Miscelбnea: A Journal of English and American Studies 21 (2000):
205-224.
Polysemy in the semantic field of movement in the english language
‘
Introduction
One of the long-established misconceptions about the lexicon is that it
is neatly and rigidly divided into semantically related sets of words.
In contrast, we claim that word meanings do not have clear boundaries.1
In this paper we will give proof of the fuzziness of meaning through an
analysis of the semantic field of MOVEMENT in the English language. We
will show that many MOVEMENT verbs belong not only to several subdomains
within the field of MOVEMENT, but also to various semantic domains
through metaphorical extension.
Before dealing with the double or even triple membership of MOVEMENT
verbs, let us first present the model on which our description of the
lexicon is based, the Functional-Lexematic Model (Martнn Mingorance,
1984, 1985a,b; 1987a,b,c; 1990a,b).
1. The Functional-Lexematic Model
The FLM integrates Coseriu’s Lexematics (1977), Dik’s Functional Grammar
(1997a) and some fundamental principles of cognitive linguistics.
Following Faber and Mairal (1998: 4-5), the two main objectives of this
model are, on the one hand, the construction of the linguistic
architecture of the lexicon of a language, and on the other hand, the
representation of knowledge based on the linguistic coding of dictionary
entries.
The FLM establishes three axes of analysis: the paradigmatic,
syntagmatic and cognitive axes. The elaboration of the paradigmatic axis
entails the structuring of the lexicon in semantic domains —each
corresponding to a basic area of meaning,2 and the organization of
lexical domains into hierarchically constructed subdomains elaborated on
the basis of shared meaning components A subdomain is “a subdivision of
semantic space derived from the factorisation of the meaning definition
of its members”3 (Faber and Mairal 1998: 6). Word definitions are built
according to Dik’s method of Stepwise Lexical Decomposition. This means
that the definition structure of each lexeme consists of the nuclear
word —the archilexeme— and a series of semantic features which mark its
distance from the preceding members of the subdomain.
Following Faber and Mairal (1999), the domain of MOVEMENT is organised
into four subdomains. The first subdomain describes generic movement,
while the other subdomains subsume lexemes which denote movement in a
number of contexts: liquid, atmosphere and land. Cutting across this
major configuration of the domain, the parameters of manner and
direction introduce further divisions within each subdomain.4 For
instance, these parameters traverse the following subdomains within the
subdomain lexicalizing generic movement:
1. Direction:
To move towards a place/person/thing
To move back
To move up
To move down
2. Manner:
To move quickly
To move slowly
To move smoothly
To move in a circular manner
As an example of a subdomain structured paradigmatically, we have
selected the subdomain To move down:
fall: to move down from a high position/the sky/a tree.
plunge: to fall suddenly a long way from a high position.
plummet: to fall very quickly from a high position.
come down: to fall (rain/snow) heavily.
descend: to move down a slope/stairs (fml).
The verbs indented to the right (plunge, plummet, come down) are defined
in terms of the verb immediate above them (fall), which thus becomes
their definiens. They are basically differentiated from one another in
terms of manner. The other archilexeme of this subdomain is descend.
The construction of the syntagmatic axis implies the analysis of the
complementation patterns of each lexeme using predicate frames as
integrated formulae.
The following types of information are captured in predicate frames:
(i) the form of the predicate
(ii) the syntactic category to which it belongs
(iii) its quantitative valency, i.e. the number of arguments that the
predicate requires
(iv) its qualitative valency, i.e. the semantic functions of the
arguments and the pertinent selection restrictions
(v) the meaning definition
Predicate frames describe a state of affairs and specify the
relationship between the predicate arguments (represented by the
variable x). Each argument is characterized by a selection restriction
—described in terms of binary semantic features— and fulfills a semantic
function (Agent, Experiencer, Goal, Recipient, etc.).
Consider the predicate frame of the verb bow:
[ (x1: prototyp. human)Ag (x2: prototyp. part of the body)Go ]Action
DEF = to bend your head and upper body as a greeting or as a sign of
respect.
This frame describes an Action and specifies the relationship between a
human argument, performing the function of Agent, and an argument
fulfilling the function of Goal and semantically marked as part of the
body (head).
The elaboration of the cognitive axis entails the formulation of the
predicate conceptual schemata, which are cognitive constructs encoding
semantic, syntactic and pragmatic information and representing our
knowledge about the lexical unit in question. Conceptual schemata are
codified at three levels: lexeme, subdomain and domain.
2. Polysemy of MOVEMENT verbs
Many MOVEMENT verbs fall within several subdomains. This double/multiple
membership may be accounted for on the following grounds:
a) The meaning component focalised
b) The genus of the lexeme
c) The metaphorical extension of the verb
Let us examine each of these factors.
2.1. Focalization of a meaning component
We have used Dik’s (1997a) pragmatic functions of Focus and Topic to
account for some instances of polysemy in the semantic field of
MOVEMENT. These functions specify the information status of the
constituents of the predicate within the communicative setting in which
they occur, and they are assigned to the constituents after the
assigning of semantic and syntactic functions. The Topic is the entity
about which the predication predicates something in the setting in
question, whereas the Focus refers to the most relevant information in
the setting:
(1) As for Mary (Focus), I don’t care for her (Topic).
The application of such functions to the paradigmatic description of the
lexicon is based on the organization of the lexicon at three levels:
domain, subdomain and lexeme. In consonance with this idea, we may
formulate various levels of focalization:
Level of focalization 1: Domain
Level of focalization 2: Subdomain
Levels of focalization 3, 4, … : Lexeme
A domain stands for the level of focalization number 1. It performs the
function of Focus in that it represents one of the basic areas of
meaning.
A subdomain represents the level of focalization number 2 in that it
focuses on an area of meaning within a domain.
The following levels of focalization are formulated at lexeme-level.
This means that the lexemes of a subdomain represent different levels of
focalization based on the meaning hierarchies within the subdomain.
What is most relevant is that what is Focus on a level becomes Topic on
the level below. Then a domain, which performs the function of Focus on
the level of focalization number 1, becomes topic at subdomain-level in
that it presents the given information, since all the subdomains of
MOVEMENT lexicalize the concept of movement. Therefore, the archilexeme
of the lexical field, move, which performs the function of Focus at
domain-level in that it codifies the nuclear meaning of the domain,
becomes Topic at subdomain-level, since it is the definiens of the
archilexeme of each subdomain.
Similarly, a subdomain, which acts as Focus on the level of focalization
number 2, becomes Topic at lexeme-level, since all the lexemes in the
subdomain share the nuclear information formalised by the subdomain.
Then, as we move down in the semantic hierarchy which characterizes the
internal structure of each subdomain, what is Focus in the meaning
definition of the archilexeme (level of focalization number 3) becomes
Topic in the meaning definition of its hyponyms (level of focalization
number 4). For example, if we take the subdomain analysed above, To move
down, the definiens “to move down” acts as Focus in the definition of
fall (the archilexeme), and as Topic in the definition of plunge,
plummet and come down, the function of Focus being performed by the
semantic parameters of manner and place in that they individuate the
members of the subdomain.
Let us now consider the functions of Topic and Focus in the case of
lexemes belonging to several subdomains. Here the function of Focus
applies to a particular meaning component, which thus becomes especially
relevant. The verbs whizz and zoom involve quick movement, thus
belonging to the subdomain To move quickly. But they can also denote
movement through the air:
(2) The bullets whizzed past.
Then, these verbs belong to the subdomain To move quickly or To move
through the air depending on which parameter is highlighted, whether
manner or medium.
Similarly, the verbs circle and whirl refer to circular movement in the
air. If the manner component is focalized, then the verbs fall in the
subdomain To move in a circular manner. If the focus is on the medium,
then the verbs belong to the subdomain To move through the air.
The table below shows the double membership of these verbs.
VERB
FOCUS
DIMENSION
MEANING
whizz
zoom
circle
whirl
Manner
To move quickly
To move in a circular manner
To move (an engine/device) very quickly with a loud whistling noise
To move (a vehicle/an aircraft) very quickly with a loud buzzing/humming
noise
To move in a circular manner in the air
To turn round in the air very quickly
whizz
zoom
circle
whirl
Medium
To move through the air
To move very quickly through the air with a loud whistling noise
To move very quickly through the air with a loud noise
To fly around in circles
To move very quickly in a circular manner through the air
2.2. Genus of the lexeme
Many verbs describe generic movement. Verb membership is then determined
by the semantic parameter of medium or direction, or by the parameter
specifying the nature of the subject/object.
The table below presents the verbs whose membership is influenced by the
medium parameter.
VERB
MEDIUM
DIMENSION
MEANING
dart
Air
Land
To move through the air
To move quickly using one’s feet
To fly suddenly and quickly (insects)
To run suddenly
dive
plunge
Air
To move down through air
To move down through air
To move downwards
To move down through air quickly and steeply
To move down through air suddenly a long way
To fall suddenly a long way from a high position
dive
plunge
Water
To move in/down below the surface of a liquid
To cause sb/sth to move in/down below the surface of a liquid
To move head-first down into water
To cause sth to move down into water quickly and violently
sink
Air
Water/
Liquid/
Substance
To move down through air
To move in/down below the surface of a liquid
To move down through air
To move down below the surface of a liquid/ soft substance
glide
Water
Air
Land
To move over liquid
To move through the air
To move smoothly
To move (boat) quietly and smoothly across water
To fly quietly
To move quietly and smoothly in an effortless way
The verb dart describes sudden movement in air and on land:
(3) He darted across the room.
(4) Bees were darting from one flower to another.
The verbs dive, plunge and sink designate downward movement in air and
water:
(5) She plunged into the swimming-pool.
(6) The falcon plunged towards its prey.
Sink, as the general term, denotes movement in a wider variety of
contexts:
(7) Helen sank into water/mud/an armchair.
However, we postulate that the verbs dart, dive and sink prototypically
describe movement in a given medium: dart is prototypically associated
with air, and dive and sink with water. Our claim is supported by the
fact that the medium parameter need not be syntactically present:
(8) She dived from the bridge and rescued the drowning child.
(9) The aircraft-carrier, hit by a torpedo, sank at once.
Further, as we will show below, sink has a metaphorical projection onto
FEELING, which codifies the metaphor Emotion = Liquid (Goatly 1997):
(10) When he crashed, his heart sank at the thought that he might die.
Finally, glide refers to quiet/smooth movement in a wide range of
contexts (water, air, land):
(11) The cruiser glided across the sea.
(12) An owl glided over the fields.
(13) The snake glided towards its prey.
As mentioned above, the domain of MOVEMENT is marked by the semantic
parameter of direction, which can determine verb membership. The lexemes
jump, vault, leap, hop and spring are subsumed under various subdomains
depending on whether they denote forward or upward/downward movement
over an obstacle:
VERB
DIRECTION
DIMENSION
MEANING
Jump
Vault
Leap
Hop
Spring
Forwards
To move forwards quickly/suddenly
To move forwards quickly using your legs
To jump onto sth with your hands on it
To jump energetically a long distance
To jump on one foot (sb)/with both feet (birds/small animals)
To jump suddenly
Jump
Vault
Leap
Over sth
To move across/over/
through
To move over sth quickly using your legs
To jump over sth with your hands on it
To jump over sth energetically
Jump
Spring
Hop
Up/Down
To move up/down using one’s feet
To move up/down quickly using one’s feet
To jump suddenly
To jump on one leg
(14) Robert jumped one metre/over the fence/out of the shadow.
(15) Carol sprang at him/to her feet.
Finally, as shown below, verb membership can also be determined by the
parameter describing the nature of the subject or object.
ARGUMENT
SEMANTIC SCOPE
VERB
DIMENSION
MEANING
Human/
Object
shake
tremble
quiver
To move from side to side/back and forth/up and down repeatedly
To move quickly from side to side/ up and down
To shake un-controllably/ slightly
To shake slightly
Part of the body
shake
tremble
quiver
To move one’s body
To move one’s body quickly from side to side/up and down
To shake un-controllably/slightly
To shake slightly
Subject
Human
Boat
sail
To move towards a place
To move over liquid
To travel to a place by ship
To move (boat) over the sea
Object
rise
fall
To move upwards
To move downwards
To move upwards through air
To move down from a high position/the sky/a tree
Vehicle/
aircraft
plunge
plummet
To move in/downwards below the surface of a liquid
To move downwards through air
To move (vehicle) below the surface of water
To move down through air very quickly
Human
rise
fall
plunge
plummet
To move one’s body by raising it
To move to the ground
To stand up (fml)
To move to the ground from force of weight / loss of balance
To fall suddenly a long way from a high position
To fall very quickly from a high position
Object
Object
swing
lift
raise
bend
To move from side to side/back and forth/up and down repeatedly
To cause stb/sth to move up
To move in a different direction
To move regularly from side to side/back and forth
To cause sb/sth to move up
To lift sth
To turn in a curve/angle
Part of the body
swing
lift
raise
bend
To move a part of one’s body
To move regularly from side to side/back and forth
To move a part of one’s body upwards (esp. head/arm/leg/foot)
To move a part of one’s body upwards
To move a part of one’s body downwards
The verbs shake, tremble and quiver may be found with a subject argument
semantically characterized as human or as concrete. But they can also
take an object denoting a part of the body via the metaphor Body part =
Human (Goatly 1997):
(16) Mark was so nervous that his knees were shaking.
Sail typically occurs with a subject semantically characterized as boat.
Its use with a human agent results from a metonymical process (content
for receptacle):
(17) They sailed the Mediterranean.
Rise designates upward movement of both human and concrete entities, but
the prototypical argument is human, as shown in the restricted use of
rise with human subjects when it describes body movement:
(18) She rose to greet me.
Fall, plunge and plummet, which denote downward movement, may also occur
with human and concrete entities:
(19) He fell off the horse.
(20) The vase fell from her hand.
Lastly, the verbs swing, lift, raise and bend take an object
semantically marked as object or part of the body:
(21) She lifted her head when I came in.
(22) The suitcase is too heavy for him to lift.
2.3. Metaphorical extension of the lexemes
The verbs creep and escape fall within various subdomains because of
their metaphorical extension.
VERB
SUBDOMAIN
MEANING
Creep
To move in a particular way
To move quietly and slowly in order to get to a place without being
noticed
To move slowly
To move (light/shadow/mist) very slowly, so that you hardly notice it
(lit.)
Escape
To move off/away from a place/thing/person
To leave a place after doing sth illegal
To move out of a place
To move (gas/liquid) out of an object/a container
Creep typically describes a person’s slow movement towards a place and
thus falls primarily within the subdomain To move in a particular way,
which refers to movement on land. Yet it also belongs to the subdomain
To move slowly through a process of personification
(Object/Substance=Human), whereby a concrete entity semantically marked
as “light/ shadow/ mist” is seen as a human entity. The meaning
components speed —“slowly”— and secrecy —“without/hardly being noticed”—
are basic to the definition of both verbs.
On the other hand, escape falls in the subdomains To move off/away from
a place/ thing/ person and To move out of a place. This double
membership obtains from the metaphorization of liquid as a human entity:
(23) Gas is escaping from this hole.
3. Interfield membership of MOVEMENT verbs
We have so far analysed the intrafield membership of a set of MOVEMENT
verbs, i.e. their grouping under several subdomains within the semantic
domain of MOVEMENT. We will now focus on the verbs’ interfield
membership, i.e. their projection onto other semantic fields.
The relations of a semantic domain with others codify metaphorical
processes, thus showing that lexical structure is governed by conceptual
structure., or, in Sweetser’s words (1990:25), “much of meaning is
grounded in speakers’ understanding of the world”. Indeed, each language
is equivalent to a particular conceptual system by means of which we
interpret our environment, and this conceptual organization is reflected
in the lexicon. This means that metaphor is not only a cognitive but
also a linguistic phenomenon. Metaphorical processes are encoded in the
lexicon and must thus be integrated in a lexical model.
Therefore, the codification of metaphorical processes in the lexicon not
only tells us a great deal about how we understand and construct reality
but also reflects the internal organization of the lexicon.
Below we sketch the metaphors codified in the domain of MOVEMENT, which
establish connections with the semantic fields of COGNITION, SPEECH,
CHANGE, FEELING and ACTION.
MET. PROCESS
TYPE METAPHOR
METAPHOR
LEX. EXPRESSION
TARGET DOMAIN
Reification
Concretization
Idea = Object
swing, revolve, stuff
cram, shove
COGNITION
Words = Object
raise, drop, pass
SPEECH
Ideas/Words = Cloth
spin, weave
SPEECH
Place/Space
Activity = Place
rush, leave, quit abandon
ACTION
Orientational
Health = Up
fall, sink
CHANGE
Pitch = Up
rise, raise, sink, lower drop
CHANGE
More = Up
jump, rise, raise, fall sink, plunge, plummet come down, lower drop,
sink
CHANGE
Importance/Status = Up
rise, climb, come down
CHANGE
Happy = Up
fall, sink, lift
FEELING
Activity/Process = Movement forward
push, prod
ACTION
Personification
Emotion = Sense expression
shake, tremble, shiver shudder, quiver
FEELING
Idea = Human
slip, escape
COGNITION
Body part = Human
fall, sink
FEELING
Following Goatly (1997), the metaphorization of abstract entities can
obtain through a process of reification or personification. Reifying
metaphors fall into three categories:
(i) Concretizing metaphors, which codify the representation of abstract
entities as objects or cloth/clothes (first row).
(ii) Orientational metaphors, i.e. equations linked to the notion of
place/space (second row).
(iii) Metaphors related to the notion of orientation. Abstract concepts
such as health, pitch, happiness, amount and rank are seen as entities
on a vertical axis (up/down)5.
The last set of equations codify the personification of abstract
entities.
Note that some verbs codify several metaphors, e.g. rise, fall, sink,
lower. In this regard, we may affirm that the intrafield membership
correlates with the interfield double membership.
MOVEMENT AND CHANGE
The projection of MOVEMENT onto CHANGE touches upon verbs denoting an
increase or decrease in amount or degree, thus linking MOVEMENT to
CHANGE, since the semantic parameters of amount and degree traverse the
domain of CHANGE. The connection between both semantic fields obtains
from a set of orientational metaphors (cf. above):
(24) He has risen to the position of manager.
(25) Share prices have plunged.
MOVEMENT AND FEELING
MOVEMENT verbs also extend to FEELING. This extension results from the
codification of several metaphorical processes:
– the metaphorical representation of a feeling (happiness) on an up/down
scale:
(26) Whenever I feel down, Martha lifts my spirits.
(27) Peter’s face fell when I broke the news to him.
– the personification of body parts. This metaphor interacts with the
previous one (cf. example above).
– the metaphorical structuring of emotions as sense expressions. The
verbs shake, tremble,shiver, shudder and quiver describe body movement
as expression of an internal emotional state (anxiety, fear, disgust).
This metaphorical process can be explained by the fact that emotions
have corresponding physical effects on the experiencer, and these
effects have come to represent the emotion that caused them:
(28) He trembled like a leaf at the sight of the tiger.
MOVEMENT AND COGNITION
The metaphorical projection of MOVEMENT into COGNITION results from a
process of reification or personification of abstract entities. On the
one hand, ideas can be metaphorized as objects moving in/into (revolve,
penetrate) or out of somebody’s mind (slip, escape):6
(29) The importance of her decision did not penetrate at first.
(30) His surname has slipped my mind.
(31) There is a major point which seems to have escaped you.
To use Halliday’s terminology (1994:117), the last examples are
instances of the please-type metaphorical structuring of mental
processes. Mental processes can be represented either as like-types or
please-types. This means that I like X is equivalent to X pleases me.
Then, It has slipped my mind/It has escaped me has the same meaning as I
have forgotten it.
Ideas can also be seen as objects which are pushed into someone’s mind:
(32) He stuffed my head full of strange ideas.
Following Reddy (1993), the verbs stuff, cram and shove lexicalize an
aspect of the conduit metaphor, which explains the conceptualization of
communication as the transfer of thoughts bodily from one person to
another.
MOVEMENT AND SPEECH
The verbs raise, drop, pass, spin and weave show the extension of
MOVEMENT to SPEECH. Ideas can be communicated like objects being moved:
raise (a subject, an objection), drop7 (a hint, remark), pass (a
sentence, remark):
(33) You shouldn’t drop hints about promotion to your boss.
Words can also be metaphorically seen as strands of thread that the
speaker puts together to produce a coherent message:
(34) The old sea captain sat by the fire spinning yawns.
MOVEMENT AND ACTION
The connection of MOVEMENT with ACTION is established though the
metaphorization of activities as places. Activities can be described as
if they were linear motion. It is then possible to move into (rush) or
away from an activity (leave, quit, abandon):
(35) They abandoned the game because of the rain.
On the other hand, causing an activity is causing movement forward:
(36) She pushed me into taking the job.
Conclusion
The semantic analysis of the field of MOVEMENT has shown that words are
embedded in a set of rich semantic relations. The focalization of a
meaning component and the genus of the lexeme account for the extension
of a few MOVEMENT verbs to other subdomains within the domain
(intrafield extensions). On the other hand, the metaphorical processes
encoded in the semantic domain of MOVEMENT account for the projection of
many verbs onto other semantic fields (interfield extensions), thus
giving proof of the linguistic significance of metaphor.a
NOTES
1 This assumption is found in some semantic theories (i.e. prototype
semantics).
2 By working upwards from the definitional structure of primary lexemes,
Faber and Mairal (1997) have identified eleven semantic domains
corresponding to basic conceptual categories: EXISTENCE, MOVEMENT,
POSITION, CHANGE, PERCEPTION, FEELING, COGNITION, POSSESSION, SPEECH,
SOUND, and GENERAL ACTION.
3 The concept of subdomain is based on Geckelerґs (1971) concept of
lexical dimension.
4 See appendix for the configuration of the paradigmatic axis of the
semantic domain of MOVEMENT.
5 Lakoff and Johnson’s Experiential Hypothesis (1980: 267-268)
postulates that most abstract concepts arise from our preconceptual
bodily experiences as infants —like the experience of up and down— by
metaphorical projection.
6 Note the conceptualization of the mind as a place. As Romelhart
(1993:89) points out: “We use a spatial world to talk about the mind”.
7 This verb codifies the conduit metaphor (cf. above).
8 The verbs in brackets are an example of the type of verbs falling in
each subdomain.
Appendix: Paradigmatic description of the semantic domain of MOVEMENT8
1. MOVEMENT
1.1. General (move)
1.1.1. To move in a particular way
1.1.1.1. To move quickly (race, hurry)
1.1.1.1a. To cause sb/sth to move quickly (race, hurry)
1.1.1.2. To move slowly (slow, trundle)
1.1.1.2a. To cause sth to move slowly (slow, trundle)
1.1.1.3. To move smoothly (glide, slide)
1.1.1.4. To move forwards quickly/suddenly (jump, leap)
1.1.1.5. To move in a circular manner (curl, circle)
1.1.1.5a. To cause sth to move in a circular manner (turn, spin)
1.1.1.6. To move from side to side/back and forth/up and down repeatedly
(swing, rock)
1.1.1.6a. To cause sb/sth to move from side to side/back and forth/up
and down repeatedly (swing, rock)
1.1.2. To move off/away from a place/thing/person (leave, go)
1.1.3. To move towards a place/person (advance, go)
1.1.4. To move backwards (back, reverse)
1.1.4a. To cause sth to move backwards (back, reverse)
1.1.5. To move upwards (rise, climb)
1.1.5a. To cause sb/sth to move upwards (lift, raise)
1.1.6. To move downwards (fall, descend)
1.1.6a. To cause sth to move downwards (lower, drop)
1.1.7. To move upside down (turn over, overturn)
1.1.7a. To cause sb/sth to move upside down (turn over, overturn)
1.1.8. To move across/over/through (pass, cross)
1.1.9. To move in a different direction (change, turn)
1.1.10. To move in relation to sb/sth
1.1.10.1. To move together (accompany)
1.1.10.1a. To cause sb/sth to go with you (take, bring)
1.1.10.1.1. To move with sb, going before/after (lead, follow)
1.1.10.2. To move round in order to be on all sides of (gather round,
surround)
1.1.10.3. To move out in all directions (spread)
1.1.10.3a. To cause sth to move out in all directions (spread)
1.1.10.4. To move into a place (enter)
1.1.10.4a. To cause sb/sth to move into a place/sth (pierce, push)
1.1.10.4.1. To move into a building by force (break in)
1.1.10.5. To move out of a place (emerge)
1.1.10.6. To move to a different place/position (shift, relocate)
1.1.10.6a. To cause sb/sth to move to a different place/position (shift,
relocate)
1.1.10.6.1. To move sb/sth to a different place/position by holding and
drawing them along, esp. with force (pull)
1.1.10.6.2. To move sb/sth to a different place/position by
holding/walking behind them and exerting force on them, esp. with one’s
hands (push)
1.1.11. To not move any more (stop)
1.1.11a. To cause sb/sth to not move any more (stop)
1.2. Liquid
1.2.1. To move as liquid in a particular way (flow)
1.2.1.1. To move slowly in small quantities (drip)
1.2.1.2. To move quickly in large quantities (pour)
1.2.1.3. To move out through an opening (squirt)
1.2.1.3a. To cause a liquid to move out through an opening (squirt)
1.2.2. To move in/downwards below the surface of a liquid (sink)
1.2.2.a. To cause sb/sth to move in/downwards below the surface of a
liquid (sink)
1.2.3. To move over liquid (sail)
1.3. Atmosphere
1.3.1. To move through the air (fly)
1.3.2. To move upwards (rise)
1.3.3. To move downwards (descend)
1.4. Land
1.4.1. To move in a particular way (skulk, creep)
1.4.1.1. To move using one’s feet (walk)
1.4.1.1.1. To move quickly using one’s feet (run)
1.4.1.1.2. To move up and down using one’s feet (jump)
1.4.2. To move downwards to the ground (fall)
1.4.3. To move one’s body (writhe, squirm)
1.4.3.1. To move one’s body by raising it (stand up)
1.4.3.2. To move one’s body by lowering it (sit)
1.4.3.3. To move a part of one’s body (raise, bend, lick)
WORKS CITED
Coseriu, Eugenio. 1977. Principios de Semбntica Estructural. Madrid:
Gredos.
Dik, Simon C. 1997. Functional Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
Faber, Pamela and Ricardo Mairal. 1997. “The Paradigmatic and the
Syntagmatic Structure of the Semantic Field of EXISTENCE in the
Elaboration of a Semantic Macronet”. In Studies in Language 21 (1)
(Amsterdam: John Benjamins): 119-154.
—. 1998. “Towards a Semantic Syntax”. Revista Canaria de Estudios
Ingleses: 37-64.
—. 1999. Constructing an English Lexicon for Verbs. Berlin: Mouton.
Geckeler, Horst. 1971. Strukturelle Semantik und Wortfeldtheorie.
Munich: Fink.
Goatly, Andrew. 1997. The Language of Metaphors. London: Routledge.
Halliday, Mark. A. K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar.
London: Edward Arnold.
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Martнn Mingorance, Leocadio. 1984. “Lexical Fields and Stepwise Lexical
Decomposition in a Contrastive English-Spanish Verb Valency Dictionary”.
In Hartman, R. R. K. (ed.). LEXeter ’83 Proceedings. Papers from the
International Conference on Lexicography at Exeter. Tьbingen: Max
Niemeyer: 226-236.
—. 1985a. “La semбntica sintagmбtica del adjetivo. Parбmetros para la
organizaciуn de un lexicуn inglйs/ espaсol de valencias adjetivales”.
Actas del II Congreso Nacional de la Asociaciуn Espaсola de Lingьнstica
Aplicada. Madrid: Sociedad General Espaсola de Librerнa: 329-340.
—. 1985b. “Bases metodolуgicas para un estudio contrastivo del lйxico
derivado”. Revista Espaсola de Lingьнstica Aplicada. 1: 37-54.
—. 1987a. “Classematics in a Functional-lexematic Grammar of English”.
Actas del X Congreso de la Asociaciуn Espaсola de Estudios
Anglo-Norteamericanos. Zaragoza: Publicaciones de la Universidad:
377-382.
—. 1987b. “Semes, Semantics, Classemes, and Dimensions: the
Lexicological and Lexicographic Perspectives”. Proceedings of the XIVth
International Congress of Linguists. Berlin: 10-15.
—. 1987c. “Pragmatic Features in the Lexicon of a Functional Grammar”.
Proceedings of the International Pragmatics Conference. Antwerp: 17-22.
—. 1990a. “Functional Grammar and Lexematics in Lexicography”. In
Tomaszczyk, J. and B. Lewandoska-Tomaszczy. (eds.). Meaning and
Lexicography, Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 227-253.
—. 1990b. “Lйxico y sintaxis en la gramбtica funcional de S. C. Dik”.
Cuadernos de Investigaciуn Filolуgica. Logroсo: CUL.
Ortony, A. (ed.). Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.
Reddy, Mark J. 1993. “The Conduit Metaphor”. In Ortony, A. (ed.):
285-324.
Romelhart, David E. 1993. “Some Problems with the Notion of Literal
Meanings”. In Ortony, A. (ed.).
Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and
Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.
a
Нашли опечатку? Выделите и нажмите CTRL+Enter
