As one krɪs wraps up his PhD another begins his own. (More details about that later). All that to say, as I’ve been getting familiar with the linguistic literature around which my own dissertation will revolve I’m just struck by how much—again—there is to learn, and similarly, how much there is I want to share. Most recently I came across an interesting section of an article that’s likely relevant for many biblical scholars who find themselves interested in dabbling with linguistics, and with the program of Cognitive Linguistics in particular.So without further ado, I give you the words of Geeraerts (2006:40–42)—he who has ears let him hear…
My audience didn’t do a particularly good job participating in the beginning quiz. Next time I’ll need to find some additional incentives.
Andrew Keenan continues his investigations… In this section, I want to cover some of the broadest components of […]
Finding Security in a Use Based Grammar and its Applications for Lexical Analysis
Scholars in Press: An interview with Alex Andrason
Editor’s note: this interview was originally published March 23rd, 2015.
Editor’s note: this interview was originally published March 30th, 2015.
Editor’s note: This interview originally appeared at Old School Script on March 3rd, 2015. Name: Elizabeth Robar Education: […]
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.