语言符号的三分法观点:从上下词的区别到意象和观念的区别

Q2 Arts and Humanities Acta Linguistica Hafniensia Pub Date : 2023-10-17 DOI:10.1080/03740463.2023.2254973
Per Durst-Andersen
{"title":"语言符号的三分法观点:从上下词的区别到意象和观念的区别","authors":"Per Durst-Andersen","doi":"10.1080/03740463.2023.2254973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTAccording to the theory of Baron and Herslund, English has a tendency to have names for collective concepts such as “chairs” and “bowls”, whereas French more or less consistently lacks names for collective concepts and, instead, has different names for different chairs and bowls. This observation is crucial and is not restricted to English and French nouns – when English uses one verb in an utterance, but Chinese more than one verb, we are dealing with the same distinction. All existing models of lexical semantics may contain tools to describe this distinction, but they lack tools to explain it. This is largely due to the fact that they are grounded in Saussure’s dichotomic view of symbols, i.e., as consisting of an expression unit and a content unit in which there is an arbitrary and conventional relationship between the two sides . However, if one adopts a trichotomic view, where there is one expression unit but two content units, called images and ideas, it becomes possible to explain the differences between English and French. Moreover, it becomes clear that “convention” and “arbitrariness” should be kept strictly apart, since they concern different sides of the linguistic sign.KEYWORDS: Symbolarbitrarinessmotivatednessconvention Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).","PeriodicalId":35105,"journal":{"name":"Acta Linguistica Hafniensia","volume":"73 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A trichotomic view of the linguistic sign: from the distinction between hyponyms and hypernyms to the distinction between images and ideas\",\"authors\":\"Per Durst-Andersen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03740463.2023.2254973\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTAccording to the theory of Baron and Herslund, English has a tendency to have names for collective concepts such as “chairs” and “bowls”, whereas French more or less consistently lacks names for collective concepts and, instead, has different names for different chairs and bowls. This observation is crucial and is not restricted to English and French nouns – when English uses one verb in an utterance, but Chinese more than one verb, we are dealing with the same distinction. All existing models of lexical semantics may contain tools to describe this distinction, but they lack tools to explain it. This is largely due to the fact that they are grounded in Saussure’s dichotomic view of symbols, i.e., as consisting of an expression unit and a content unit in which there is an arbitrary and conventional relationship between the two sides . However, if one adopts a trichotomic view, where there is one expression unit but two content units, called images and ideas, it becomes possible to explain the differences between English and French. Moreover, it becomes clear that “convention” and “arbitrariness” should be kept strictly apart, since they concern different sides of the linguistic sign.KEYWORDS: Symbolarbitrarinessmotivatednessconvention Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).\",\"PeriodicalId\":35105,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Linguistica Hafniensia\",\"volume\":\"73 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Linguistica Hafniensia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.2023.2254973\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Linguistica Hafniensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.2023.2254973","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

【摘要】根据Baron和Herslund的理论,英语倾向于为“椅子”和“碗”等集体概念命名,而法语或多或少一直缺乏集体概念的名称,不同的椅子和碗都有不同的名称。这个观察结果很重要,而且不局限于英语和法语名词——当英语在一个话语中使用一个动词,而汉语使用多个动词时,我们处理的是同样的区别。所有现有的词汇语义模型都可能包含描述这种区别的工具,但它们缺乏解释这种区别的工具。这在很大程度上是由于它们基于索绪尔的符号二分观,即由表达单位和内容单位组成,其中双方之间存在任意和传统的关系。然而,如果采用三分法的观点,即只有一个表达单位,但有两个内容单位,称为图像和思想,就有可能解释英语和法语之间的差异。此外,很明显,“惯例”和“任意性”应该严格分开,因为它们涉及语言符号的不同方面。关键词:符号、任意性、动机性、惯例披露声明作者未报告潜在利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A trichotomic view of the linguistic sign: from the distinction between hyponyms and hypernyms to the distinction between images and ideas
ABSTRACTAccording to the theory of Baron and Herslund, English has a tendency to have names for collective concepts such as “chairs” and “bowls”, whereas French more or less consistently lacks names for collective concepts and, instead, has different names for different chairs and bowls. This observation is crucial and is not restricted to English and French nouns – when English uses one verb in an utterance, but Chinese more than one verb, we are dealing with the same distinction. All existing models of lexical semantics may contain tools to describe this distinction, but they lack tools to explain it. This is largely due to the fact that they are grounded in Saussure’s dichotomic view of symbols, i.e., as consisting of an expression unit and a content unit in which there is an arbitrary and conventional relationship between the two sides . However, if one adopts a trichotomic view, where there is one expression unit but two content units, called images and ideas, it becomes possible to explain the differences between English and French. Moreover, it becomes clear that “convention” and “arbitrariness” should be kept strictly apart, since they concern different sides of the linguistic sign.KEYWORDS: Symbolarbitrarinessmotivatednessconvention Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Linguistica Hafniensia
Acta Linguistica Hafniensia Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊最新文献
Boundary-crossing situations and the use of deictic verbs in Finnish and Estonian expressions of non-actual motion Are discourse-initial action-guiding verbless speech acts elliptical? Bulletin du Cercle linguistique de Copenhague 2023 The use of case forms in Modern Danish – an empirical study Schematicity vs. lexicality: typological differences between Danish and Spanish
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1