Chapter 3. Translation, equivalence, and lexical meaning

2018 ◽  
pp. 71-128
Keyword(s):  
Lexical Meaning

Lexical Meaning

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Lynne Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Lexical Meaning

Lexikálny Význam V Recepcii

2018 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 302-315
Author(s):  
Juraj Dolník
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Conceptual Knowledge ◽  
Lexical Meaning ◽  
Pragmatic Analysis ◽  
Way Of Thinking

Abstract Asking first about how the lexical meaning manifests itself as we experience it in a communicative event, the author explores the background of the ways in which we are able to perceive the meaning of words in texts. One useful way of thinking about how recipients react to the words in utterances is in terms of behavioural and actional lexical meaning. The first refers to the understanding of meaning, the second corresponds to interpretations of words when the recipient does not succeed in the process of natural understanding of words. These terms lead to questions about the rationality of language. One aspect of this rationality is the function of the intentional­emergent mechanism that adjusts the interplay of automatic and deliberate use of language. This mechanism has its roots in the fundamental human nature: we are behavioural­actional beings. Pragmatic analysis sheds light on how hearers understand and interpret what they hear with regard to their conceptual knowledge associated with words.

Pohľad Na Pomenovanie Cez Prizmu Teoretických Rámcov A Slovníkového Hesla

2018 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 277-301
Author(s):  
Alexandra Jarošová
Keyword(s):  
Corpus Linguistics ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Linguistic Meaning ◽  
Extended Model ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Departure Point ◽  
Lexical Meaning ◽  
Linguistic Pragmatics ◽  
Situational Contexts ◽  
Methodological Procedures

Abstract The first part of this paper outlines the relevant aspects of functional structuralism serving lexicographers as a departure point for building a model of lexical meaning useable in the Dictionary of Contemporary Slovak Language. This section also points to some aspects of Klára Buzássyová’s research on lexis and word­formation that have enriched the functional­structuralist paradigm. The second section shows other theoretical and methodological frameworks, such as linguistic pragmatics, cognitive linguistics and corpus linguistics (all of them departing in some respect from the structuralism and, in other aspects, being complementary with it) that can enhance the structuralist basis of the model. The third section outlines an extended model of lexical meaning that represents a synthesis of all those theoretical frameworks and, at the same time, represents a reflection of three language constituents: 1. The social constituent is present in consideration of communicative functions of utterances, naming functions of lexical units, functional styles and registers, language norms, and situational contexts; 2. The psychological component takes the form of consideration of the prototype effect, the abolition of boundaries between linguistic meaning and other parts of cognition; 3. Thanks to the structural/systematic component, a description of paradigmatic and syntagmatic behaviour of words can be performed, and an inventory of formal­content units and categories (lexemes, lexies, word­forming and grammatical structures) can be provided. In our dictionary practice, the above­mentioned model is reflected in the methodological procedures as follows: 1. Systemization of repetitive (regular, standardized) phenomena; 2. Prototypicalization of meaning description; 3. Contextualization/encyclopedization of meaning description; 4. Pragmatization of meaning description; 5. Continualized presentation of language phenomena, i.e., introduction of numerous phenomena of transient and indeterminate nature and indicating the existence of a semantic­pragmatic and lexical­grammatical continuum; 6. “Discretization” of combinatorial continuum, i.e., identification and description of entrenched word combinations with naming functions.

On the Principles of Working with Concepts during Russian Language and Literature Lessons

2020 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. I. Shutan
Keyword(s):  
Russian Language ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Lexical Meaning ◽  
Classroom Activities ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Language And Literature

In this article, the author sets out to investigate the principles of teaching schoolchildren how to work with word concepts during Russian language and literature lessons, including distinction between the lexical meaning of the word and the concept, creation of the image of a word concept (on the example of the concept "face"), visualisation of concepts, textocentrism. The identification of these principles is based on the analysis of scientific publications and accumulated pedagogical experience. The concluding part of the article correlates classroom activities of working with word concepts with the content of Russian state exams in the 9th and 11th forms.

Where Do Semantic Illiteracy and Stylistic Tolerance Lead? (Essay Notes)

2019 ◽  
Vol 80 (2) ◽  
pp. 31-34
Author(s):  
O. V. Shatalova
Keyword(s):  
Lexical Meaning ◽  
Correlative Relationship

The article attempts to establish the correlative relationship between the understanding of the lexical meaning and the stylistic qualification of a word with the peculiarities of the thinking and worldview of a student. The use of official business cliches is defined as a factor of the development and socio-psychological realization of an individual.

Lexical Meaning, Concepts, and the Metasemantics of Predicates

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Glanzberg
Keyword(s):  
Mental Representations ◽  
Compositional Semantics ◽  
Lexical Meaning ◽  
Standard Methods

This chapter examines how concepts relate to lexical meanings. It focuses on how we can appeal to concepts to give specific, cognitively rich contents to lexical entries, while at the same time using standard methods of compositional semantics. This is a problem, as those methods assume lexical meanings provide extensions, while concepts are mental representations that have very different structure from an extension. The chapter proposes a way to solve this problem which is by casting concepts in a metasemantic role for certain expressions, notably verbs, but more also generally, with expressions that function as content-giving predicates in a sentence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document