METADATA


Title: How seeing is different from looking a cognitive perspective on verb-particle constructions with look and see

 

Vol. 7, 2019, pp. 7-21.

DOI: 10.46687/SILC.2019.v07.001

 

Author: Svetlana Nedelcheva

About the author: Svetlana Nedelcheva is an Associate professor of English linguistics at Konstantin Preslavsky University of Shumen, Department of English Studies. She has published two monographs Cognitive Interpretation of the English Preposition ON and Space, Time and Human Experience: A Cognitive View on English and Bulgarian Prepositions, two course books English Morphology – Traditional and Cognitive Perspective and Essential English Syntax for University Students, and research articles in the field of cognitive linguistics, contrastive linguistics, translation studies and foreign language teaching. She has specialized in a number of universities, e.g., the University of Bangor, UK (Post-Doctoral Research Program) and Georgetown University, USA (as a Fulbright researcher).

e-mail: s.nedelcheva@shu.bg

ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1614-8758

 

Citation (APA style): Nedelcheva, S. (2019). How seeing is different from looking a cognitive perspective on verb-particle constructions with look and see. Studies in Linguistics, Culture, and FLT, 7, 7-21. doi: 10.46687/SILC.2019.v07.001

 

Link: https://silc.fhn-shu.com/images/issues/2019/vol7/SILC_2019_Vol%207_007-021_15.pdf

 

Abstract: In Cognitive linguistics verb-particle (VP) constructions are treated as compositional and analyzable. The particles when combined with the verbs contribute to the overall meaning in the form of image schemas. This article compares the verbparticle constructions with look and see. It aims at analyzing the nuances of meaning of two synonymous verbs that combine with spatial particles and examines the image schemas associated with them.

When the corresponding image schemas are activated they influence the VP constructions, thus they bring forth new evidence for the embodied nature of language and thought. This study also uses the theoretical framework of Construction Grammar to focus on the different ways of processing spatial and non-spatial VP constructions.

Key words: cognitive approach, verb-particle constructions, image schemas, see, look

 

References:     

Aneva Ts. 2019. The semantic network of “see” (a corpus-based study). Studies in Linguistics, Culture and FLT, Asenevtsi, Sofia, 7: 22-35.

Cienki A. 1997. Some properties and groupings of image schemas. Verspoor M., Lee K. D. and Sweetser E. (eds). Lexical and syntactical constructions and the construction of meaning. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 3-15.

Clausner T. and Croft W. 1999. Domains and image schemas. Cognitive Linguistics, 10: 1-31.

COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs. 2012. Harper Collins Publishers, Glasgow.

Gibbs R. W. Jr. and Berg E. A. 2002. Mental imagery and embodied activity. Journal of Mental Imagery, 26: 1-30.

Gibbs R. W. Jr. and Colston H. L. 1995. The cognitive psychological reality of image schemas and their transformations. Cognitive Linguistics, 6: 347-378.

Gibbs R. W. Jr., Beitel D. A., Harrington M. and Sanders P. E. 1994. Taking a stand on the meanings of stand: Bodily experience as motivation for polysemy. Journal of Semantics, 11: 231-251.

Grady J. 1999. Heaviness and difficulty: “image content” vs. “response content” in conceptual metaphors. Talk at the 6th International Cognitive Linguistic Conference (Stockholm, July 1999).

Johnson M. 1987. The body in the mind. The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago University Press, Chicago.

Lakoff G. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Lakoff G. and Johnson M. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh. The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. Basic Books, New York.

Lakoff G. and Johnson M. 2002. Why cognitive linguistics requires embodied realism. Cognitive Linguistics, 13: 245-263.

Lakoff G. and Turner M. 1989. More than cool reason. A field guide to poetic metaphor. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Longman Phrasal Verbs Dictionary. 2000. Pearson Education Limited, Harlow.

Mandler J. M. 1992. How to build a baby: II. Conceptual primitives. Psychological Review, 99: 587-604.

Turner M. 1991. Reading minds. The study of English in the age of cognitive sciences. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Tyler A. and Evans V. (2003). The semantics of English prepositions: spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Tyler A. and Evans V. 2004. Rethinking English ‘prepositions of movement’. Adpositions of movement. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 247-270.

Viberg A. 1984. The verbs of perception: a typological study. Butterworth B., Comrie B. and Dahl Ö. (eds). Explanations for language universals. Mouton, Berlin, pp. 123-162.