Polysemy in the semantic field of movement in the english language

Polysemy in the semantic field of movement in the english language

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
(Martín 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 ones 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 ones 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 ones 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 ones 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

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 Geckeler´s (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 Semántica
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.

Martín
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
. Tübingen:
Max Niemeyer: 226-236.

—. 1985a. “La  semántica
sintagmática del adjetivo. Parámetros para la organización
de un lexicón inglés/ español de valencias adjetivales”. Actas
del II Congreso Nacional de la Asociación Española de
Lingüística Aplicada
. Madrid: Sociedad General Española
de Librería: 329-340.

—. 1985b. “Bases metodológicas
para un estudio contrastivo del léxico derivado”. Revista
Española de Lingüística Aplicada
. 1: 37-54.

—. 1987a. “Classematics in a
Functional-lexematic Grammar of English”. Actas del X Congreso de la
Asociación Española 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. “Léxico y sintaxis en
la gramática funcional de S. C. Dik”. Cuadernos de
Investigación Filológica
. Logroño: 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

Добавить комментарий

Ваш адрес email не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *