Time and speed: Where do speed adjectives come from?

Плунгян, В.А.; Рахилина, Екатерина

doi:10.1007/s11185-013-9117-7

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of resources have been developed to address this need, all of which give a firm basis for the building of a Russian Constructicon. One outcome of this line of work is the Corpus Dictionary of Multi-Word Lexical Units (2008, http://ruscorpora.ru/obgrams.html), composed of data on frequent collocations in the Russian National Corpus, with supplementary material from Rоgožnikova's (2003) dictionary of collocations and the four-volume academy dictionary of Russian (Evgen'eva, 1999). The Corpus Dictionary of Multi-Word Lexical Units lists over 2900 such collocations, along with their frequency (in the Russian National Corpus as of 2008), and links to corpus examples.…”

Section: History and Partnersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, to date there has been very little research on typological comparisons of constructions across languages. Rakhilina and colleagues (Rakhilina & Majsak, 2007;Rakhilina & Plungian, 2013) have pioneered typological work on the lexical semantics of certain domains (aquamotion, pain, speed), but such typological comparisons could be extended both in terms of the syntax and the semantics of constructions. Following this lead, it would be possible to take an onomasiological approach, starting from general types of meanings such as negation and indefiniteness, and examine how these meanings are expressed by constructions.…”

Section: Further Research Facilitated By the Russian Constructiconmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constructicography

Ohara¹,

Torrent²,

Lyngfelt³

et al. 2018

Constructional Approaches to Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This book has been long in the making, but now having the result under our eyes, we believe that it was worth the wait. The idea of compiling a volume collecting the experiences of the various constructicon initiatives going on around the world was born in the context of an international collaboration between the universities at Gothenburg in Sweden and Juiz de Fora in Brazil, and the excellent opportunities to interact and learn from each other's experiences afforded by both research visits and the international FrameNet workshops organized jointly by the Swedish and Brazilian teams, together with the FrameNet group in Berkeley, California: IFNW 2013 in Berkeley, IFNW 2016, collocated with ICCG9 in Juiz de Fora, and the upcoming IFNW 2018 with the special theme Multilingual FrameNets and Constructicons, collocated with LREC in Miyazaki, Japan. Moreover, profitable discussions relevant to the works presented in this book took place in the special sessions Cognitively grounded lexica, constructicons, and metaphor repositories, at ICLC12 in Edmonton, Canada, in 2013, and Constructionist resources -a workshop in honor of Charles J. Fillmore, at ICCG8 in Osnabrück, Germany, in 2014.During these events, most -if not all -authors of the chapters in this volume had the chance to share their points of view, positions and questions on the development of constructionist resources. Beyond the group of authors whose contributions make this book, we'd like to thank our -and their -interlocutors.The work on preparing the volume has been funded in part by the Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher Education (STINT), by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES, Brazil), and by the Swedish Foundation for Humanities and Social Sciences (Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, RJ), but it could not have happened without the long-term support given to both Språkbanken (the Swedish Language Bank) -now well into its fifth decade -by the University of Gothenburg, its Faculty of Arts and its Department of Swedish, and to FrameNet Brasil by the Federal University of Juiz de Fora.The volume editors would like to express their gratitude to the anonymous reviewers for their thorough and insightful comments and suggestions, to the series editor Jan-Ola Östman for his final vetting of the volume, and to Esther Roth and Susan Hendriks at John Benjamins, always helpful and unerringly professional, under whose watchful eyes the volume went from idea to finished product. Last but viii Constructicography not least, we are grateful to the person without whom none of all this would have happened: the late Charles J. Fillmore. For inspiring us all, for being a core element in our research frame(works), for having guided our ways into the development of constructicons, and for being such a great guy, we dedicate this volume to Chuck.

show abstract

Section: History and Partnersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Further Research Facilitated By the Russian Constructiconmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructicography

Ohara¹,

Torrent²,

Lyngfelt³

et al. 2018

Constructional Approaches to Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The idea of time is fixed in the mental unit 'the notion of time' (see Khairullina, 2018, p. 308-309). It plays a special role in the process of thinking (Janda, 2013; Lakoff, 1993;Plungian & Rakhilina, 2013), as, alongside the notion of space, it is a logical structure of the highest level of abstraction, i.e., a higher-order notion on the basis of which the notions of mind can be constructed (Evans & Green, 2006, p. 231). Together with all the other units that reflect the interpreted objects or phenomena of reality and are embodied in verbal forms, it constitutes language (Nordlander, 1997, p. 3-4), or the world of rationally considered ideas formulated linguistically (Rastall, 2006, p. 34-35).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The framework of the notion of time is modelled on the basis of the meanings of the lexical means that represent it. Even though the mental unit of time has been the subject of a number of studies (Huang, 2016; Janda, 2013; Lakoff, 1993;Makarova & Nesset, 2013;Nordlander, 1997;Plungian & Rakhilina, 2013;Tatsenko, 2009), only a few linguists have attempted to answer the question about its basic semantic structure. So, for example, Evans (2005) reduced all the possible meanings of the noun time to eight senses based on the meaning, concept elaboration and grammatical criteria.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verbalization of the Notion of Time in Present-Day English

Mai

Borysov

2022

StALan

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The universal notion of time, alongside the basic notion of space, is believed to determine the formation of a huge number of other notions of the human mind. The results of time interpretation are fixed first and foremost in the semantics of the lexical units of national languages. The novelty of this research is that the noun synonyms to the lexeme time in present-day English have been established and analyzed with their subsequent grouping in synonymic rows within the core of the nominative field of time. The structure of the polysemous lexeme time, which consists of nine lexico-semantic variants, was chosen as guidance for synonymic rows organization. On the ground of the established obligatory and optional ties between them, among which hyper-hyponymic relations turn out to be fundamental, the semantic network of the core of the nominative field of time has been revealed and visualized. The network is based on four central hypersemes that represent the main features of the notion of time verbalized by the noun units of present-day English. A clear tendency of synonyms to express time metaphorically and metonymically in terms of ‘quantity’ in close connection to the components ‘something that happens’ and ‘state’ has been established.

show abstract

“…The further rationale for focusing on speed in this study is driven by its central relevance to motion (Ikegami 1969, Slobin et al 2014 and is also supported by the fact that motion verbs tend to form a continuum from those expressing very slow to those expressing very fast motion (Taremaa 2017). Furthermore, fast motion tends to have more lexical resources in terms of adverbs and adjectives in many languages (Dixon 1982, Plungian & Rakhilina 2013, Hallonsten Halling 2018, Schäfer 2020, which indicates the fast-over-slow asymmetry (Taremaa & Kopecka 2022). A recent corpus study on Estonian motion verbs (Taremaa & Kopecka 2023) further suggests that manner verbs expressing fast motion (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speed as a dimension of manner in Estonian frog stories

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Focusing on the expression of manner and path in the ‘frog story’ narrations of Estonian native speakers, this study shows that Estonian – a morphologically rich satellite-framed Finno-Ugric language – is characterised by high manner and high path salience. Furthermore, when analysing one of the core qualities of manner – speed – we show that when the participants were asked to narrate a story as if the events developed slowly, they also spoke slowly and their stories tended to be long (both in time duration and word count) and include many details. When they were asked to tell the story as if the events developed fast, they also spoke faster and used more verbs of caused motion and verbs of vertical motion. Thus, the speed of motion in the physical world seems to be mimicked by speech rate, indicating mental simulation and iconic prosody. The exact nature of speed effects in linguistic choices for expressing motion remains to be studied in future works.

show abstract

Time and speed: Where do speed adjectives come from?

Cited by 9 publications

References 11 publications

Constructicography

Constructicography

Verbalization of the Notion of Time in Present-Day English

Speed as a dimension of manner in Estonian frog stories

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About