{"title":"忠诚、主体性与公民权的话语:从中世纪到现代的实践","authors":"M. Radulović","doi":"10.21638/spbu02.2022.315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article discusses historical, linguistic, and discursive aspects of the nouns loyalty, subjecthood, and citizenship. Тhe focus is on the historical lexico-semantic changes of the three nouns, which demonstrate that denotations are modified in different historical contexts. The analysis starts with D. Sperber and D. Wilson’s assumption that the correspondence between concepts and words may be one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-one, or a combination of these since it is quite implausible that there is an exhaustive one-to-one mapping between mental concepts and public words. Words can be used in different contexts and discourses, and the synchronic semasiological approach may not always provide the full specification of word meaning, especially when the meaning of abstract nouns is analyzed. As argued by H.-J. Schmid, the formation of concrete concepts is different from the formation of abstract concepts, the latter being more complex as it can depend on many different experiences, which can make it difficult to form a single stable abstract concept. In the report on their experiments, S. J. Crutch and E. K. Warrington’s assertion would be that abstract concepts are represented in an associative neural network while concrete concepts have a categorical organization. This suggests that concrete words are more likely to be understood adequately, and, vice versa, abstract words — inadequately. Moreover, our understanding of words and the world can change over time because our experiences and historical circumstances can and do change. This article considers the issue of abstract concept-formation with regard to both synchronic and diachronic lexico-semantic aspects of the nouns loyalty, subjecthood, and citizenship. These aspects are analyzed in accordance with the lexico-semantic frameworks provided by the second editionof the University of Glasgow’s Historical Thesaurus of English. The aim is to demonstrate that the meanings of the three nouns can be understood more adequately if their lexico-semantic features are compared and contrasted not only synchronically but also diachronically. Another aim is to show that a better understanding of the nouns relies on both synchronically and diachronically contextualized knowledge.","PeriodicalId":53995,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Discourse of Loyalty, Subjecthood and Citizenship: from Medieval to Modern Practices\",\"authors\":\"M. Radulović\",\"doi\":\"10.21638/spbu02.2022.315\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article discusses historical, linguistic, and discursive aspects of the nouns loyalty, subjecthood, and citizenship. Тhe focus is on the historical lexico-semantic changes of the three nouns, which demonstrate that denotations are modified in different historical contexts. The analysis starts with D. Sperber and D. Wilson’s assumption that the correspondence between concepts and words may be one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-one, or a combination of these since it is quite implausible that there is an exhaustive one-to-one mapping between mental concepts and public words. Words can be used in different contexts and discourses, and the synchronic semasiological approach may not always provide the full specification of word meaning, especially when the meaning of abstract nouns is analyzed. As argued by H.-J. Schmid, the formation of concrete concepts is different from the formation of abstract concepts, the latter being more complex as it can depend on many different experiences, which can make it difficult to form a single stable abstract concept. In the report on their experiments, S. J. Crutch and E. K. Warrington’s assertion would be that abstract concepts are represented in an associative neural network while concrete concepts have a categorical organization. This suggests that concrete words are more likely to be understood adequately, and, vice versa, abstract words — inadequately. Moreover, our understanding of words and the world can change over time because our experiences and historical circumstances can and do change. This article considers the issue of abstract concept-formation with regard to both synchronic and diachronic lexico-semantic aspects of the nouns loyalty, subjecthood, and citizenship. These aspects are analyzed in accordance with the lexico-semantic frameworks provided by the second editionof the University of Glasgow’s Historical Thesaurus of English. The aim is to demonstrate that the meanings of the three nouns can be understood more adequately if their lexico-semantic features are compared and contrasted not only synchronically but also diachronically. Another aim is to show that a better understanding of the nouns relies on both synchronically and diachronically contextualized knowledge.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53995,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2022.315\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Istoriya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu02.2022.315","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文讨论了忠诚、主体性和公民身份这三个名词的历史、语言和话语方面。Тhe的重点是三个名词的历史词汇语义变化,这表明在不同的历史语境中,外延发生了变化。分析开始于D. Sperber和D. Wilson的假设,即概念和单词之间的对应关系可能是一对一的,一对多的,多对一的,或者是这些的组合,因为在心理概念和公共词汇之间存在详尽的一对一映射是相当不可信的。词语可以在不同的语境和语篇中使用,而共时符号学方法并不总是能提供完整的词义规范,特别是在分析抽象名词的意义时。正如h - j。施密德认为,具体概念的形成不同于抽象概念的形成,抽象概念的形成更为复杂,因为它可以依赖于许多不同的经验,这使得很难形成一个单一的稳定的抽象概念。在他们的实验报告中,S. J. Crutch和E. K. Warrington断言抽象概念在一个联想神经网络中表示,而具体概念有一个分类组织。这表明具体的单词更容易被充分理解,反之亦然,抽象的单词则不容易被充分理解。此外,我们对词语和世界的理解会随着时间的推移而改变,因为我们的经历和历史环境可以而且确实会改变。本文考虑了忠诚、主体性和公民身份这三个名词的共时和历时词汇语义方面的抽象概念形成问题。这些方面是根据格拉斯哥大学英语历史同义词词典第二版提供的词汇语义框架进行分析的。本文的目的是为了证明,如果将这三个名词的词汇语义特征在共时和历时上进行比较和对比,可以更充分地理解它们的意义。另一个目的是表明更好地理解名词依赖于共时和历时语境化知识。
Discourse of Loyalty, Subjecthood and Citizenship: from Medieval to Modern Practices
The article discusses historical, linguistic, and discursive aspects of the nouns loyalty, subjecthood, and citizenship. Тhe focus is on the historical lexico-semantic changes of the three nouns, which demonstrate that denotations are modified in different historical contexts. The analysis starts with D. Sperber and D. Wilson’s assumption that the correspondence between concepts and words may be one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-one, or a combination of these since it is quite implausible that there is an exhaustive one-to-one mapping between mental concepts and public words. Words can be used in different contexts and discourses, and the synchronic semasiological approach may not always provide the full specification of word meaning, especially when the meaning of abstract nouns is analyzed. As argued by H.-J. Schmid, the formation of concrete concepts is different from the formation of abstract concepts, the latter being more complex as it can depend on many different experiences, which can make it difficult to form a single stable abstract concept. In the report on their experiments, S. J. Crutch and E. K. Warrington’s assertion would be that abstract concepts are represented in an associative neural network while concrete concepts have a categorical organization. This suggests that concrete words are more likely to be understood adequately, and, vice versa, abstract words — inadequately. Moreover, our understanding of words and the world can change over time because our experiences and historical circumstances can and do change. This article considers the issue of abstract concept-formation with regard to both synchronic and diachronic lexico-semantic aspects of the nouns loyalty, subjecthood, and citizenship. These aspects are analyzed in accordance with the lexico-semantic frameworks provided by the second editionof the University of Glasgow’s Historical Thesaurus of English. The aim is to demonstrate that the meanings of the three nouns can be understood more adequately if their lexico-semantic features are compared and contrasted not only synchronically but also diachronically. Another aim is to show that a better understanding of the nouns relies on both synchronically and diachronically contextualized knowledge.