Cognitive Linguistics

Seminar 2

Theme: Main Terms of Cognitive Linguistics

Points for discussion

1. Cognitive Linguistics: a cluster of approaches or a single well-defined theory.

Capitalized and uncapitalized cognitive linguistics in the broader framework of
cognitive science.
2. Meaning as a foundational point of Cognitive Linguistics. Main features of cognitive
linguistic meaning.
3. The problems, questions raised by the cognitive features of meaning
4. The main terms of Cognitive Linguistics
5. Put down into your glossary of terms ten terms you consider to be important for
your understanding of Cognitive Linguistics

Key terms to be defined: cognitive linguistic meaning, Cognitive Grammar, Cognitive

Construal, symbolic unit, cognitive semantics, backstage cognition, meaning construction,
embodied experience, domain, encyclopedic knowledge, grammaticalization.

Outstanding cognitive linguists (discussion): Find and study the information about life,
works and contribution of cognitive linguists and state their contribution into the
development of the field (R.W. Langacker, L. Talmy)

Individual projects:

Study the following papers and summarize them:

1. Fillmore Ch. J. Frame Semantics // Cognitive Linguistics. Basic Readings / ed. by

Dirk Geeraerts. – Mouton de Gruyter : Berlin, New York, 2006. – P. 373-400.
2. Nerlich B. and Clarke D.D. Cognitive Linguistics and the History of Linguistics // The
Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics / ed. by D. Geeraerts and R. Cuyckens. –
Oxford : OUP, 2007. – P. 589-610.
 1. Cognitive Linguistics: a cluster of approaches or a single well-defined theory.
Capitalized and uncapitalized cognitive linguistics in the broader framework of
cognitive science.
CL is a conglomerate of more or less extensive, more or less active centers of linguistic
research that are closely knit together by a shared perspective, but that are not (yet) brought
together under the common rule of a well-defined theory. Structure of CL is very similar to
category structure
CL constitutes a cluster of many partially overlapping approaches rather than a single well-
defined theory that identifies in an all-or-none fashion whether something belongs to
Cognitive Linguistics or not.
Cognitive Linguistics is a flexible framework rather than a single theory of language.
Structure of CL is very similar to category structure
CL constitutes a cluster of many partially overlapping approaches rather than a single well-
defined theory that identifies in an all-or-none fashion whether something belongs to
Cognitive Linguistics or not.
Cognitive linguistics is a cluster of overlapping approaches to the study of language as a
mental phenomenon. Cognitive linguistics emerged as a school of linguistic thought in the
1970s.
In the introduction to Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings (2006), linguist Dirk Geeraerts
makes a distinction between uncapitalized cognitive linguistics ("referring to all approaches
in which natural language is studied as a mental phenomenon") and capitalized Cognitive
Linguistics ("one form of cognitive linguistics").
One of the approaches to cognitive linguistics is called Cognitive Linguistics, with capital
initials, but it is also often spelled cognitive linguistics with all lowercase letters. [15] This
movement saw its beginning in early 1980s when George Lakoff's metaphor theory was
united with Ronald Langacker's Cognitive Grammar, with subsequent models
of Construction Grammar following from various authors. The union entails two different
approaches to linguistic and cultural evolution: that of the conceptual metaphor, and the
construction.
Cognitive Linguistics defines itself in opposition to generative grammar, arguing that
language functions in the brain according to general cognitive principles. Lakoff's and
Langacker's ideas are applied across sciences. In addition to linguistics and translation
theory, Cognitive Linguistics is influential in literary
studies, education, sociology, musicology, computer science and theology.
The roots of cognitive linguistics are in Noam Chomsky’s 1959 critical review of B. F.
Skinner’s Verbal Behavior. Chomsky's rejection of behavioural psychology and his
subsequent anti-behaviourist activity helped bring about a shift of focus
from empiricism to mentalism in psychology under the new concepts of cognitive
psychology and cognitive science.
Chomsky considered linguistics as a subfield of cognitive science in the 1970s but called his
model transformational or generative grammar. Having been engaged with Chomsky in
the linguistic wars,[5] George Lakoff united in the early 1980s with Ronald Langacker and
other advocates of neo-Darwinian linguistics in a so-called ”Lakoff—Langacker
agreement”. It is suggested that they picked the name ”cognitive linguistics” for their new
framework to undermine the reputation of generative grammar as a cognitive science.
Consequently, there are three competing approaches that today consider themselves as true
representatives of cognitive linguistics. One is the Lakoffian—Langackerian brand with
capitalised initials (Cognitive Linguistics). The second is generative grammar, while the
third approach is proposed by scholars whose work falls outside the scope of the other two.
They argue that cognitive linguistics should not be taken as the name of a specific selective
framework, but as a whole field of scientific research that is assessed by its evidential rather
than theoretical value.[3]
2. Meaning as a foundational point of Cognitive Linguistics. Main features of
cognitive linguistic meaning.
Primacy of meaning as a foundational point of Cognitive Linguistics
CL sees language ‘as an instrument for organizing, processing, and conveying information’ –
as something primarily semantic
Four specific characteristics that show the way CL deals with meaning
 Linguistic meaning is perspectival. It says that meaning shapes and construes the
world around, it embodies a perspective into the world
Spatial perspective: It is behind the house. It is in front of the house
Linguistic meaning is dynamic and flexible
We adapt our semantic categories to transformations of the circumstances - Language is not
a more or less rigid and stable structure - Linguistic structures are flexible
Linguistic meaning is encyclopedic and non-autonomous
Meaning involves other forms of the world knowledge that is integrated with our other
cognitive capacities.
 We are embodied beings, not pure minds.
 Languages may embody the historical and cultural experience of groups of
speakers
Linguistic meaning is based on usage and experience
Relations between
Concrete level of words (Mary sent Peter a message)
Abstract level of functional categories (Subject – Verb – Direct Object – Indirect
Object)
Another is that aspects of language that are treated as discrete and encapsulated in formal
linguistics, such as grammar, cannot be treated as such within cognitive linguistics;
cognitive linguists take a broadly functional perspective: language emerged to facilitate
communicative meaning. Hence, grammatical organisation, which supports situated
meaning, cannot be artificially separated from the study of meaning, which it is specialised
to facilitate.
Within cognitive linguistics, the study of language often exhibits either a focus on semantics,
or on grammar, although there is typically no hard and fast division between the way the
two are studied, despite the specific focus adopted. In practice, the division arises due to the
focus of a particular researcher, or of the research question being investigated, rather than
due to a principled division. 
The area of study involving cognitive linguistics approaches to semantics is concerned with
investigating a number of semantic phenomena. One such phenomenon is linguistic
semantics, encompassing phenomena traditionally studied under the aegis of lexical
semantics (word meaning), compositional semantics (sentence meaning), and pragmatics
(situated meaning). It also encompasses phenomena not addressed under these traditional
headings, such as the relationship between experience, the conceptual system and the
semantic structure encoded by language during the process of meaning construction. 
Cognitive linguistics approaches to grammar take the view that a model of meaning (a
"cognitive semantics" account), has to be delineated before an adequate cognitive model of
grammar can be developed. This is because grammar is viewed within the cognitive
linguistics enterprise as a meaningful system in and of itself, which therefore shares
important properties with the system of linguistic meaning and cannot be functionally
separated from it.
3. The problems, questions raised by the cognitive features of meaning

Characteristics of meaning define a number of specific questions for Cognitive

Linguistics

The perspectival nature of meaning raises questions about the specific mechanisms of
construal present in a language: what kinds of semantic construal, imagery, conceptual
perspectivization do languages implement? The dynamic nature of meaning raises questions
about the process of meaning extension: what are the mechanisms of semantic flexibility,
and how do the various readings of a linguistic expression relate to each other?

The encyclopedic nature of meaning raises questions about the interdisciplinary links of
language to the other cognitive capacities: to what extent are the cognitive mechanisms at
work in natural language shared by other cognitive systems? And the usage-based nature of
meaning raises questions about the relationship between syntax and lexicon, and the
acquisition of language: what kind of experience do children need to learn a language?
4. The main terms of Cognitive Linguistics
Cognitive Grammar (R.W. Langacker)
 Theory of language
 Grammar is viewed as conceptualization and imagery
 Grammar is not built up of grammatical rules and lexicon
 Grammar consists of symbolic units (conventional pairings of a form and a meaning);
 Symbolic units are more abstract than lexical items
 Decontextualization Recontextualization
Relational Predication
relates to the schematic meaning encoded by lexical classes such as verbs, adjectives,
prepositions and so on (relations). The term ‘predication’ relates to meaning and refers to the
semantic pole of a symbolic assembly. Relational predications are conceptually dependent.
Relational predications are divided into two sub-categories: temporal relations and
atemporal relations.
Relationships between symbolic assemblies
the set of interlinking and overlapping relationships holding between symbolic assemblies.
There are three kinds of relationships that constitute the network: (1) symbolisation – the
symbolic links between the semantic pole and phonological pole of a given symbolic
assembly; (2) categorisation – for example, the link between the expressions rose and
flower, given that rose is a member of the category flower; and (3) integration – the relation
between parts of a complex symbolic assembly such as flower-s.
 Sentence
an abstract entity based on prototypical patterns found in utterances. In other words, a
sentence is an idealisation that has determinate properties, often stated in terms of
grammatical structure. For example, one definition of (an English) sentence might consist of
the formula:
S →NP VP.
In this formula, ‘S’ stands for sentence, ‘NP’ for subject noun phrase and ‘VP’ for the verb
phrase or predicate which provides information about the subject NP.
Utterance (usage event)
A situated instance of language use which is culturally and contextually embedded and
represents an instance of linguistic behavior on the part of a language user. An utterance has
a unit-like status in that it represents the expression of a coherent idea, making (at least
partial) use of the conventions of the language.
Utterances involve grammatical forms (for example, word order), semantic structures
(patterns of meaning), speech sounds, patterns of intonation (for example, pitch contours),
slight pauses, and accelerations and decelerations.
Utterance schema (Michael Tomasello)
Relates to an early multi-word utterance in first language acquisition which exhibits
functional asymmetry. That is, the expressions contain a relatively stable element with ‘slots’
that can be filled by other lexical items. Thus early multi-word utterances, rather than
containing two or more words of equal status, tend to be ‘built’ around a functionally more
salient and stable word.
Some examples of attested utterance schemas include: Here’s the X, I wanna X, More X, It’s
a X, There’s a X, Put X here, Throw X, X gone, X here. The obligatory element in an
utterance schema is known as the ‘pivot’.
Symbolic unit (also linguistic unit)
A general term for the fundamental unit of language
Linguistic units include:
 inflectional morphemes (the plural marker ‘-s’ as in toys),
 meaningful parts of words (‘-er’ in teacher),
 words such as cat,
 complex words such as cats made up of ‘cat’ and ‘-s’,
 idioms such as He kicked the bucket,
 sentence level grammatical constructions such as the
ditransitive construction, with the schematic meaning
x caused y to receive z, and the form SUBJECT VERB OBJECT1 OBJECT2, e.g. John gave
Mary a bouquet of flowers
Construal
a selection of a particular expression among various alternatives that reflects just one of the
countless ways of conceiving and portraying the situation in question (R. Langacker)
Five dimensions of construal that are relevant in grammar:
1) viewing frame, 2) generality vs specificity, 3) objectivity vs subjectivity, 4) mental
scanning, 5) figure and ground
Backstage cognition (Gilles Fauconnier)
Refers to the observation that much of what goes on in the construction of meaning occurs
‘behind the scenes’. Fauconnier argues that language does not encode thought in its complex
entirety but encodes rudimentary instructions for the creation of rich and elaborate ideas
Cognitive semantics
Four guiding principles of a cognitive approach to semantics:
 The thesis of embodied cognition
 The thesis that semantic structure reflects conceptual structure
 The thesis that meaning representation is encyclopedic
 The thesis that meaning construction is conceptualisation
Conceptual Metaphor Theory (G.Lakoff, M. Johnson)
One of the earliest theoretical frameworks to be developed in cognitive semantics
Metaphor is not simply a stylistic feature of language but that thought itself is
fundamentally metaphorical in nature
concept of quantity can be thought of in terms of the concept of vertical elevation, as in She
got a really high mark in the test, where high relates not literally to physical height but to a
good mark.
Conventions
the ‘norms’ of linguistic behaviour in a particular linguistic community. These include,
among other things, lexical forms, grammatical patterns, suprasegmental phonology and
discourse strategies.
Encyclopedic knowledge
the structured body of nonlinguistic knowledge to which a linguistic unit such as a word
potentially provides access.
Grammaticalisation
The process whereby lexical or content words acquire grammatical functions or existing
grammatical units acquire further grammatical functions.
grammaticalisation is characterised by interlaced changes in the form and meaning of a given
construction and can therefore be seen as a process that is essentially grounded in meaning.
Image schemas
elementary, recurrent dynamic mental structure of sensorimotor origin that are the basis for
more complex images of our consciousness. The component ‘image’ refers to perception as
the basis for conceptualization, on the one hand, and, on the other, to the usage of these
elementary structures for forming complex images of consciousness. The component
‘schema’ means that these mental structures operate on the high level of generalization and
abstraction, representing mechanisms of perception shared by all humans. Image schemas
link orientation to conceptualization and language.
Embodiment
Embodiment means the body-in-space, the body as it interacts with the physical,
psychological, cultural and social environment.
Many of the objects we interact every day are cognitive artifacts we have designed with our
bodies in mind.
Embodiment can also refer to the particular subjective vantage point from which a particular
perspective is taken as opposed to the all-seeing, objective vantage point.
Embodied Cognition
is grounded in the human body and its interaction with the environment, thus in perception
and action.
Cognition is not some inner process performed by the mind but rather is a form of embodied
action.
Perception and action play a crucial role in the conceptual and linguistic representation of
objects.
Perception
involves human sensory (or sense-perceptory) systems and the brain in order to form
representations known as percepts. Perception consists of three stages: (1) sensation; (2)
perceptual organisation; and (3) identification and recognition. Sensation concerns the way
in which external energy, such as light, heat or (sound) vibrations, are converted into the
neural codes which the brain recognises.
Perceptual organisation concerns the way in which this sensory information is organised and
formed into a perceptual object, a percept. Identification and recognition relates to the stage
in the process whereby past experiences and conceptual knowledge is brought to bear in
order to interpret the percept.
Mimesis (by Merlin Donald)
a form of cognitive representation that was crucial to the development of the cognitively
modern mind, and advanced symbolic abilities such as ritual, narrative, language and so on.
Mimesis involves, among other things, the ability to use a body part and the motion
associated with the body part in order to represent some action, object or event and,
crucially, for this representation to be intended by the subject to stand for the action, object
or event in question.
Mimetic schema
A form of body-based representation proposed by Jordan Zlatev which builds on the notion
of mimesis and which is hypothesised to ground linguistic meaning. The mimetic schema is
also claimed to be superior to the related construct of image schema. Mimetic schemas have
a number of properties associated with them, some of which include: the view that they are
based on bodily action and are thus bodybased, that they are representational in that they
stand for a particular object, action or event, that they are accessible to consciousness, that
they are specific, each one constituting a generalisation over a particular bodily act, and
finally that they can be pre-reflectively shared, in the sense that they can be imitated and thus
‘shared’ via cultural exposure.
Projected Reality
A term coined by Ray Jackendoff. It relates to the human construal of reality which is
determined by the specifics of human cognitive, neurological and perceptual mechanisms
and processes. From this perspective, what we experience as reality is not an objective
‘god’s eye’ view of the world, but the world as constructed by virtue of our species-specific
cognitive apparatus and bodies.
Window of Attention
One of the kinds of pattern which serve to govern the distribution of attention in the
attentional system. The window of attention pattern involves the explicit mention of some
part or parts of an event (‘windowing’), while other parts may be omitted (‘gapping’). The
windowing pattern differs from the focus of attention pattern which focuses attention on
participants. For instance, a path of motion consists of a beginning, a middle and an end. In
the following examples, the whole path of motion is windowed in (1), whereas in the
examples in (2–4) only the initial, medial or final portion of the path is windowed,
respectively: 1. The champagne cork shot out of the bottle, through the air and into Jane’s
eye. 2. The champagne cork shot out of the bottle [initial]. 3. The champagne cork shot
through the air [medial]. 4. The champagne cork shot into Jane’s eye [final].