Loading...

English versus Slavic

Lexicon in a Morphological and Semantic Perspective

by Ewa Konieczna (Volume editor) Robert Kiełtyka (Volume editor)
Edited Collection 200 Pages

Summary

This book offers a collection of papers pertaining to the most thought-provoking problems in the areas of theoretical and contrastive linguistics. The contributions are devoted to current developments in morphological and semantic theorizing. The contrastive analyses conducted by the authors examine the structure of English and selected Slavic languages.

Table Of Content

  • Cover
  • Title
  • Copyright
  • About the author
  • About the book
  • This eBook can be cited
  • Table of Contents
  • Introduction (Robert Kiełtyka / Ewa Konieczna)
  • 1. Contrastive studies in retrospect
  • 2. Outline of the volume
  • References
  • The Semantics and Morphology of Identity Enhancement in the Lexicons of Bulgarian and English (Alexandra Bagasheva)
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Theoretical framework, data and methodology
  • 2.1. Basic notions and framework
  • 2.2. Data
  • 3. The scope and nature of identity enhancement within intensification
  • 4. Prototypicality and reduplication
  • 5. Identity specification and the elative compound construction
  • 6. Retrospectus and prospectus
  • References
  • Dictionaries and corpora
  • Polish versus English Metonymy-based Synonyms of Prostitute (Bożena Duda)
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Idealised cognitive model and metonymy
  • 3. Metonymy-based synonyms of prostitute
  • 4. Conclusions
  • References
  • A Contrastive Analysis of Yiddish Words in English and Slavic Languages: The Female-related Vocabulary (Anna Dziama)
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Overview of the literature
  • 3. Ways-of-use of the female-specific lexical units
  • 4. Conclusions
  • References
  • Dictionaries
  • Internet Sources
  • Lexico-semantic Analysis of the Nouns Denoting Respect in English and Ukrainian (Myroslava Fabian)
  • 1. Theoretical background
  • 2. Methodology
  • 3. Findings and discussion
  • 3.1 Lexico-semantic peculiarities
  • 3.2. Structural peculiarities of the nouns denoting respect
  • 3.3. Nationally specific characteristics of the nouns denoting respect due to extra–lingual factors
  • 3.4. Diversity of the words’ semantics
  • 4. Conclusions
  • References
  • Conceptualization and Lexicalization Paterns in Croatian and English: Morphosemantic Fields Related to the Concept of Sight (Matea Filko and Ida Raffaelli)
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Some basic features of the model of morphosemantic patterns
  • 3. The MS field of the Croatian noun vid ‘sight’
  • 3.1 Verbs in the MS field of the noun vid ‘sight’
  • 3.2. Adjectives in the MS field of the noun vid ‘sight’
  • 4. The MS fields of the English noun sight and verb see
  • 4.1. MS field of the noun sight
  • 4.2. MS field of the verb see
  • 5. Concluding remarks
  • References
  • Birdsemy in English and Polish Idiomatic and Proverbial Expressions from the Perspective of Language and Culture (Małgorzata Górecka-Smolińska)
  • Introductory word
  • Phraseological developments of bird, hen and dove
  • Concluding remarks
  • References
  • Dictionaries
  • Language of Love: On Zoosemy and Terms of Endearment in English, Russian and Polish (Agnieszka Grząśko)
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Definition and division of endearments
  • 3. Methodological contour
  • 4. The analysis of selected endearments
  • CONY
  • LADYBIRD
  • SPARROW
  • MOUSE
  • LAMB
  • KITTEN
  • 5. Summary
  • References
  • Dictionaries and corpora
  • On the Complexity of Zoosemic Transfers in English and Polish (Robert Kiełtyka)
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. The morphology-semantics interface in zoosemy
  • 3. Zoosemy: The case of the metaphor-metonymy interface
  • 4. The derivation snout > to snout
  • 4.1 In search of partial conclusions
  • 5. The derivation pysk > pyskować
  • 5.1 In search of partial conclusions
  • 6. Concluding remarks
  • References
  • Dictionaries and corpora
  • Extensions of Spatial Relations to Non-physical Domains: English Particle on and Polish Prefix na- in Composite Verbs (Ewa Konieczna)
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Theoretical framework
  • 3. Non-spatial senses of the particle on
  • 3.1. Proto-scene for on
  • 3.2. Support Cluster5
  • 3.3. Control
  • 3.4. Contact Cluster
  • 3.5. Visibility Cluster
  • 4. Non spatial senses of the prefix na-
  • 4.1. Contact Cluster
  • 4.2. Accumulation Sense
  • 5. Conclusion
  • References
  • Dictionaries and corpora
  • An Overview of Polish and English Attributive Ethnonyms Based on Culinary Traditions (Marcin Kudła)
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. A cognitive linguistic approach to stereotypes
  • 3. Cuisine-based attributive ethnonyms in English and Polish
  • 3.1. Equivalent stereotypes
  • 3.2. Approximate stereotypes
  • 3.3. Divergent stereotypes
  • 3.4. Incomparable stereotypes
  • 4. Conclusions
  • References
  • Dictionaries and encyclopaedias
  • Dispositional Middles in English and Polish with Detours into Other Slavic Languages (Anna Malicka-Kleparska)
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Data
  • 3. Differences between middles in English and Slavic languages
  • a. Formal characteristics
  • b. Non-eventive character
  • c. The ‘by phrase’ and other agentive phrases
  • 4. Analysis
  • References
  • Corpora
  • Case Assignment by Verbal Particles in English and Verbal Prefixes in Slovak (Milada Walková)
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Aspect and case
  • 3. Proposal
  • 3.1. Case-assigning particles and prefixes
  • 3.2. Case-blocking particles and prefixes
  • 4. Implications
  • 5. Conclusion
  • References
  • Contributors

Ewa Konieczna / Robert Kiełtyka (eds.)

English versus Slavic

Lexicon in a Morphological and Semantic Perspective

img

About the author

Robert Kiełtyka is Associate Professor at the Institute of English Studies, University of Rzeszów (Poland). His main research interests include diachronic semantics, cognitive linguistics and morphology-semantics interface.

Ewa Konieczna is Assistant Professor at the Institute of English Studies, University of Rzeszów (Poland). Her main research interests include morphological polysemy, embodied cognition in language and innovative word formation processes.

About the book

This book offers a collection of papers pertaining to the most thought-provoking problems in the areas of theoretical and contrastive linguistics. The contributions are devoted to current developments in morphological and semantic theorizing. The contrastive analyses conducted by the authors examine the structure of English and selected Slavic languages.

This eBook can be cited

This edition of the eBook can be cited. To enable this we have marked the start and end of a page. In cases where a word straddles a page break, the marker is placed inside the word at exactly the same position as in the physical book. This means that occasionally a word might be bifurcated by this marker.

Robert Kiełtyka, Ewa Konieczna

Introduction

1. Contrastive studies in retrospect

Contrastive studies have undergone several shifts of emphasis since their beginnings in the 1940s when they were started at the University of Michigan by Charles Fries, who saw a need to for contrastive analysis in connection with second language acquisition: “[...] the most effective materials [in foreign language teaching] are those that are based upon a scientific description of the language to be learned, carefully compared with a parallel description of the native language of the learner” (Fries 1945: 9). A decade later Fries’ colleague Robert Lado (1957) put the project into practice by formulating the so-called “Contrastive Hypothesis” in the light of which foreign language teaching can be improved by means of comparing the learner’s native language with the language to be mastered. One of its best-known assumptions concerns the nature of the student’s learning task, which is seen as the sum of the differences between the two languages, based on the belief that similarities between the two languages cause no difficulties (positive transfer), while differences do, due to negative transfer, also known as interference. However, the contrastive hypothesis soon turned out to be oversimplified as it did not take into account many factors, such as the nature of second language acquisition (natural vs. mediated, second vs. third language, etc.), or psychological variables. Consequently, the enterprise aimed at improving foreign language teaching through pairwise language comparison was soon abandoned.

Pairwise language comparison aroused interest in the 1970s and 1980s with a series of publications that did not primarily serve didactic purposes (e.g. Köning 1971, Rohdenburg 1974, Plank 1984) but were typologically oriented. The most important book of this period was Hawkins’ (1986) monograph entitled A comparative typology of English and German – unifying the contrasts. It was meant to discover correlations between various subsystems of the two languages, especially syntax and morphology, and to provide explanations for the correlations observed. Despite the fact that the book received a lot of criticism (e.g. Kortmann and Meyer 1992, or Rohdenburg 1992), it became a source of valuable insights and contributed to the establishment of contrastive linguistics as a branch of linguistics aimed at comparing languages for its own sake, without necessarily applying the findings of this comparison to second language acquisition.←7 | 8→

In the 1980s and 1990s a wider variety of linguistic disciplines became the subject of studies of contrastive linguistics, such as pragmatics and discourse studies (e.g. Oleksy 1989). Moreover, the growing popularity and availability of specialised corpora led to the introduction of new empirical methods and also to the renewal of interest in the practical applications of contrastive linguistics, such as using insights from quantitative contrastive analyses for translation studies (Johansson 1998).

Biographical notes

Ewa Konieczna (Volume editor) Robert Kiełtyka (Volume editor)

Ewa Konieczna is Assistant Professor at the Institute of English Studies, University of Rzeszów (Poland). Her main research interests include morphological polysemy, embodied cognition in language and innovative word formation processes. Robert Kiełtyka is Associate Professor at the Institute of English Studies, University of Rzeszów (Poland). His main research interests include diachronic semantics, cognitive linguistics and morphology-semantics interface.

Previous

Title: English versus Slavic