In this paper Gärdenfors’s geometric approach to meaning in natural language is compared to Jackendoff's algebraic one, and this is done against the backdrop of formal semantics. Ultimately, the paper tries to show that Jackendoff's framework is to be preferred to all others. The paper proceeds as follows. In Section 2, the common theoretical commitments of Gärdenfors and Jackendoff are outlined, and it is attempted to argue briefly that they are on the right track. In Section 3, the basics of the two frameworks to be compared are laid out, and it is assessed how they deal with some central issues in semantic theory, namely reference and truth, lexical decomposition, and compositionality. In Section 4, we get into the nitty-gritty of how Gärdenfors and Jackendoff actually proceed in semantic analysis, using an example of a noun and a verb (embedded in a sentence). In Section 5, the merits of Gärdenfors's empiricism when it comes to word learning and concept acquisition are assessed and compared to the moderate nativism of Jackendoff, and it is argued that Jackendoff's nativism is to be preferred. In the sixth section, the semantic internalism common to both frameworks is commented on.
{"title":"The geometry vs. the algebra of meaning","authors":"Joško Žanić","doi":"10.29162/jez.2021.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2021.3","url":null,"abstract":"In this\u0000paper Gärdenfors’s geometric approach to meaning in natural language is\u0000compared to Jackendoff's algebraic one, and this is done against the backdrop\u0000of formal semantics. Ultimately, the paper tries to show that Jackendoff's\u0000framework is to be preferred to all others. The paper proceeds as follows. In\u0000Section 2, the common theoretical commitments of Gärdenfors and Jackendoff\u0000are outlined, and it is attempted to argue briefly that they are on the right\u0000track. In Section 3, the basics of the two frameworks to be compared are laid\u0000out, and it is assessed how they deal with some central issues in semantic\u0000theory, namely reference and truth, lexical decomposition, and compositionality.\u0000In Section 4, we get into the nitty-gritty of how Gärdenfors and Jackendoff\u0000actually proceed in semantic analysis, using an example of a noun and a verb\u0000(embedded in a sentence). In Section 5, the merits of Gärdenfors's empiricism\u0000when it comes to word learning and concept acquisition are assessed and\u0000compared to the moderate nativism of Jackendoff, and it is argued that\u0000Jackendoff's nativism is to be preferred. In the sixth section, the semantic\u0000internalism common to both frameworks is commented on.","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42489750","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Vremenski adverbijali heterogena su skupina izraza čija je distribucija i funkcija nalik onima leksičke kategorije priloga, a kojima se izražavaju različiti aspekti kognitivne kategorije vremena. Polazeći od Kleinova određenja ovih izraza (1994; 2009a), u radu se predlaže klasifikacija hrvatskih adverbijala položaja u vremenu, kojima je svojstveno smještanje događaja na vremensku os. U analizi se uzimaju u obzir neki hrvatski adverbijali položaja koji smještaju događaj u prošlost – tada, u poss vrijeme, u svoje vrijeme, jednom, nekoć i nekad(a). Razmatraju se primjeri njihove uporabe u korpusu hrWaC (Ljubešić i Klubička 2014), a u analizi načina na koji istraživani adverbijali smještaju događaj na vremensku os primjenjuje se Haspelmathov (1997) pristup vremenskim adverbijalima te se komentiraju njihova svojstva anaforičnosti i/ili deiktičnosti. U radu se daju neka zapažanja o vremenskom određenju istraživanih izraza i predlažu kriteriji na temelju kojih je moguće klasificirati i razlikovati hrvatske adverbijale položaja u vremenu.
异质性临时状语是一组功能分布类似于演讲类的表达方式，表达时间认知类的不利方面。通过偏离克莱因的具体术语（1994；2009a），该工作提出了克罗地亚语hadveral位置的时间分类，其中临时轴发生在其自身的住处。U analizi se uzimaju U obzir neki hrvatski adverbijali položajakoji smještaju doga dj aj U prošlost–tada，U poss vrijeme，U svojevrijme，jednom，nekoći nekad（a）。他们正在考虑他们在hrWaC中的u se的碎片化（Ljubescic和Klubička，2014），并且毫不拖延地，调查的广告事件在时间上的使用方式，Haspelmatov（1997）可以接触到时间广告商，并被推荐用于回指和/或低效。注意研究表达和建议的时间设置数据，在此基础上，它可以在时间上与克罗地亚状语进行分类和区分。
{"title":"Zapažanja\u0000o hrvatskim adverbijalima položaja u vremenu","authors":"Mia Batinić Angster, Marco Angster","doi":"10.29162/jez.2021.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2021.1","url":null,"abstract":"Vremenski adverbijali heterogena su skupina izraza čija je distribucija i\u0000funkcija nalik onima leksičke kategorije priloga, a kojima se izražavaju\u0000različiti aspekti kognitivne kategorije vremena. Polazeći od Kleinova određenja\u0000ovih izraza (1994; 2009a), u radu se predlaže klasifikacija hrvatskih\u0000adverbijala položaja u vremenu, kojima je svojstveno smještanje događaja na\u0000vremensku os. U analizi se uzimaju u obzir neki hrvatski adverbijali položaja\u0000koji smještaju događaj u prošlost – tada, u poss vrijeme, u svoje\u0000vrijeme, jednom, nekoć i nekad(a). Razmatraju se\u0000primjeri njihove uporabe u korpusu hrWaC (Ljubešić i Klubička 2014), a u\u0000analizi načina na koji istraživani adverbijali smještaju događaj na vremensku\u0000os primjenjuje se Haspelmathov (1997) pristup vremenskim adverbijalima te se\u0000komentiraju njihova svojstva anaforičnosti i/ili deiktičnosti. U radu se daju\u0000neka zapažanja o vremenskom određenju istraživanih izraza i predlažu\u0000kriteriji na temelju kojih je moguće klasificirati i razlikovati hrvatske\u0000adverbijale položaja u vremenu.","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47138837","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
According to political realism, conflict is an immanent feature of world politics (Morgenthau 1948/1973). Drawing on this basic premise, it can be expected that the conflict frame is routinely exploited by politicians to explain and justify their foreign policy (Musolff 2016). Conflict is especially prevalent in populist narratives, where the “pure people” are juxtaposed with the “corrupt elite” (Mudde 2004). Accordingly, we hypothesized that the current Hungarian populist government would also frame its turbulent relationship with the EU by metaphorically conceptualizing it as a violent conflict. Drawing on a discourse dynamics approach to metaphor identification (Cameron et al. 2009; 2010), we analysed the metaphorical framing of the term Brüsszel (‘Brussels’) found in articles published on official government websites between 2015 and 2017. Our results indicate that explicit manifestation of the conflict frame in the form of violent conflict (such as a military operation) is less prevalent in contemporary government rhetoric, as opposed to the eu as person frame. This latter conceptualization, however, is manifested by metaphorical scenarios that evoke conflictual relations with varying degrees (and thus feed into populist narratives) by making sense of the EU as an authority figure, a partner in a joint venture, a bully, and an opponent in a battle.
{"title":"Brussels – boss, bully or the big brother?","authors":"R. Benczes, L. Szabó","doi":"10.29162/jez.2020.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2020.11","url":null,"abstract":"According to political realism, conflict is an\u0000immanent feature of world politics (Morgenthau 1948/1973). Drawing on this\u0000basic premise, it can be expected that the conflict\u0000frame is routinely exploited by politicians to explain and justify their\u0000foreign policy (Musolff 2016). Conflict is especially prevalent in populist\u0000narratives, where the “pure people” are juxtaposed with the “corrupt elite”\u0000(Mudde 2004). Accordingly, we hypothesized that the current Hungarian populist\u0000government would also frame its turbulent relationship with the EU by\u0000metaphorically conceptualizing it as a violent conflict. Drawing on a discourse\u0000dynamics approach to metaphor identification (Cameron et al. 2009; 2010), we\u0000analysed the metaphorical framing of the term Brüsszel (‘Brussels’) found in articles published on official\u0000government websites between 2015 and 2017. Our results indicate that explicit\u0000manifestation of the conflict\u0000frame in the form of violent conflict (such as a military operation) is less\u0000prevalent in contemporary government rhetoric, as opposed to the eu as person frame. This latter\u0000conceptualization, however, is manifested by metaphorical scenarios that evoke\u0000conflictual relations with varying degrees (and thus feed into populist\u0000narratives) by making sense of the EU as an authority figure, a partner in a\u0000joint venture, a bully, and an opponent in a battle.","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47394142","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Can the use of linguistic devices to achieve persuasion, such as metaphor, irony and hyperbole, ever be “too persuasive”, i.e., overshoot its rhetorical aim? More specifically, can the combination of such devices be “too much of a good thing” in that it commits speakers (and approving hearers) to actions that they were not part of their persuasion intentions? This paper investigates the semantic and pragmatic development of the Brexit-related applications of the metaphorical proverb, You cannot have your cake and eat it, during 2016–2019 in British public discourse. At the start of that period, the proverb’s reversal into the assertion “We can have our cake and eat it!” by the then Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and other “Brexiteers” became a highly prominent endorsement of Brexit and its supposed benefits for the UK; it even temporarily set the agenda for the public perception of UK–EU negotiations. Over time it became an object of hyperbolic praise as well as derision and recently seems to have lost much of its persuasive force. The paper argues that the proverb’s new reversed application by Johnson was initially successful in reviving its metaphorical meaning and framing it in a hyperbolic rhetorical context but that it also pushed Brexit proponents to an “all-or-nothing” outcome of the conflict narrative, both vis-à-vis the EU and within the British political debate. Thus, rhetorical success can lead to argumentative (and political) commitments that may have been not foreseen by the speaker and may run counter to their persuasive interests.
{"title":"Can\u0000political rhetoric ever be “too persuasive”?","authors":"A. Musolff","doi":"10.29162/jez.2020.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2020.9","url":null,"abstract":"Can the use of linguistic devices to achieve\u0000persuasion, such as metaphor, irony and hyperbole, ever be “too persuasive”,\u0000i.e., overshoot its rhetorical aim? More specifically, can the combination of\u0000such devices be “too much of a good thing” in that it commits speakers (and\u0000approving hearers) to actions that they were not part of their persuasion\u0000intentions? This paper investigates the semantic and pragmatic development of\u0000the Brexit-related applications of the metaphorical proverb, You cannot have your cake and eat it,\u0000during 2016–2019 in British public discourse. At the start of that period,\u0000the proverb’s reversal into the assertion “We can have our cake and eat it!”\u0000by the then Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and other “Brexiteers” became a\u0000highly prominent endorsement of Brexit and its supposed benefits for the UK;\u0000it even temporarily set the agenda for the public perception of UK–EU\u0000negotiations. Over time it became an object of hyperbolic praise as well as\u0000derision and recently seems to have lost much of its persuasive force. The\u0000paper argues that the proverb’s new reversed application by Johnson was\u0000initially successful in reviving its metaphorical meaning and framing it in a\u0000hyperbolic rhetorical context but that it also pushed Brexit proponents to an\u0000“all-or-nothing” outcome of the conflict narrative, both vis-à-vis the EU and\u0000within the British political debate. Thus, rhetorical success can lead to\u0000argumentative (and political) commitments that may have been not foreseen by\u0000the speaker and may run counter to their persuasive interests.","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48231886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article studies figurative uses of metaphors and metonymies utilized to frame the discourse of transplantology. We assume a somewhat wider view of framing than is usually found in the literature and argue that framing effects can be observed on a cline stretching from the private to the institutional pole. We combine this approach with the findings of the prospect theory that distinguishes between gain-framing and loss-framing as two strategic choices in tackling an issue in discourse. The framing tools, as we show in our analysis of authentic materials, in order to be effective need to be adapted to the section of, or the point on, the cline occupied by a particular subtype of discourse. Although the focus in the cognitive linguistic literature is on how conceptual metaphors are employed in framing discourse, we point out that metonymies, interacting with these metaphors, can also play a very important role. The framing tools used in public campaign aimed at winning new organ donors are strategically mostly gain-framed, and as a rule globally based on the gift metaphor. It seems that the metaphorical use of gift as a global choice in institutional contexts is not very efficient since it is too general and vague to make discourse more persuasive at the personal level, as expected in the light of the exemplification theory. This metaphor is more effective when adapted accordingly, as we demonstrated on some campaigns supported by or based on metonymic presentation of various aspects stressing the quality of life after transplantation
{"title":"The role of metaphors and metonymies in framing the transplantation\u0000discourse","authors":"M. Brdar, Rita Brdar-Szabó","doi":"10.29162/jez.2020.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2020.10","url":null,"abstract":"This\u0000article studies figurative uses of metaphors and metonymies utilized to frame\u0000the discourse of transplantology. We assume a somewhat wider view of framing\u0000than is usually found in the literature and argue that framing effects can be\u0000observed on a cline stretching from the private to the institutional pole. We\u0000combine this approach with the findings of the prospect theory that\u0000distinguishes between gain-framing and loss-framing as two strategic choices\u0000in tackling an issue in discourse. The framing tools, as we show in our\u0000analysis of authentic materials, in order to be effective need to be adapted\u0000to the section of, or the point on, the cline occupied by a particular\u0000subtype of discourse. Although the focus in the cognitive linguistic\u0000literature is on how conceptual metaphors are employed in framing discourse,\u0000we point out that metonymies, interacting with these metaphors, can also play\u0000a very important role. The framing tools used in public campaign aimed at\u0000winning new organ donors are strategically mostly gain-framed, and as a rule\u0000globally based on the gift\u0000metaphor. It seems that the metaphorical use of gift as a global choice in institutional contexts is not\u0000very efficient since it is too general and vague to make discourse more\u0000persuasive at the personal level, as expected in the light of the\u0000exemplification theory. This metaphor is more effective when adapted\u0000accordingly, as we demonstrated on some campaigns supported by or based on\u0000metonymic presentation of various aspects stressing the quality of life after\u0000transplantation","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42706219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper aims to analyze the main paradigms of the horror genre and their equivalents in the conservative – liberal political division in the United States by exploring the dominant political rhetoric and its specific framing devices as mirrored in horror cinema. The analysis focuses on two distinct celluloid works by John Carpenter: The Thing (1982), and They Live (1988), themselves constructed as subversive commentaries on the carefully intertwined American and global culture of fear and consumerism. The framing devices include the division of citizens based on race and other characteristics, the “us vs. them” mentality, negation of (inter)national unity and coexistence, the symbolism of the color red, as well as repetition and hyperbole. As powerful persuasive tools in the hands of the political elite, these devices influence the US citizens by appealing to their beliefs. These beliefs are based on models of morality (Lakoff 2002). The dualism of horror is also discussed, i.e. external versus internal horror (the Otherness outside and the alien within in Ognjanović 2016), and the way in which the binary quality of the genre informs and guides cinematic artworks in their exploration of society, especially one fraught with political and social issues. The paper investigates why the two analyzed films are important for a discussion of contemporary American society and how the horror genre can be seen as a prism through which various issues can be explored
{"title":"The Otherness\u0000and the Consumer","authors":"Ilhana Škrgić","doi":"10.29162/jez.2020.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2020.13","url":null,"abstract":"This\u0000paper aims to analyze the main paradigms of the horror genre and their\u0000equivalents in the conservative – liberal political division in the United\u0000States by exploring the dominant political rhetoric and its specific framing\u0000devices as mirrored in horror cinema. The analysis focuses on two distinct\u0000celluloid works by John Carpenter: The\u0000Thing (1982), and They Live\u0000(1988), themselves constructed as subversive commentaries on the carefully\u0000intertwined American and global culture of fear and consumerism. The framing\u0000devices include the division of citizens based on race and other\u0000characteristics, the “us vs. them” mentality, negation of (inter)national\u0000unity and coexistence, the symbolism of the color red, as well as repetition\u0000and hyperbole. As powerful persuasive tools in the hands of the political\u0000elite, these devices influence the US citizens by appealing to their beliefs.\u0000These beliefs are based on models of morality (Lakoff 2002). The dualism of\u0000horror is also discussed, i.e. external versus internal horror (the Otherness\u0000outside and the alien within in Ognjanović 2016), and the way in which the\u0000binary quality of the genre informs and guides cinematic artworks in their\u0000exploration of society, especially one fraught with political and social\u0000issues. The paper investigates why the two analyzed films are important for a\u0000discussion of contemporary American society and how the horror genre can be\u0000seen as a prism through which various issues can be explored","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69711606","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Applying conceptual blending theory, the paper analyses the construction of the meaning of a satirical text ridiculing the language employed by politicians to frame the debate on current political and social issues. In particular, it focuses on the language used by Donald Trump in explaining his anti-immigration stances through a poem based on the fable about the farmer and the viper, and a satirical text providing a new version of the poem, which criticizes Trump’s immigration policy. The paper examines the creation of the humorous meaning of the text in conceptual blending. The humorous meaning is created in the blended space due to the unusual combination of related structures, which results in incongruity (Coulson 2002; Marín-Arrese 2003). Furthermore, as blending can be used as a rhetorical tool influencing the audience to change the reality and even act upon it (Coulson 2006; Coulson & Oakley 2006; Coulson & Pascual 2006; Oakley & Coulson 2008), the analysis of the construction of the meaning of the satirical text as a product of conceptual blending can reveal rhetorical and argumentative goals in political discourse.
{"title":"The President and the viper","authors":"Sanja Berberović, Nihada Delibegović Džanić","doi":"10.29162/jez.2020.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2020.12","url":null,"abstract":"Applying\u0000conceptual blending theory, the paper analyses the construction of the meaning\u0000of a satirical text ridiculing the language employed by politicians to frame\u0000the debate on current political and social issues. In particular, it focuses\u0000on the language used by Donald Trump in explaining his anti-immigration\u0000stances through a poem based on the fable about the farmer and the viper, and a satirical text providing a new\u0000version of the poem, which criticizes Trump’s immigration policy. The paper\u0000examines the creation of the humorous meaning of the text in conceptual\u0000blending. The humorous meaning is created in the blended space due to the unusual combination of related\u0000structures, which results in incongruity (Coulson 2002; Marín-Arrese 2003). Furthermore, as blending can be used as a rhetorical tool\u0000influencing the audience to change the reality and even act upon it (Coulson\u00002006; Coulson & Oakley 2006; Coulson & Pascual 2006; Oakley &\u0000Coulson 2008), the analysis of the construction of the meaning of the\u0000satirical text as a product of conceptual blending can reveal rhetorical and\u0000argumentative goals in political discourse.","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49496321","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
U ovom se radu izlaže „treći put“ u često suprotnim shvaćanjima metafora kao konceptualne odnosno diskursne pojave. Metafora se sagledava kao sposobnost metaforizacije koja je zajednička i globalna, ali koja na presudan način ovisi o lokalnim faktorima. Ističu se jezični čimbenici koji utječu na metafore: eksplicitnost odnosno implicitnost, različita metaforičnost različitih gramatičkih oblika i leksičke značajke izraza koji se odnose na izvornu domenu. Na diskursnoj razini govori se o grozdovima metafora i ulozi metafora u stvaranju emocionalnog stila. Navedeni se elementi smještaju među suvremene teorije metafore, posebice trodimenzionalnu teoriju metafore Gerarda Steena i Kövecsesev kontekstualni model metafore. Na kraju se izvlače metodološke posljedice opisanog „trećeg puta“ za istraživanje metafora.
{"title":"Metafora\u0000na razmeđu koncepata,\u0000jezika i diskursa","authors":"Mateusz-Milan Stanojević","doi":"10.29162/jez.2020.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2020.6","url":null,"abstract":"U ovom se radu\u0000izlaže „treći put“ u često suprotnim shvaćanjima metafora kao konceptualne\u0000odnosno diskursne pojave. Metafora se sagledava kao sposobnost metaforizacije\u0000koja je zajednička i globalna, ali koja na presudan način ovisi o lokalnim\u0000faktorima. Ističu se jezični čimbenici koji utječu na metafore: eksplicitnost\u0000odnosno implicitnost, različita metaforičnost različitih gramatičkih oblika i\u0000leksičke značajke izraza koji se odnose na izvornu domenu. Na diskursnoj\u0000razini govori se o grozdovima metafora i ulozi metafora u stvaranju\u0000emocionalnog stila. Navedeni se elementi smještaju među suvremene teorije\u0000metafore, posebice trodimenzionalnu teoriju metafore Gerarda Steena i\u0000Kövecsesev kontekstualni model metafore. Na kraju se izvlače metodološke\u0000posljedice opisanog „trećeg puta“ za istraživanje metafora.","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43854526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
U ovome se radu analiziraju promjene glagolskih frazema u engleskom i hrvatskom jeziku koji odražavaju sheme dinamike sile. Cilj je na temelju podataka iz računalnih korpusa utvrditi na koje načine sheme dinamike sile ograničavaju promjene leksičko-gramatičkog ustrojstva glagolskih frazema u tim dvama jezicima. Rezultati pokazuju da su oblici u kojima se javljaju glagolski frazemi u engleskome i hrvatskome ograničeni na one vrste konstrukcija kojima se jezično izražavaju odnosi među sudionicima događaja unutar pojedine događajne sheme, a to su akcija, prijenos ili kretanje. Također se pokazuje da s obzirom na specifičnu vrstu sheme dinamike sile koju glagolski frazemi odražavaju varira i njihov stupanj promjenjivosti pa se javljaju u manjem ili većem broju oblika. Sve to pokazuje da promjenjivost glagolskih frazema istodobno ograničavaju značenje i gramatička struktura.
{"title":"Sheme dinamike sile i promjenjivost glagolskih frazema","authors":"Jelena Parizoska, Marija Omazić","doi":"10.29162/jez.2020.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2020.7","url":null,"abstract":"U ovome se radu analiziraju promjene glagolskih\u0000frazema u engleskom i hrvatskom jeziku koji odražavaju sheme dinamike sile.\u0000Cilj je na temelju podataka iz računalnih korpusa utvrditi na koje načine\u0000sheme dinamike sile ograničavaju promjene leksičko-gramatičkog ustrojstva\u0000glagolskih frazema u tim dvama jezicima. Rezultati pokazuju da su oblici u\u0000kojima se javljaju glagolski frazemi u engleskome i hrvatskome ograničeni na\u0000one vrste konstrukcija kojima se jezično izražavaju odnosi među sudionicima\u0000događaja unutar pojedine događajne sheme, a to su akcija, prijenos ili\u0000kretanje. Također se pokazuje da s obzirom na specifičnu vrstu sheme dinamike\u0000sile koju glagolski frazemi odražavaju varira i njihov stupanj promjenjivosti\u0000pa se javljaju u manjem ili većem broju oblika. Sve to pokazuje da\u0000promjenjivost glagolskih frazema istodobno ograničavaju značenje i gramatička\u0000struktura.","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48679289","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
U radu se opisuju različiti sustavi naglašivanja s osobitim osvrtom na Školski rječnik hrvatskoga jezika i Hrvatski mrežni rječnik (Mrežnik). Posebno se problematiziraju četiri teme: 1) odnos priručnika prema standardnojezičnim naglasnim pravilima, 2) pitanje uporabne norme s posebnim osvrtom na naglasni inventar i dijalektnu sliku, 3) provedba načela normativne hijerarhije u naglasnoj normi te 4) primjeri obrade iz dvaju navedenih rječnika.
该作品描述了克罗地亚语和克罗地亚语（Mrežnik）学校突出社会的各种系统。Posebno se problematizirajučetiri teme：1）odnos priručnika prema standardnojezičnim naglasnim pravilima，2）pitanjeuporabne norme的posebnim osvrtom na naglasni inventar i dijalektnu sliku，3）证明了načela normativne hijerarhije u naglasnoj 4）primjeri obradeiz dvaju navedenih rječnica。
{"title":"Hrvatski naglasni sustav između deskriptivnoga i preskriptivnoga pristupa","authors":"D. Vidović","doi":"10.29162/jez.2020.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2020.1","url":null,"abstract":"U radu se opisuju različiti sustavi naglašivanja s\u0000osobitim osvrtom na Školski rječnik hrvatskoga jezika i Hrvatski\u0000mrežni rječnik (Mrežnik). Posebno se problematiziraju četiri teme:\u00001) odnos priručnika prema standardnojezičnim naglasnim pravilima, 2) pitanje\u0000uporabne norme s posebnim osvrtom na naglasni inventar i dijalektnu sliku, 3)\u0000provedba načela normativne hijerarhije u naglasnoj normi te 4) primjeri obrade\u0000iz dvaju navedenih rječnika.","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41470358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：