. Dixon & A.Y. Aikhenvald (eds.), Word: A cross-linguistic typology, 1-41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Durst, Uwe
1999 BAD as a semantic primitive: Evidence from Biblical Hebrew. Pragmatics & Cognition 7(2). 375-403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, Nick J
2002 Combinatoric properties of natural semantic metalanguge expressions in Lao. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Meaning and universal grammar –Theory and empirical findings, vol. II1, 145-256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evans, Nicholas
2007 Standing up your mind: Remembering in Dalabon. In Mengistu Amberber (ed.), The language of memory in a cross-linguistic perspective, 67-96. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Semantic typology. In Jae-Jung Sung (ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic typology, 504-533. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicolas, Francesca Merlin & Maggie Tukumba
2004 A first dictionary of Dalabon (Ngalkbon). Maningrida: Maningrida Arts and Culture.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas & Hans-Jürgen Sasse
2007 Searching for meaning in the Library of Babel: Field semantics and problems of digital archiving. In Peter K. Austin (ed.), Language description and documentation, vol. 41, 58-99. London: Hans Rausing Endangered Languages Project, School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar
Everett, D.L
2005 Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã. Current Anthropology 461. 621-646. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Don’t sleep. There are snakes. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
2012 Understanding others requires adaptive thinking: Response to Wierzbicka. Pragmatics & Cognition 20(2). 417-428. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foley, William A
2003 Genre, register and language documentation in literate and preliterate communities. In Peter K. Austin (ed.), Language documentation and description, vol. 11, 85-98. London: Hans Rausing Endangered Languages Project, School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar
Frank, Michael C., Daniel L. Everett, Evelina Fedorenko & Edward Gibson
2008 Number as a cognitive technology: Evidence from Pirahã language and cognition. Cognition 1081. 819-824. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Furbee, N. Louanna
2010 Language documentation: Theory and practice. In Lenore A. Grenoble & N. Louanna Furbee (eds.), Language documentation: Practice and values, 3-24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk
2010 Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gippert, Jost, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Ulrike Mosel
(eds.) 2006 Essentials of language documentation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gladkova, Anna
2007 Universal and language-specific aspects of “propositional attitudes”: Russian vs. English. In Andrea C. Schalley & Drew Khlentzos (eds.), Mental states: Volume 2: Language and cognitive structure, 61-83. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Russkaja kul’turnaja semantika: ėmocii, cennosti, žiznennye ustanovki[Russian cultural semantics: Emotions, values, attitudes.] Moscow: Languages of Slavic Cultures.Google Scholar
Goddard, Cliff
1991 Testing the translatability of semantic primitives into an Australian Aboriginal language. Anthropological Linguistics 33(1). 31-56.Google Scholar
1994 Lexical primitives in Yankunytjatjara. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Semantic and lexical universals – Theory and empirical findings, 229-262. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000 Polysemy: A problem of definition. In Yael Ravin & Claudia Leacock (eds.), Polysemy: Theoretical and computational approaches, 129-151. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2001a  Sabar, ikhlas, setia – patient, sincere, loyal? A contrastive semantic study of some “virtues” in Malay and English. Journal of Pragmatics 331. 653-681. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001b  Hati: A key word in the Malay vocabulary of emotion. In Jean Harkins & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Emotions in crosslinguistic perspective, 171-200. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001c Lexico-semantic universals: a critical overview. Linguistic Typology 5(1). 1-66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 Thinking across languages and cultures: Six dimensions of variation. Cognitive Linguistics 14(2-3). 109-140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 Natural semantic metalanguage. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 2nd edn., 544-551. Oxford: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 A “lexicographic portrait” of forgetting . In Mengistu Amberber (ed.), The language of memory in a cross-linguistic perspective, 119-137. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Towards a systematic table of semantic elements. In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Cross-linguistic semantics, 59-81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 Cultural scripts. In Gunter Senft, Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren (eds.), Culture and language use (Handbook of Pragmatics Highlights 2), 68-80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010a Semantic molecules and semantic complexity (with special reference to “environmental” molecules). Review of Cognitive Linguistics 8(1). 123-155.Google Scholar
2010b The Natural Semantic Metalanguage approach. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.) The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 459-484. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2011a Semantic analysis, Revised 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2011b The lexical semantics of ‘language’ (with special reference to ‘words’). Language Sciences 33(1). 40-57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Semantic primes, semantic molecules, semantic templates: Key concepts in the NSM approach to lexical typology. Linguistics 50(3). 711-743. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2008 Cross-linguistic semantics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goddard, Cliff & Anna Wierzbicka
(eds.) 1994 Semantic and Lexical Universals — Theory and Empirical Findings. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(eds.) 2002 Meaning and Universal Grammar — Theory and Empirical Findings. Vols I and II1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Semantic primes and cultural scripts in language teaching and intercultural communication. In Farzad Sharifian & Gary Palmer (eds.), Applied cultural linguistics: Implications for second language learning and intercultural communication, 105-124. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 ‘Want’ is a semantic and conceptual universal (response to Khanina). Studies in Language 34(1). 108-123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Semantics and cognition. Wiley Interdiscipinary Reviews: Cognitive Science (WIREs Cognitive Science) 2(2). 125-135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Words and meanings: Lexical semantics across domains, languages, and cultures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gordon, Peter
2004 Numerical cognition without words: Evidence from Amazonia. Science 3061. 496-499. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grenoble, Lenore A. & N. Louanna Furbee
(eds.) 2010 Language documentation. Practice and values. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Habib, Sandy
2011a Contrastive lexical conceptual analysis of folk religious concepts in English, Arabic and Hebrew: NSM approach. PhD thesis, University of New England.Google Scholar
2011b  Angels can cross cultural boundaries. RASK, International Journal of Language and Communication 341. 49-75.Google Scholar
Hanks, Patrick W
2007 General introduction. In Patrick W. Hanks (ed.), Lexicology: Critical concepts in linguistics, vol. I1, 1–23. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harkins, Jean
2001 Talking about anger in Central Australia. In Jean Harkins & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Emotions in crosslinguistic perspective, 201-220. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harkins, Jean & David P. Wilkins
1994. Mparntwe Arrernte and the search for lexical universals. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Semantic and lexical universals – Theory and empirical findings, 285-310. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasada, Rie
2001 Meanings of Japanese sound-symbolic emotion words. In Jean Harkins & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Emotions in crosslinguistic perspective, 221-258. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Two virtuous emotions in Japanese: Nasake/joo and jihi . In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Cross-linguistic linguistics, 331-347. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hellwig, Birgit
2010 Meaning and translation in linguistic fieldwork. Studies in Language 34(4). 802-831. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hill, Deborah
1994 Longgu. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Semantic and lexical universals – Theory and empirical findings, 310-330. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hinton, Leanne
2001a Language revitalisation: An overview. In Leanne Hinton & Kenneth Hale (eds.), The green book of language revitalization in practice, 3-18. Boston: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001b The Karuk language. In Leanne Hinton & Kenneth Hale (eds.), The green book of language revitalization in practice, 191-194. Boston: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Junker, Marie-Odile
2003 A native American view of the “mind” as seen in the lexicon of cognition in East Cree. Cognitive Linguistics 14(2-3). 167-194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 The language of memory in East Cree. In Mengistu Amberber (ed.), The language of memory in a crosslinguistic perspective, 235-261. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Semantic primes and their grammar in a polysynthetic language: East Cree. In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Cross-linguistic linguistics, 163-204. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Junker, Marie-Odile & Louise Blacksmith
2006 Are there emotional universals? Evidence from the native American language East Cree. Culture & Psychology 12(3). 275-303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keesing, R
1984 Rethinking mana. Journal of Anthropological Research 401. 137-156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knight, Emily
2008 Hyperpolysemy in Bunuba, a polysynthetic language of the Kimberley, Western Australia. In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Cross-linguistic semantics, 205-223. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leung, Helen Hue Lam
2012 The semantics of the Cantonese utterance particle 'laa1'. In M. Ponsonnet, L. Dao & M. Bowler (eds.), Proceedings of the 42nd Australian Linguistic Society Conference – 2011 , Australian National University, Canberra ACT, 2-4 December 2011 (pp. 245-280).
Levisen, Carsten
2012 Cultural semantics and social cognition. A case study on the Danish universe of meaning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. & Sergio Meira
2003 ‘Natural’ concepts in the spatial topological domain — adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: An exercise in semantic typology. Language 79(3). 485-516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Löbner, Sebastian
2002 Understanding semantics. London: Arnold Publications.Google Scholar
Macaulay, Monica
2004. On the Karuk directional suffixes. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 30(2). elanguage​.net​/journals​/bls​/article​/download​/839​/727. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Majid, Asifa
2012 A guide to stimulus-based elicitation for semantic categories. In Nicholas Thieberger (ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic fieldwork, 54-71. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Majid, Asifa & Melissa Bowerman
(eds.) 2007 Cutting and breaking events across languages. Cognitive Linguistics 18(2) [Special issue].Google Scholar
Mason, Te Haunihiata
2008 The incorporation of Mātauranga Māori or Māori knowledge into Te Mātāpuna, the first monolingual Māori dictionary for adults. In Rob Amery & J. Nash (eds.), Warra wiltaniappendi Strengthening languages: Proceedings of the Inaugural Indigenous Languages Conference (ILC) 2007 , 35-39. Adelaide: University of Adelaide SA.Google Scholar
Matthewson, Lisa
2004 On the methodology of semantic fieldwork. International Journal of American Linguistics 701. 369-415. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moorfield, John C
2005 Te aka. Maori-English, English-Maori dictionary and index. Auckland: Pearson/Longman.Google Scholar
Mosel, Ulrike
1994 Samoan. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Semantic and lexical universals – Theory and empirical findings, 331-360. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 Grammaticography: The art and craft of writing grammars. In Felix Ameka, Alan Dench & Nicholas Evans (eds.), Catching language: The standing challenge of grammar writing, 41-68. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2012 Morphosyntactic analysis in the field: A guide to the guides. In Nicholas Thieberger (ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic fieldwork, 72-89. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. Lynne
2010 Lexical meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myhill, John
1996 Is BAD a semantic primitive? Evidence from Biblical Hebrew. Lexicology 2(2). 99-126.Google Scholar
Nicholls, Sophie
2009. Referring expressions and referential practice in Roper Kriol (Northern Territory, Australia). University of New England dissertation. https://​e​-publications​.une​.edu​.au​/vital​/access​/manager​/Repository​/une:9244.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew
1994 Kalam exponents of lexical and semantic primitives. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Semantic and lexical universals: Theory and empirical findings, 87-422. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peeters, Bert
(ed.) 2006 Semantic primes and universal grammar: Empirical findings from the Romance languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 La métalangue sémantique naturelle: acquis et défis. In J. François (ed.), Grandes voies et chemins de traverse de la sémantique cognitive, 75-101. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
Pica, P., C. Lemer, V. Izard & S. Dehaene
2004 Exact and approximate arithmetic in an Amazonian indigene group. Science 3061. 499-503. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ponsonnet, Maïa
2009 Aspects of the semantics of intellectual subjectivity in Dalabon (southwestern Arnhem Land). Australian Aboriginal Studies 2009(1). 16-28.Google Scholar
Priestley, Carol
2002 Insides and emotion in Koromu. Pragmatics & Cognition 10(1/2). 243-270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 The semantics of “inalienable possession” in Koromu (PNG). In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Cross-linguistic semantics, 277-300. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012a Koromu temporal expressions: Semantic and cultural perspectives. In Luna Filipović & Kasia Jaszczolt (eds.), Space and time in languages and cultures: Language, culture and cognition, 143-165. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012b. The expression of potential event modality in the Papuan language of Koromu. In M. Ponsonnet, L. Dao & M. Bowler (eds.), Proceedings of the 42nd Australian Linguistic Society Conference – 2011 , Australian National University, Canberra ACT, 2-4 December 2011 (pp. 389-422).
Sakel, Jeanette & Everett, Daniel L
2012 Linguistic fieldwork: A student guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shi-xu
2000 To feel or not to feel, that is the question. Culture & Psychology 6(3). 375-383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stanwood, Ryo E
1997 The primitive syntax of mental predicates in Hawaii Creole English: A text-based study. Language Sciences 19(3). 209-217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999 On the Adequacy of Hawai’i Creole English. University of Hawai’i dissertation.Google Scholar
Thieberger, Nicholas
(ed.) 2012 The Oxford handbook of linguistic fieldwork. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tien, Adrian
2009 Semantic prime HAPPEN in Mandarin Chinese: In search of a viable exponent. Pragmatics & Cognition 17(2). 356-382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tong, Malindy, Michael Yell & Cliff Goddard
1997 Semantic primitives of time and space in Hong Kong Cantonese. Language Sciences 19(3). 245-261. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Travis, Catherine E
2002 La Metalengua Semántica Natural: The natural semantic metalanguage of Spanish. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Meaning and universal grammar – Theory and empirical findings, vol. I1, 173-242. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004 The ethnopragmatics of the diminutive in conversational Colombian Spanish. Intercultural Pragmatics 1(2). 249-274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Travis, Catherine
2006 The communicative realization of confianza and calor humano in Colombian Spanish. In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Ethnopragmatics: Understanding discourse in cultural context, 199-230. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Vanhatalo, Ulla, Anna Idström & Heli Tissari
Forthcoming The foundations of the Finnish based Natural Semantic Metalanguage.
Warner, Sam L. No'eau
2001 The movement to revitalize Hawaiian language and culture. In Leanne Hinton & Kenneth Hale (eds.), The green book of language revitalization in practice, 133-44. Boston: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wakefield, John C
2011 The English equivalents of Cantonese sentence-final particles: A contrastive analysis. Hong Kong Polytechnic University dissertation.Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna
1996 Semantics: Primes and universals. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2002 Semantic primes and universal grammar in Polish. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Meaning and universal grammar – Theory and empirical findings, Vol. II1, 65-144. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 English: Meaning and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Is “remember” a universal human concept? “Memory: and culture. In Mengistu Amberber (ed.), The language of memory in a crosslinguistic perspective, 13-39. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Case in NSM: A reanalysis of the polish dative. In Andrej Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, 151-169. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2009 The theory of the mental lexicon. In Sebastian Kempgen, Peter Kosta, Tilman Berger & Karl Gutschmidt (eds.), Die slavischen Sprachen/The slavic languages: Eine internationales Handbuch zu ihrer Struktur, ihrer Geschichte und ihrer Erforsching/An international handbook of their structure, their history and their investigation, 848-863. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2010a Experience, evidence, and sense: The hidden cultural legacy of English. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010b ‘Story’ – An English cultural keyword and a key interpretive tool of Anglo culture. Narrative Inquiry 20(1). 53-181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Understanding others requires shared concepts. Pragmatics & Cognition 20(2). 356-379. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Imprisoned in English: The hazards of English as a default language. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
in press. Two levels of verbal communication: Universal and culture-specific. In Louis de Saussure & Andrea Rocci (eds.), The handbooks of communication science, Volume 3: Verbal communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forthcoming. Back to 'mother' and 'father': Overcoming the Eurocentrism of kinship studies through eight universal semantic molecules.
Wilson, William H. & Kaijanoe Kamanā
2001 “Mai Loko Mai O ka ‘I’ini: Proceeding from a dream”: The ‘Aha Pūnana Leo Connection in Hawaiian language revitalization. In L. Hinton & K. Hale (eds.), The green book of language revitalization in practice, 147-178. Boston: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wong, Jock
2005 “Why you so Singlish one?” A semantic and cultural interpretation of the Singapore English particle one . Language in Society 34(2). 239-275. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 The triple articulation of language. Journal of Pragmatics 42(11). 2932-2944. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
in press. The Culture of Singapore English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logo
Ye, Zhengdao
2006 Why the ‘inscrutable’ Chinese face? Emotionality and facial expression in Chinese. In Cliff Goddard (ed.), Ethnopragmatics: Understanding discourse in cultural context, 127-169. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2007 ‘Memorisation’, learning and cultural cognition: The notion of bèi (‘auditory memorisation’) in the written Chinese tradition. In Mengistu Amberber (ed.), The language of memory in a crosslinguistic perspective, 127-169. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Eating and drinking in Mandarin and Shanghainese: A lexical-conceptual analysis. In E. Christensen, E. Schier & J. Sutton (eds.), ASCS09: Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the Australasian Society for Cognitive Science , 375-383. Sydney: Macquarie Centre for Cognitive Science.Google Scholar
Yoon, Kyung-Joo
2006 Constructing a Korean Natural Semantic Metalanguage. Seoul: Hankook Publishing Co.Google Scholar
2007 Mental states reflected in cognitive lexemes related to memory: A case in Korean. In Andrea C. Schalley & Drew Khlentzos (eds.), Mental states: Volume 2: Language and cognitive structure, 85-108. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 26 other publications

Britton, Emma R. & Theresa Y. Austin
2020. “Keeping Words in Context”: Language Policy and Social Identification in an Immigrant Job Training Program. Journal of Language, Identity & Education ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Forbes, Alexander
2020.  In Studies in Ethnopragmatics, Cultural Semantics, and Intercultural Communication, ► pp. 143 ff. Crossref logo
Goddard, Cliff
2015. The complex, language-specific semantics of “surprise”. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 13:2 ► pp. 291 ff. Crossref logo
Goddard, Cliff
2017.  In International Handbook of Modern Lexis and Lexicography, ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Goddard, Cliff & Anna Wierzbicka
2016. Explicating the English lexicon of ‘doing and happening’. Functions of Language 23:2 ► pp. 214 ff. Crossref logo
Goddard, Cliff & Anna Wierzbicka
2016. ‘It's mine!’. Re-thinking the conceptual semantics of “possession” through NSM. Language Sciences 56 ► pp. 93 ff. Crossref logo
Goddard, Cliff & Anna Wierzbicka
2019. Reported speech as a pivotal human phenomenon: Commentary on Spronck and Nikitina. Linguistic Typology 23:1 ► pp. 167 ff. Crossref logo
Goddard, Cliff & Anna Wierzbicka
2021. “We”: conceptual semantics, linguistic typology and social cognition. Language Sciences 83 ► pp. 101327 ff. Crossref logo
Goddard, Cliff, Anna Wierzbicka & Horacio Fabréga
2014. Evolutionary semantics: using NSM to model stages in human cognitive evolution. Language Sciences 42 ► pp. 60 ff. Crossref logo
Goddard, Cliff & Zhengdao Ye
2014. Exploring “happiness” and “pain” across languages and cultures. International Journal of Language and Culture 1:2 ► pp. 131 ff. Crossref logo
Goddard, Cliff & Zhengdao Ye
2016.  In "Happiness" and "Pain" across Languages and Cultures [Benjamins Current Topics, 84], ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Hinrichs, Nicolás, Maryam Foradi, Tariq Yousef, Elisa Hartmann, Susanne Triesch, Jan Kaßel & Johannes Pein
2022. Embodied Metarepresentations. Frontiers in Neurorobotics 16 Crossref logo
Holden, Josh
2019. Semantic Primes In Denesųłiné: In Search of Some Lexical “Universals”. International Journal of American Linguistics 85:1 ► pp. 75 ff. Crossref logo
Levisen, Carsten
2017. The social and sonic semantics of reggae: Language ideology and emergent socialities in postcolonial Vanuatu. Language & Communication 52 ► pp. 102 ff. Crossref logo
Levisen, Carsten
2019. Biases we live by: Anglocentrism in linguistics and cognitive sciences. Language Sciences 76 ► pp. 101173 ff. Crossref logo
Levisen, Carsten & Karime Aragón
2017.  In Creole Studies – Phylogenetic Approaches, ► pp. 315 ff. Crossref logo
Levisen, Carsten & Kristoffer Friis Bøegh
2017.  In Creole Studies – Phylogenetic Approaches, ► pp. 293 ff. Crossref logo
Moravcsik, Edith A.
2017.  In The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Typology, ► pp. 440 ff. Crossref logo
Newman, John
2020.  In Meaning, Life and Culture: In conversation with Anna Wierzbicka, ► pp. 319 ff. Crossref logo
Roettger, Timo B.
2021. Preregistration in experimental linguistics: applications, challenges, and limitations. Linguistics 59:5 ► pp. 1227 ff. Crossref logo
van Lier, Eva
2016. Lexical flexibility in Oceanic languages . Linguistic Typology 20:2 ► pp. 197 ff. Crossref logo
Wierzbicka, Anna
2015. A whole cloud of culture condensed into a drop of semantics. International Journal of Language and Culture 2:1 ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Wierzbicka, Anna
2016. Back to ‘Mother’ and ‘Father’: Overcoming the Eurocentrism of Kinship Studies through Eight Lexical Universals. Current Anthropology 57:4 ► pp. 408 ff. Crossref logo
Wierzbicka, Anna
2016. Making sense of terms of address in European languages through the Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM). Intercultural Pragmatics 13:4 ► pp. 499 ff. Crossref logo
Wierzbicka, Anna
2016. Overcoming the Eurocentrism in Psychological Anthropology with Lexical Universals: A Response to Naomi Quinn. Ethos 44:3 ► pp. 195 ff. Crossref logo
Wierzbicka, Anna & Cliff Goddard
2018. Talking about our Bodies and their Parts in Warlpiri. Australian Journal of Linguistics 38:1 ► pp. 31 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 january 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.