Quantized Motion Trajectory of Event

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2023.05.005

Abstract

Abstract:

In comparison with previous accounts on the dynamicality of sentence meaning by the Newtonian mechanics, this study, via category formulation quantization, aims at the same issue by focusing on one aspect of it, namely motion trajectory of verbal event. The research objective is Mandarin Chinese verb system, which is specified as 5 simplex types of typical motion distance with 2 complex types in terms of duration and end property: zero, line, point-to-point, point-to-line, line-to-point, line-to-line and multi-dimensional transformations, along with a number of factors, including tempora-spatial interaction, interval pattern, displacement value, motion durativity, semantic domain commitment, categorical angle and quantum attribute. All of these are represented with a systemic network in AND and OR relations, characteristics of entanglement and superposition states of quantum movement, which may reflect one essential working mechanism of the brain and thinking.

Key words: motion trajectory, distance property, interval, displacement, quantization

CLC Number:

PENG Xuanwei, GAO Jihua. Quantized Motion Trajectory of Event[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2023, 23(5): 43-65.

Figures/Tables 15

References 43

[1]	Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax[M]. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
[2]	Colman, A. M. 2006. Oxford Dictionary of Psychology[Z]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[3]	Ericsson, K. A. & W. Kintsch. 1995. Long-term working memory[J]. Psychological Review (2): 211-245. pmid: 7740089
[4]	Fauconnier, G. & M. Turner. 2002. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities[M]. New York: Basic Books.
[5]	Halliday, M. A. K. 1990. New ways of meaning: the challenge to applied linguistics[J]. Journal of Applied Linguistics (6): 7-36.
[6]	Halliday, M. A. K. 2001. Is the grammar neutral? Is the grammarian neutral? [A]. In Jessica de Villiers & Robert J. Stainton (eds.). Communication in Linguistics, Volume 1: Papers in Honour of Michael Gregory [C]. Toronto: Editions du Gref. 179-204.
[7]	Halliday, M. A. K. 2003. On Language and Linguistics, Volume 3 in the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday [C]. Ed. J. J. Webster. London: Continuum.
[8]	Halliday, M. A. K. 2008. Complementarities in Language (语言系统的并协与互补)[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆.
[9]	Halliday, M. A. K. & R. Hasan. 1985. Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Socio-Semantic Perspective[M]. Victoria: Deakin University Press.
[10]	Halliday, M. A. K. & C. M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar[M]. London: Routledge.
[11]	Jackendoff, R. 1983. Semantics and Cognition[M]. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
[12]	Jackendoff, R. 1990. Semantic Structures[M]. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
[13]	Johnson, M. 1987. The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[14]	Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Category Reveal About Mind[M]. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
[15]	Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. 1999. Johnson. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[16]	Langacker, R. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Theoretical Prerequisites[M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
[17]	Levinson, S. C. 2003. Space in Language and Cognition: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[18]	Martin, J. R. 1992. English Text: System and Structure[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[19]	Melkikh, A. V. 2019. Thinking as a quantum phenomenon[J]. Biosystems (176): 32-42.
[20]	Peng, X. 2016. English Morphemic Constituents Working for Discourse Wording: Extending Rank Scale from “Clause (Complex)” up to “Text (Type)”[J]. International Journal of English Linguistics (3): 38-60.
[21]	Peng, X. 2017. ‘(Text as) wording’ as wording in text size: Stretching lexicogrammatical rank hierarchy from clause to text[J]. Word (2): 135-172.
[22]	Pylkkäne, L. 2019. The neural basis of combinatory syntax and semantics[J]. Science (366): 62-66.
[23]	Rosch, E. 1975. Human categorization [A]. In Neil Warren (ed.). Studies in Cross-linguistic Psychology [C]. London: Academic. 1-49.
[24]	Talmy, L. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Volume 1, Concept Structuring System[M]. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
[25]	Taylor, J. 1989. Linguistic Categorization Prototypes in Linguistic Theory[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[26]	阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦. 2018. 相对论(麦芒译)[M]. 天津: 天津人民出版社.
[27]	邓湘君. 2018. 汉语空间表达与事件语义学[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社.
[28]	都有为. 2017. 物理学大词典[Z]. 北京: 科学出版社.
[29]	高建英. 2012. 现代汉语近义词“回,还,归, 返”的区别性语义特征分析[D]. 河北师范大学硕士学位论文.
[30]	郭锐. 1993. 汉语动词的过程结构[J]. 中国语文 (5):410-419.
[31]	黄献民. 2008. 狭义相对论与时空图[M]. 北京: 国防工业出版社.
[32]	吉姆·艾尔-哈利利、约翰乔·麦克法登. 2016. 神秘的量子生命:量子生物学时代的到来(侯新智、祝锦杰译)[M]. 杭州: 浙江人民出版社.
[33]	金立鑫. 2008. 试论行为类型、情状类型及其与体的关系[J]. 语言教学与研究 (4):1-9.
[34]	刘岩. 2013. 现代汉语运动事件表达模式研究[D]. 南开大学博士学位论文.
[35]	芭芭拉·帕赫蒂、爱丽丝·特缪伦、罗伯特·沃. 2012. 语言研究的数学方法(吴道平等译)[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆.
[36]	彭宣维. 2021a. 韩礼德著述中的量子力学思想[J]. 中国外语(1):25-35.
[37]	彭宣维. 2021b. 系统语言学范畴体系和语言观中的量子力学思想[J]. 当代外语研究(2):19-31.
[38]	彭宣维. 2022. 论量子化的事件运动系统[J]. 外语学刊(1):1-10.
[39]	史文磊. 2014. 汉语运动事件词化类型的历时考察[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆.
[40]	史文磊. 2021. 汉语运动事件词化类型演变新探[M]. 上海: 上海教育出版社.
[41]	杨洁. 2020. 汉语运动事件类型学探究[M]. 杭州: 浙江大学出版社.
[42]	张克定. 2016. 空间关系构式的认知研究[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社.
[43]	中国社会科学院语言研究所词典编辑室编. 2017. 现代汉语词典(第7版)[Z]. 北京: 商务印书馆.