In:The Typology of Physical Qualities
Edited by Ekaterina Rakhilina, Tatiana Reznikova and Daria Ryzhova
[Typological Studies in Language 133] 2022
► pp. 117–160
Chapter 5Typology of dimensions
Published online: 25 May 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.133.05koz
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.133.05koz
Abstract
The paper focuses on the lexical typology of dimensional terms such as English long, deep, wide, etc. Compared to other semantic fields, this one is relatively well-studied; however, the present study is the first to approach it from the modern typological point of view. We propose a semantic map of dimensional terms, which outlines the possible and impossible colexification patterns in the domain. However, other regularities appear likely to exist, which cannot be captured by the model of semantic mapping. We discuss the potential restrictions on colexifications, and suggest explanations for them.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The semantic map of dimension
- 2.1Topological classification
- 2.2The list of classes
- 2.3Building a semantic map
- 3.Patterns of lexicalization: Latus
- 4.On categorization of penetrable layers
- 5.Patterns of lexicalization: Altus
- 5.1Ternary systems
- 5.2Unifying systems
- 5.2.1DH-merger
- 5.2.2HL-merger
- 6.Discussion
- 6.1General remarks
- 6.2M. Bierwisch and E. Lang: A componential analysis approach
- 6.3Anna wierzbicka: Dimensional terms in the natural semantic metalanguage
- 6.4Questions remaining
Acknowledgements Notes References
References (29)
Abaev, V. 1995. Izbrannye trudy. Tom II. Obščee i sravnitel’noe jazykoznanie [Selected Works. Volume II. General and Comparative Linguistics]. Vladikavkaz: Ir.
Bierwisch, M. & Lang, E. 1989. Dimensional Terms: Grammatical Structure and Conceptual Interpretation. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag
Brown, D., Chumakina, M. & Corbett, G. G. (eds). 2013. Canonical Morphology and Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chirikba, V. 2008. The problem of the Caucasian Sprachbund. In From Linguistic Areas to Areal Linguistics, P. Muysken (ed), 25–94. Amsterdam, Philadlphia: John Benjamins.
Dirven, R. & Taylor, J. 1988. The conceptualisation of vertical space in English: the case of ‘‘tall’’. In Topics in Cognitive Linguistics, B. Rudzka-Ostyn (ed), 207–229. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fillmore, Ch. J. 1978. On the organization of semantic information in the lexicon. In Papers from the Parasession on the Lexicon, 148–173. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Greenberg, J. H. 1966. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Universals of Language, J. H. Greenberg (ed), 73–113. Cambridge, Massachusets & London, England: MIT Press.
Haspelmath, M. 2003. The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In New Psychology of Language, vol. 2, M. Tomasello (ed), 211–242. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in cross-linguistic studies. Language 86(4): 663–687.
Jackendoff, R. & Landau, B. 1993. “What” and “where” in spatial language and spatial cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16: 217–265.
Jones, S., Murphy, M. L., Paradis, C. & Willners, C. 2012. Antonyms in English: Construals, Constructions and Canonicity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Klimov, G. (ed). 1978. Strukturnye obščnosti kavkazskix jazykov [The Structural Affinities Between the Caucasian Languages]. Moskva: Nauka.
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. & Miestamo, M. 2015. Antonyms and wordlevel negation. Paper presented at Diversity Linguistics: Retrospect and Prospect, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary anthropology, Leipzig, 2 May 2015.
Kukhto, A., Kozlov, A. & Privizentseva, M. 2016. O real’nosti semantičeskogo pol’a: lexiko-tipologičeskij podxod [On the reality of a semantic field: lexico-typological approach]. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana XII (1): 522–533.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh. The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.
Lang, E. 2001. Spatial dimension terms. In Language Typology and Language Universals. An International Handbook, M. Haspelmath, E. König, W. Oesterreicher & W. Raible (eds), 1251–1275. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Levinson, S. C. 1997. Language and cognition: The cognitive consequences of spatial description in Guugu Yimithirr. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 7(1): 98–131.
2006. The language of space in Yéli Dnye. In Grammars of Space. Explorations in Cognitive Diversity, S. C. Levinson, & D. Wilkins (eds), 157–203. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Murphy, M. L. 2003. Semantic Relations and the Lexicon: Antonymy, Synonymy, and other Paradigms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Paradis, C., Willners, C. & Jones, S. 2009. Good and bad opposites: using textual and psycholinguistic techniques to measure antonym canonicity. The Mental Lexicon 4(3): 380–429.
Pulvermüller, F. 2005. Brain Mechanisms Linking Language and Action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 6: 576–582.
Rakhilina, E. V. 2000. Kognitivnyj analiz predmentyx imen: semantika i sočetaemost’ [Cognitive Analysis of Concrete Nouns: Semantics and Combinability]. Moscow: Russkie slovari.
Talmy, L. 1983. How language structures space. In Spatial Orientation: Theory, Research and Application, H. L. Pick & L. P. Acredolo (eds), 225–282. New York: Plenum Press.
Varela, F. J., Thompson, E. & Rosch, E. 1991. The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wierzbicka, A. 2006. Shape in grammar revisited. Studies in Language 30(1): 115–177.
