T HINK  and  BELIEVE  in Polish :  A search for semantic motivation in construction patterns Iwona K okorniak Małgorzata F...
Overview <ul><li>Cognitive Grammar (CG) assumptions </li></ul><ul><li>The Polish PWN Corpus </li></ul><ul><li>The adopted ...
1. CG assumptions: Construal vs. coding <ul><li>An event can be construed in many  ways   </li></ul><ul><li>A  number of l...
1. CG assumptions: Coding of THINK and BELIEVE <ul><li>relations represented by the verbs  are  constrained by sentential ...
1. CG assumptions: Coding by means of cases <ul><li>characteristics of the entities designated to interact with one anothe...
2. The Polish PWN Corpus <ul><li>extracts from 386 books, 977 issues of 185 newspapers and magazines, 84 recorded conversa...
3. The method: tagging <ul><li>Tagging categories : </li></ul><ul><li>Object case: ACC, DAT, o+LOC, w+ACC, INSTR  </li></u...
3. The method: Problems <ul><li>Object case : </li></ul><ul><li>(2)a.  Będę myślał  o  tym,  że  przed  laty ten  festiwal...
3. The method: Solutions <ul><li>Object semantics : </li></ul><ul><li>(3)  Pamiętasz? Obsesyjnie wierzył w Sokołów.  (ObjL...
3. The method: Solutions <ul><li>Object type : </li></ul><ul><li>(5)a.  myślałam, że  już  wstałaś.  Też myślałam .  </li>...
4a. Quantitative analysis:  myśleć <ul><li>Table 1:  Myśleć:  Direct object characteristics </li></ul>
4a. Quantitative analysis:  wierzyć <ul><li>Table 2:  Wierzyć:  Direct object characteristics </li></ul>
4a. Quantitative analysis:  wierzyć <ul><li>Table 3:  Wierzyć:  Indirect object characteristics </li></ul>
4a. Object type vs. verb type:  Pearson's chi-square <ul><li>CompINCI:  myśleć  (633) vs.  wierzyć  (248)  p<0.001 </li></...
4a. Object semantics vs. verb type:  Pearson's chi-square <ul><li>ABSTRACT:  myśleć  (115) vs.  wierzyć  (281)  p<0.001 </...
4a. DObj & IObj semantics vs. verb type:  Pearson's chi-square <ul><li>ABSTRACT:  myśleć  (115) vs.  wierzyć  (327)  p=0.0...
4b.  Wierzyć : Object semantics continuum   <ul><li>(6)a.  A w co wierzysz?...  w Boga wierze!   </li></ul><ul><li>‘ And w...
4b.  Wierzyć : Qualitative analysis <ul><li>wierzyć : imperfective aspect  </li></ul><ul><li>The internal aspect of the me...
4b.  Myśleć : Object type continuum <ul><li>(7)a.  „śpi, odsypia wczorajsze&quot;, myślałem, wchodząc po schodach </li></u...
4b.  Myśleć:  Qualitative analysis <ul><li>Myśleć : imperfective aspect </li></ul><ul><li>o +LOC -  an indefinite constant...
5. Research perspectives <ul><li>Subject continuum </li></ul><ul><li>Impersonal constructions ( myśli się myślano  ‘It is/...
Selected Bibliography <ul><li>Danielewiczowa, Magdalena. 2002. Wiedza i niewiedza: Studium polskich czasowników epistemicz...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Prague presentation

256 views
193 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
256
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
7
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Metaphor Festival 2009
  • Prague presentation

    1. 1. T HINK and BELIEVE in Polish : A search for semantic motivation in construction patterns Iwona K okorniak Małgorzata Fabiszak Anna Hebda School of English , Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Polan d
    2. 2. Overview <ul><li>Cognitive Grammar (CG) assumptions </li></ul><ul><li>The Polish PWN Corpus </li></ul><ul><li>The adopted methodology </li></ul><ul><li>Results: </li></ul><ul><li>a. Quantitative analysis </li></ul><ul><li>b. Qualitative analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Research perspectives </li></ul>
    3. 3. 1. CG assumptions: Construal vs. coding <ul><li>An event can be construed in many ways </li></ul><ul><li>A number of lexical items and grammatical constructions can be used to convey these construals </li></ul><ul><li>“ construal is partly a matter of linguistic convention and partly of the speaker’s communicative objectives” (Dąbrowska 1997: 115) : </li></ul><ul><li>(1) a. Peter has bought a red bike from his friend Tom. </li></ul><ul><li> b. His friend Tom has sold Peter a red bike. </li></ul><ul><li> c. A red bike has been sold to Peter (by Tom). </li></ul><ul><li>d. *Peter has been bought a bike from Tom. </li></ul>
    4. 4. 1. CG assumptions: Coding of THINK and BELIEVE <ul><li>relations represented by the verbs are constrained by sentential context </li></ul><ul><li>semantics and aspect of the verbs contribute to the construction patterns they go into </li></ul><ul><li>mental verbs , i.e, they represent what originates in the subject’s mind , the ‘internal reality’ ( Shinzato 2004: 862) </li></ul>
    5. 5. 1. CG assumptions: Coding by means of cases <ul><li>characteristics of the entities designated to interact with one another in the relation s contribute to the construal of the event </li></ul><ul><li>case markers depicting the relationships between the participants involved in the processes are semantically motivated </li></ul><ul><li>one case may be used to convey quite a number of relationships between or among participants of an event </li></ul><ul><li>different cases may represent the same or similar construals, each being motivated semantically </li></ul><ul><li>In Polish, there are six grammatical cases: </li></ul><ul><li>NOMINATIVE (NOM), GENETIVE (GEN), DATIVE (DAT), ACCUSATIVE (ACC), INSTRUMENTAL (INSTR), LOCATIVE (LOC) </li></ul>
    6. 6. 2. The Polish PWN Corpus <ul><li>extracts from 386 books, 977 issues of 185 newspapers and magazines, 84 recorded conversations, 207 websites and several hundred promotional leaflets </li></ul><ul><li>40 million words; demo online version of the corpus used – 7.5 million words </li></ul><ul><li>1048 out of 2882 random hits of myśleć </li></ul><ul><li>1008 out of 1147 random hits of wierzyć </li></ul>
    7. 7. 3. The method: tagging <ul><li>Tagging categories : </li></ul><ul><li>Object case: ACC, DAT, o+LOC, w+ACC, INSTR </li></ul><ul><li>Object type: ObjNP, ObjPro, ObjPropname, ObjcompINCI, ObjINFph </li></ul><ul><li>Object semantics: ObjHUM, ObjINSTIT, ObjCONCR, ObjLOCAT, ObjABSTRACT </li></ul><ul><li>Object number: Obj1stSG, Obj2ndSG, Obj3rdSG, Obj1stPL, etc. </li></ul>
    8. 8. 3. The method: Problems <ul><li>Object case : </li></ul><ul><li>(2)a. Będę myślał o tym, że przed laty ten festiwal uratował mi Zycie </li></ul><ul><li> [(I) will thought about this-LOC that before years this festival saved me life] </li></ul><ul><li>‘ I will be thinking about the fact that years ago this festival saved my life’ </li></ul><ul><li>b. wierzyliśmy w to, ze stary Marczewski ma pistolet pod poduszką </li></ul><ul><li>[(we) believed-1stPL in this-ACC that old Marczewski has gun under pillow] </li></ul><ul><li>‘ we believed that old Marczewski had a gun under the pillow’ </li></ul>
    9. 9. 3. The method: Solutions <ul><li>Object semantics : </li></ul><ul><li>(3) Pamiętasz? Obsesyjnie wierzył w Sokołów. (ObjLOCAT) </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Do you remember? He obsessively believed in Sokołów.’ </li></ul><ul><li>(4) Czyli żyje się ze skrzatów, ale się w nie nie wierzy? </li></ul><ul><li>‘ So one lives off brownies, but they don’t believe in them’ (ObjPro but ObjABSTRACT) </li></ul><ul><li>(4)a. Nie myślelismy wtedy o obaleniu komuny, lecz o poprawie życia. </li></ul><ul><li>‘ We didn’t think about overthrowing the communism’ </li></ul><ul><li>b. nie podobna było myśleć o ustawianiu rusztowania </li></ul><ul><li>‘ It was impossible to think about mounting the scaffolding </li></ul><ul><li>c. nie potrafiłem juz myśleć o rozmowie naszej jako o zwykłej wymianie zdań . </li></ul><ul><li>‘ I couldn’t think about our conversation as a mere exchange of opinions’ </li></ul><ul><li>d. Wszyscy próbują nie myśleć o tym horrorze. </li></ul><ul><li>‘ They all are trying not to think about this horror’ (ObjABSTRACT) </li></ul>
    10. 10. 3. The method: Solutions <ul><li>Object type : </li></ul><ul><li>(5)a. myślałam, że już wstałaś. Też myślałam . </li></ul><ul><li>[(I) thought that already got-2ndSG up. Also thought-1stSG] </li></ul><ul><li>‘ (I) thought that you got up already. I thought so too.’ (ObjcompINCI) </li></ul><ul><li>b. Tego dnia Irek nie myślał już więcej o sobie. Nie myślał też i w nocy. </li></ul><ul><li>[That day Irek not thought-3rdSG yet more about himself-LOC. Not thought-3rdSG also and in night] </li></ul><ul><li>‘ On that day Irek didn’t think about himself any more. He didn’t think at night either.’ (ObjPro) </li></ul>
    11. 11. 4a. Quantitative analysis: myśleć <ul><li>Table 1: Myśleć: Direct object characteristics </li></ul>
    12. 12. 4a. Quantitative analysis: wierzyć <ul><li>Table 2: Wierzyć: Direct object characteristics </li></ul>
    13. 13. 4a. Quantitative analysis: wierzyć <ul><li>Table 3: Wierzyć: Indirect object characteristics </li></ul>
    14. 14. 4a. Object type vs. verb type: Pearson's chi-square <ul><li>CompINCI: myśleć (633) vs. wierzyć (248) p<0.001 </li></ul><ul><li>NP : myśleć (180) vs. wierzyć (280) p<0.001 </li></ul><ul><li>Pro: myśleć (96) vs. wierzyć (98) p=0.663, p>0.05 </li></ul>
    15. 15. 4a. Object semantics vs. verb type: Pearson's chi-square <ul><li>ABSTRACT: myśleć (115) vs. wierzyć (281) p<0.001 </li></ul><ul><li>HUMAN: myśleć (71) vs. wierzyć (27) p<0.001 </li></ul><ul><li>CONCRETE: myśleć (31) vs. wierzyć (7) p<0.001 </li></ul>
    16. 16. 4a. DObj & IObj semantics vs. verb type: Pearson's chi-square <ul><li>ABSTRACT: myśleć (115) vs. wierzyć (327) p=0.004, p<0.01 </li></ul><ul><li>HUMAN: myśleć (71) vs. wierzyć (160) p=0.759, p>0.05 </li></ul><ul><li>CONCRETE: myśleć (31) vs. wierzyć (20) p<0.001 </li></ul>
    17. 17. 4b. Wierzyć : Object semantics continuum <ul><li>(6)a. A w co wierzysz?... w Boga wierze! </li></ul><ul><li>‘ And what do you believe in? I believe in God.’ </li></ul><ul><li>b. Niezbyt wierzą w szczerość intencji liderów tej organizacji. </li></ul><ul><li>They do not quite believe in honesty of the leaders of this organization </li></ul><ul><li>c. Wszystkie kobiety wierzą w Roberto. </li></ul><ul><li>‘ All women believe in Roberto’ (PERSON FOR SKILLS) </li></ul><ul><li>d. W biskupów popierających Radio Plus wierzą tez niektórzy szefowie lokalnych stacji . </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Also some bosses of local radio stations believe in the bishops supporting Radio Plus’ (PERSON FOR SPEECH ACT ) </li></ul><ul><li>e. Związkowcy twierdzą ponadto, że nie wierzą zapewnieniom rządowym. </li></ul><ul><li>Union members claim that they do not believe in government declarations’ </li></ul><ul><li>(SPEECH ACT FOR INSTITUTION) </li></ul><ul><li>f. Nie wierz ą żadnej ekipie. </li></ul><ul><li>‘ They do not believe any crew.’ (INSTITUTION FOR PEOPLE) </li></ul><ul><li>g. Zadeklarował więc, iż nie wierzy papieżowi. </li></ul><ul><li>‘ He declared that he did not believe the pope . ’ </li></ul>
    18. 18. 4b. Wierzyć : Qualitative analysis <ul><li>wierzyć : imperfective aspect </li></ul><ul><li>The internal aspect of the mental process i s displayed by the w +LOC nominal phrase </li></ul><ul><li>w +ACC - being in a privileged position , not easy to gain access to ; “being valued or judged as positive in some way” (Evans –Tyler 2004: 26) </li></ul><ul><li>the social interaction aspect is reflected by the dative construction </li></ul><ul><li>Dative nominal phrase – cause of the experience </li></ul>
    19. 19. 4b. Myśleć : Object type continuum <ul><li>(7)a. „śpi, odsypia wczorajsze&quot;, myślałem, wchodząc po schodach </li></ul><ul><li>‘ “ s /he is sleeping, making up for yesterday”, I was thinking as I was climbing up the stairs ’ </li></ul><ul><li>b. Myślałem, że żartuje, a ona mówiła to serio </li></ul><ul><li>‘ I thought she was joking , but she was serious ’ </li></ul><ul><li>c. do końca myślał tylko o swojej dziewczynie </li></ul><ul><li>‘ he thought of/about his girlfriend till the end’ </li></ul><ul><li>d. Myślał nad ścisłym, rozumnym wyjaśnieniem… </li></ul><ul><li>‘ He was thinking about a logical and accurate explanation… ’ </li></ul><ul><li>e. Niezależnie od tego, co naprawdę czuli i myśleli... </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Regardless of what they felt and thought…’ </li></ul>
    20. 20. 4b. Myśleć: Qualitative analysis <ul><li>Myśleć : imperfective aspect </li></ul><ul><li>o +LOC - an indefinite constant circular movement round the focal point </li></ul><ul><li>nad +LOC – extendedness of the LM </li></ul>
    21. 21. 5. Research perspectives <ul><li>Subject continuum </li></ul><ul><li>Impersonal constructions ( myśli się myślano ‘It is/was thought’ wierzy się, wierzono ‘It is/was believed’) </li></ul><ul><li>Aspectuality </li></ul><ul><li>Genre specificity </li></ul><ul><li>Discourse markers ( wierz mi… ‘believe me…’, myślę, że ‘I think that …’ </li></ul><ul><li>... </li></ul>
    22. 22. Selected Bibliography <ul><li>Danielewiczowa, Magdalena. 2002. Wiedza i niewiedza: Studium polskich czasowników epistemicznych. Warszawa: Katedra Lingwistyki Formalnej UW. </li></ul><ul><li>Gries, St. 2006. Corpus-based Methods and Cognitive Semantics: The many meanings of to run. Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-based approaches to syntax and lexis. Gries, St. & Stefanowitsch, A. (eds) 57-99. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter. </li></ul><ul><li>Janda, Laura. 1993. A geography of case semantics: The Czech dative and the Russian instrumental. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. </li></ul><ul><li>Langacker, Ronald. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar: Descriptive application. Vol. 2. Stanford: Stanford University Press. </li></ul><ul><li>Rudzka-Ostyn, Brygida. 2000. Z rozważań nad kategorią przypadka [Ruminating on the case category]. (transl. Elżbieta Tabakowska). Kraków: Universitas. </li></ul><ul><li>Verhagen A. 2007, Construal and perspectivization, The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, Oxford University Press </li></ul>

    ×