语言学与应用语言学

施事性因果链的注意视窗开启与概念接合模式探究

  • 匡芳涛 ,
  • 张倩慧
展开
  • 西南大学,重庆,400715
匡芳涛,博士,西南大学外国语学院教授、博士生导师。主要研究方向为认知语言学、英语教育研究。电子邮箱:ftkuang@swu.edu.cn;
张倩慧,讲师,西南大学外国语学院博士研究生。主要研究方向为认知语言学。电子邮箱:475192594@qq.com

网络出版日期: 2024-11-27

Exploring Patterns of Windowing of Attention and Conceptual Splicing of the Agentive Causal Chain

  • KUANG Fangtao ,
  • ZHANG Qianhui
Expand

Online published: 2024-11-27

摘要

本文基于汉语口语表达,同时结合访谈数据,对内含多个子事件的施事性因果链的注意视窗开启模式和概念接合模式进行考察。研究发现,就注意视窗开启而言,施事性因果链共呈现五种视窗开启模式,不同模式在开启视窗的子事件类型上存在差异,但模式内子事件开启视窗的顺序都遵循因果链序列中子事件的布列状况;说话人自身的身体体验对视窗开启模式的选择具有影响。就概念接合而言,施事性因果链共呈现四种概念接合模式,模式之间的差异体现在开启视窗的子事件的组合方式上;开启视窗的子事件在发生顺序上的邻近程度对子事件的组合方式具有影响。

本文引用格式

匡芳涛 , 张倩慧 . 施事性因果链的注意视窗开启与概念接合模式探究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2024 , 24(5) : 136 -149 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2024.05.013

Abstract

Based on the spoken Chinese and the interview data, this paper explores the patterns of windowing of attention and conceptual splicing of the agentive causal chain that contains multiple sub-events. In terms of the windowing of attention, it is found that the agentive causal chain presents five patterns of windowing and they differ in the types of sub-events which are windowed, but the order of windowing in each pattern follows the arrangement of sub-events in the causal chain. In addition, the speaker’s physical experience has an impact on the choice of patterns of windowing. In terms of patterns of conceptual splicing, it is found that the agentive causal chain presents four patterns of conceptual splicing and they differ in the way the windowed sub-events are grouped. The degree of contiguity in the sequence between the windowed sub-events has an impact on the grouping of the windowed sub-events.

参考文献

[1] Bohemeyer J., N. J. Enfield, J. Essegbey, et al. 2011. The macro-event property: The segmentation of causal chains [A]In J. Bohnemeyer & E. Pederson (eds.). Event Representation in Language and Cognition[C]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 43-67.
[2] Gibbs R. 2005. Embodiment and Cognitive Science[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[3] Ibarretxe-Antunano I. 2006. Leonard Talmy. A windowing onto conceptual structure and language: Part 2: Language and cognition: Past and future[J]. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 4(1):253-268.
[4] Langacker R. W. 2001. Dynamicity in grammar[J]. Axiomathes 12:7-33.
[5] Langacker R. W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction[M]. New York: Oxford University Press.
[6] Nisbett R., K. Peng, I. Choi, et al. 2001. Culture and system of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition[J]. Psychological Review 108(2), 291-310.
[7] Talmy L. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Volume I: Concept Structuring Systems[M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[8] Talmy L. 2007. Attention phenomena[A]. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (eds.). Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics[C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 264-294.
[9] Talmy L. 2008. Aspects of attention in language[A]. In P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (eds.). Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition[C]. New York: Routledge. 27-39.
[10] Wolff P. 2003. Direct causation in the linguistic coding and individuation of causal events[J]. Cognition 88: 1-48.
[11] 杜静、 李福印、 邓宇. 2018. 施事性状态变化事件概念构建的认知机制[J]. 现代外语(1):12-22.
[12] 林海云、 张小春. 2020. 古汉语状态变化事件的概念化过程及认知机制[J]. 古汉语研究(3):58-64.
[13] 文旭. 2007. 语义、认知与识解[J]. 外语学刊(6):35-39.
[14] 邢福义、 刘培玉、 曾常年, 等. 2004. 汉语句法机制验察[M]. 北京: 生活.读书.新知三联书店.
[15] 杨大然. 2017. 事件句法视域下“把”字句与“使”字句的比较研究[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报(6):103-112.
[16] 于翠红、 潘秀丽. 2019. 注意力视窗理论关照的隐喻汉英表征与认知路径——以《天堂蒜薹之歌》汉英版本为例[J]. 当代外语研究(6):54-63.
[17] 张敬源、 王深. 2013. 基于加的夫语法的现代汉语“把”字结构及物性研究[J]. 当代外语研究(4):12-15.
文章导航

/