...
首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Psychology >Elevation as a Grammatical and Semantic Category of Demonstratives
【24h】

Elevation as a Grammatical and Semantic Category of Demonstratives

机译:提升作为示范的语法和语义类别

获取原文
           

摘要

In this paper I study semantic and pragmatic properties of elevational demonstratives by means of a typological investigation of 50 languages with elevational demonstratives from all across the globe. The four basic verticality values expressed by elevational demonstratives are UP, DOWN, LEVEL, and ACROSS. They can be ordered along the elevational hierarchy (UP/DOWN LEVEL/ACROSS), which reflects cross-linguistic tendencies in the expression of these values by demonstratives. Elevational values are frequently co-expressed with distance-based meanings of demonstratives, and it is almost always distal demonstratives that express elevation, whereas medial or proximal demonstratives can lack elevational distinctions. This means that elevational demonstratives largely refer to areas outside the peripersonal sphere in a similar way as simple distal demonstratives. In the proximal domain, fine grained semantic distinctions such as those encoded by elevational demonstratives are superfluous since this domain is accessible to the interlocutors who in the default case of a normal conversation are located in close proximity to each other. I then discuss metaphorical extensions of elevational demonstratives to non-spatial uses such as temporal and social deixis. There are a few languages in which elevational demonstratives with the meaning UP express the temporal meaning future, whereas the DOWN demonstratives encode past. This finding is particularly interesting in view of the widely-debated use of Mandarin Chinese spatial terms ‘up’ for past events and ‘down’ for future events, which show the opposite metaphorical extension. I finally examine areal tendencies and potential correlations between elevational demonstratives and the geographical location of speech communities in mountainous areas such as the Himalayas, the Papuan Highlands and the Caucasus. I tentatively conclude that languages spoken in similar topographic environments do not tend to have similar systems of elevational demonstratives if they belong to different language families.
机译:在本文中,我通过从全球各地的所有语言的类型研究了50种语言的类型学研究,研究了高度证据的语义和务实的性质。由高地证明表达的四个基本垂直度值升高,下降,水平和跨越。它们可以沿着高度层次结构(上/下和GT;级别/跨越)订购,这反映了通过证明表达这些价值观的跨语言倾向。高度值经常与证明的距离为基础的含义共同表达,几乎总是表达升级的远端证明,而中间或近端证明缺乏高度的区别。这意味着高度证明在很大程度上以与简单的远端演示类似的方式指的是围栏形式球体之外的区域。在近端域中,诸如由仰视演示编码的细粒的语义区别是多余的,因为该域是可以在违规情况下的默认情况下位于彼此附近的内部域。然后,我讨论向非空间用途(如颞和社交Deixis)的隐喻扩展。有几种语言,其初始证明具有含义的表现出来的时间意义的未来,而令人沮丧的演示编码过去。这一发现鉴于普通话的普通话的普通话的普通话的空间术语和“向下”来说,这一发现鉴于未来的事件的广泛争辩使用,这表现出相反的隐喻延伸。我终于审查了山区地区的山区地区的地区倾向和言论社区的地理位置潜在的相关性,如喜马拉雅山,屈辱人口高地和高加索人。我暂时得出结论,如果他们属于不同的语言家庭,类似地形环境中所说的语言不会倾向于具有类似的高地证明系统。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号