Pokaż uproszczony rekord

dc.contributor.authorBadio, Janusz
dc.contributor.editorBadio, Janusz
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-01T12:19:32Z
dc.date.available2021-02-01T12:19:32Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationBadio, J. (2020). Ranking for cognitive salience of events and coding them into a sentence format. In. J. Badio (Ed.), Categories and Units in Language and Linguistics, (pp. 21-31). Łódź–Kraków–Wałbrzych: WUŁ–Agent PR–Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa im. Angelusa Silesiusa, http://dx.doi.org/10.18778/8142-988-7.03pl_PL
dc.identifier.isbn978-83-8142-988-7
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/33261
dc.description.abstractThis article discusses the use of different syntactic options in the construal of events. The examples selected for presentation and analysis come from a study by Badio (2014). This work understood construal to be non-linguistic, mental or conceptual, i.e. related to thought, whereas the term coding was reserved for the use of form to signal aspects of a conceptualisation. The present work focuses on demonstrating that if they are prominent, events tend to be coded with finite verb forms (of the superordinate) clause, followed by participial and infinitive constructions. The former contain the full processual profiles when they are used to relate the main participants, the subject and object. Infinitives and participles tend to be less cognitively salient, whereas nominalisations and other non-verbal options background the processual profile of an event. As a consequence, events coded with them are less salient within a clause or a sentence.pl_PL
dc.language.isoenpl_PL
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegopl_PL
dc.relation.ispartofCategories and Units in Language and Linguistics;
dc.relation.ispartofseriesŁódzkie Studia z Językoznawstwa Angielskiego i Ogólnego;10
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Międzynarodowe*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectconstrualpl_PL
dc.subjecteventpl_PL
dc.subjectcodingpl_PL
dc.subjectverb formspl_PL
dc.subjectnominalisationpl_PL
dc.subjectcognitive prominencepl_PL
dc.titleRanking for cognitive salience of events and coding them into a sentence formatpl_PL
dc.typeBook chapterpl_PL
dc.page.number21-31pl_PL
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationUniwersytet Łódzki, Wydział Filologiczny, Katedra Językoznawstwa Angielskiego i Ogólnegopl_PL
dc.identifier.eisbn978-83-8142-989-4
dc.referencesBadio, J. (2014). Construal and Linguistic Coding of Narrative Events. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.pl_PL
dc.referencesBarsalou, L. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–609.pl_PL
dc.referencesChafe, W. (1994). Discourse, Consciousness and Time. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesCroft, W. and Cruse D. A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesFillmore, Ch. (1976). Frame semantics and the nature of language. In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Conference on the Origin and Development of Language and Speech, Vol. 280, 20–32.pl_PL
dc.referencesGivón, T. (1992). The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions. Linguistics, 30(1), 5–56.pl_PL
dc.referencesGivón, T. (1994). The pragmatics of de-transitive voice: Functional and typological aspects of inversion. Voice and inversion, 3, 44.pl_PL
dc.referencesGoldbreg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesKoffka, K. (1935). Principles of Gestalt Psychology. New York: Harcourt, Brace.pl_PL
dc.referencesKöhler, W. (1929). Gestalt Psychology. New York: Liveright.pl_PL
dc.referencesLakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesLangacker, R. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume 2, Descriptive Applications. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesLangacker, R. (2008). Cognitive Grammar, A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesLambrecht, K. & Polinsky, M. (1997). Typological variation in sentence-focus constructions. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, 33, 189–206.pl_PL
dc.referencesMaruszewski, T. 1996. Psychologia poznawcza [Cognitive Psychology]. Warszawa: Polskie Towarzystwo Semiotyczne.pl_PL
dc.referencesNeisser, U. 1967. Cognitive Psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Croft.pl_PL
dc.referencesNeisser, U. 1976. Cognition and Reality. San Francisco: Freeman.pl_PL
dc.referencesSemantics, F. C. J. F., & Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Linguistics in the morning calm. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Co, 111–137.pl_PL
dc.referencesTalmy, L. (2000). Toward a Conceptual Semantics, Vol. 1 and 2. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesTalmy, L. (2007). Attention phenomena. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford Hanbook of Cognitive Linguistics, (pp. 264–294). Oxford: Oxford University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesTomlin, R. S. (1995). Focal attention, voice, and word order: an experimental, crosslinguistics study. In P. Downing and M. Noonan (eds.), Word Order in Discourse, (pp. 517–554). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.pl_PL
dc.referencesQuirk, R., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. (1992 [20th impression]). A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.pl_PL
dc.referencesZacks, J. and Tversky, B. (2001). Event structure in perception and conception. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 3–21.pl_PL
dc.identifier.doi10.18778/8142-988-7.03


Pliki tej pozycji

Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail

Pozycja umieszczona jest w następujących kolekcjach

Pokaż uproszczony rekord

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Międzynarodowe
Poza zaznaczonymi wyjątkami, licencja tej pozycji opisana jest jako Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Międzynarodowe