When we talk about the semantics of prepositional phrases, we are talking about a specific kind of conventionalized pattern. Conventional patterns are arbitrary in the sense that they are not predictable from one language to another. But in another way, they are nevertheless motivated (Sweetser 1990). There is a reason they occur as they do. Basic cognitive processes influence how different prepositions extend from spatial meanings to more abstract ones.
cognitive grammar
Today Rachel and I received word from Faithlife/Logos Bible Software that our book on the grammar and semantics […]
Scholars in Press: An interview with Rachel Aubrey
There are bits to be salvaged from Ruhl (1989), perhaps, but it might be easier to start elsewhere entirely.
I fully acknowledge there is certainly an appeal for monosemy as a theoretical construct. The ability to schematize all usages or senses within a single abstract sense does indeed simplified and elegant semantic theory. Such a theory is an attractive prospect for all linguists.
Generative grammar has moved on from its old theories about syntax. Can we please do the same with their semantic theories, too?
We’re getting over the peak and headed toward the end. The practical take away is coming.
Semantic theory: it’ll get harder before it gets hardest.
Meaning is hard. Unfortunately, I’m not going to make any easier here.
Compounding and Cogntive Processes in Word Formation with ὑδροποτέω and its relatives: Discussions of lexical semantics often make […]
Koine-Greek 