Componential analysis

Cliff Goddard
Table of contents

Componential analysis (CA) in the broadest sense, also known as ‘lexical decomposition’, is any attempt to formalize and standardize procedures for the analysis of word meanings. CA often has the ambition to represent the cognitive or psychological reality of the speakers, and to shed light on correlations between language and culture.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price.

References

Ameka, F
1992 Interjections. Journal of Pragmatics 18(2/3): 101–118. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Apresjan, J
1974 Leksiceskaja semantika. [Lexical semantics.] Nauka.Google Scholar
Bogusławski, A
1970 On semantic primitives and meaningfulness. In A. Greimas, M.R. Mayenowa & S. Zolkiewski (eds.) Sign, Language and Culture: 143–152. Mouton.Google Scholar
Burling, R
1970 Man’s many voices. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Coseriu, E. & H. Geckeler
1974 Linguistics and semantics. In T.A. Sebeok (ed.) Current trends in linguistics: 103–171. Mouton.Google Scholar
Geckeler, H
1971 Strukturelle Semantik und Wortfeldtheorie. Fink.Google Scholar
Goddard, C. & A. Wierzbicka
(eds.) 1994 Semantic and lexical universals. John Benjamins. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Goodenough, W.H
1956 Componential analysis and the study of meaning. Language 32(1): 195–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greimas, A.J
1966 Sémantique structurale. Larousse.Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, L
1943 Omkring sprogteoriens grundlæggelse. [Prolegomena to a theory of language.] Lunos.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R
1983 Semantics and cognition. MIT Press.Google Scholar
1990 Semantic structures. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Katz, J.J
1972 Semantic theory. Harper & Row.Google Scholar
1987 Common sense in semantics. In E. Lepore (ed.) New directions in semantics: 157–233. Academic Press.Google Scholar
. & J.A. Fodor 1963 The structure of a semantic theory. Language 39: 170–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G
1972 Linguistics and natural logic. In D. Davidson & G. Harman (eds.) Semantics of natural language: 545–665. Reidel. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Leech, G
1981 Semantics. Penguin.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Lehrer, A
1974 Semantic fields and lexical structure. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Lounsbury, F.G
1956 A semantic analysis of the Pawnee kinship usage. Language 32(1): 158–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyons, J
1977 Semantics. Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Mel’čuk, I.A
. & A.K. Zholkovskij 1970 Toward a functioning meaning-text model of language. Linguistics 57: 10–47.Google Scholar
Miller, G.A
. & P. Johnson-Laird 1976 Language and perception. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nida, E.A
1964 Linguistic and semantic structure. In A.S. Dil (ed.) 1975 Language structure and translation. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1975 Componential analysis of meaning. Mouton.Google Scholar
Porzig, W
1934 Wesenhafte Bedeutungsbeziehungen. Beiträge zur deutschen Sprache und Literatur 58: 70–97.Google Scholar
Pottier, B
1963 Recherches sur l’analyse sémantique en linguistique et en traduction méchanique. University de Nancy.Google Scholar
1974 Linguistique générale. Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Schank, R.S
1973 Conceptual information processing. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Talmy, L
1985 Lexicalization patterns. In T. Shopen (ed.) Grammatical categories and the lexicon: 57–149. Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Trier, J
1934 Das sprachliche Feld. Neue Jahrbücher für Wissenschaft und Jugendbildung 10: 428–449.Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, A
1972 Semantic primitives. Athenäum.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1985 Lexicography and conceptual analysis. Karoma.Google Scholar
1987 English speech act verbs. Academic Press.Google Scholar
1991 Cross-cultural pragmatics. Mouton de Gruyter.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1992 Semantics, culture, and cognition. Oxford University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Wilks, Y
1975 A preferential, pattern-seeking semantics for natural language inference. Artificial Intelligence 6: 53–74. DOI logo[See also: Lexical field analysis]Google Scholar