Seyed Mahmoud Motesharrei; Fatemeh Yousefi Rad
Volume 11, Issue 2 , June 2020, , Pages 181-201
Abstract
The present paper aimed at investigating the polysemy of the Persian word Topol from the perspective of cognitive sociolinguistics. The study begins with introducing the tenets of cognitive sociolinguistics, and then goes on to investigate the polysemy of the Persian adjective topol within this framework. ...
Read More
The present paper aimed at investigating the polysemy of the Persian word Topol from the perspective of cognitive sociolinguistics. The study begins with introducing the tenets of cognitive sociolinguistics, and then goes on to investigate the polysemy of the Persian adjective topol within this framework. In cognitive sociolinguistics, it is believed that polysemy cannot be reduced to a static state, one and the same for all speakers of a language. Rather, social variables like age and gender of speakers affect the way they perceive different senses of the polysemous words. This paper, in line with cognitive sociolinguistic studies on polysemy employed advanced statistical methods of Logistic Regression and Cross Tab to study the polysemy of Persian adjective Topol. The data were gathered through library research (including Persian dictionaries), interviews, and questionnaires. The research method employed is mixed, that is, qualitative and quantitative. The data were gathered from 200 participants, 100 male and 100 females, in four different age groups. The main hypothesis was that the “mere” cognitive approach is not adequate enough to explain lexical polysemy. The results indicate that cognitive sociolinguistics is indeed more adequate in giving more exact explanations concerning meaning variation in polysemous words and the effect of social variables of age and gender on the number and salience of each sense. In other words, the results show that different senses of the polysemous words do not suggest the same distribution among different speakers, both male and female, belonging to different age groups, and is not accidental but explainable in terms of age and gender of the speakers.
Sepideh Abdolkarimi; Ehsan Changizi
Volume 9, Issue 17 , July 2018, , Pages 21-47
Abstract
Extended abstract
1- Introduction
Present research has been an attempt to investigate semantic aspects of “gereftan” diachronically, within the framework of cognitive semantics. The noticeable question in the present analysis is that if there exists a verb, namely “gereft/gir” which is used ...
Read More
Extended abstract
1- Introduction
Present research has been an attempt to investigate semantic aspects of “gereftan” diachronically, within the framework of cognitive semantics. The noticeable question in the present analysis is that if there exists a verb, namely “gereft/gir” which is used in modern Persian with many different meanings or if there exists different “gereft/gir”s, each is associated with a meaning. For diachronic analysis of semantic aspects of “gereftan”, the authors have collected historical data from Iranian languages, i.e., forms and meanings of this verb have been gathered from Avesta, ancient Persian, middle Persian and modern Persian, namely Dari (versified and prose texts from Islamic era). Main questions in this research are: Do present documents affirm the polysemy of “gereftan”? Which image schemas are represented in compound constructions in which this word has been the verbal part? What kind of relationship is there between the represented image schemas on the one hand and the semantic components which have caused polysemy of this word on the other hand?
2- Theoretical Framework
Polysemy: Polysemy is a technical term in semantics used for words having different, but related meanings. Thus, in lexical semantics, words with different meanings are considered polysemous; but under the condition that was mentioned, meanings have at least one semantic component in common.
Image schemas: Image schemas are schematic pictures from humans’ embodied experiences imagined and formed in their minds. Image schemas lack details. They are abstract entities which contain repetitive models related to humans’ embodied experiences. Image schemas’ source of emergence is interaction with the outer world and conceptualizations after experiencing the world. The fact that humans talk so easily about abstract entities is because of the similarities they see or create between concrete experiences and concepts and abstract ones. Image schemas have different types as containment, movement, surface, force, path, directional, source, destination, event, and possession schemas.
3- Methodology
Gathering data for this research has been done in libraries and the analysis of the gathered data has been done using comparison and description. In order to determine semantic components of “gereftan”, first, different forms and meanings of this word have been cited from Avesta, Old Persian and Middle Persian. Then, using Dehkhoda dictionary, some parts of old versified and prose texts from Beyhaghi History and Shahnameh (by Ferdowsi) have been cited in order to investigate semantic function of “gereftan” in Dari Persian. Finally, evidences of semantic function of “gereftan” in New Persian have been found from Sokhan Persian dictionary. With observing the represented image schemas in the verb “gereft/gir” and the compound words in which this verb have been used, the authors have come to the conclusion that “gereftan” is a polysemic word according to historical and etymological evidences and certain types of image schemas are observed in linguistic constructions in which “gereftan” has been used. It was determined by the main semantic component of this word that in its own turn, has accompanied different meanings of “gereftan”.
4- Results and Discussion
The word “gereftan” is the remainder of the root “grab-” in Avesta and old Persian. The root “grab” is polysemous and had been used with the meanings “get”, “gain”, “understand” and “feel”. Getting something, occupying a place, understanding something and also feeling something all have a semantic component in common and that is [+ get something] / [+have something with oneself] either concretely or abstractly, as something which the agent do or the state which an experiencer experiences. In middle Persian, “giriftan/girift”and “gir” are the remainders of “grab-” in Avesta and in old Persian, associated with the meanings “get”, “feel”, “understand” and “percept”. In Dari, the word “gereftan” has been used with semantic components [+ receive] and [+ get the authority of]/ [+ have something with oneself]. Today, in modern Persian this word is used with semantic components [+ have something with oneself], [+ possession], [+ transmit power] and [+ initiate]. This semantic component can be used with different degrees of concreteness and abstractness. For instance, in the compound verb “bu gereftan” “bu” has been considered as a concrete object which the patient of the verb receives and keeps it with him. In a sentence as “matlab ra gereftam” (I got the point), speaker’s intention is to talk about receiving the content of the transferred message which is of course an abstract entity. The patient of “gereftan” might be something concrete like “yek nafar” (somebody) or something abstract like “ghol” (promise). In addition to possession image schema, other types of image schemas like movement, path, source and destination are also represented in compound constructions in which one of the building parts is “gereftan”. Because with semantic fulfilment of “gereftan”, we have movement in a certain direction and at the point where the patient of the verb is, we have the destination of such a movement, the point at which the movement ends. With regard to these common semantic components, different meanings of “gereftan” can be analyzed considering the image schemas possession, path, source, destination and force. The concepts path, source and destination are primary concepts which are gathered together to form the image schemas movement and event.
5- Conclusion and Suggestions
Due to historical evidences, the verb “gereft/gir” must be considered as a polysemous verb and considering different “gereftan”s as homonym words is wrong. Historical documents and semantic evidences have shown that different meanings of “gereftan” have semantic component(s) in common, namely, movement in a certain path, from a certain source and reaching a certain destination. Today, these semantic components relate different meanings of “gereft/gir”. The investigations have shown that the type of formed and represented image schema is related to the main semantic component of the verb which has been used in a given compound verb. Observed image schemas in compound verbs with “gereft/gir” as verbal part are possession, force and source which represent semantic components [+ have something with oneself], [+ possession], [+ transmit power] and [+ initiate].
Ali Abdollahi Nezhad; Ali Izanloo; Azam Estaji
Volume 9, Issue 17 , July 2018, , Pages 153-174
Abstract
Extended abstract
1- Introduction
When a word resembles the meaning of another word, both words are in the same ideal cognitive domain and follow a certain conceptual cognitive pattern. Such associations suggest important relations between these concepts that can be because of so many reasons like ...
Read More
Extended abstract
1- Introduction
When a word resembles the meaning of another word, both words are in the same ideal cognitive domain and follow a certain conceptual cognitive pattern. Such associations suggest important relations between these concepts that can be because of so many reasons like cultural priorities. Making a new association and eventually a new concept out of a new word, depends on the importance and the state of the association. Linguists' emphasis on the existence of focal and prominent meaningful entity for every single one of the concepts has been the fountain of many investigations for determining various meanings of a concept and its focal meaning in the form of semantic network.
2- Theoretical Framework
Some similar researches involve: (Achresh & Jahromi, 2015), (Afrashi et al., 2012), (Afrashi et al., 2015), (Afshari & Samet, 2014), (Ghavam Esperghem, 2015), (Golshaieb et al., 2014), (Graf, 2011), (Hesabi, 2016), (Ibañez-Moreno, 2005), (Mousavi et al., 2015). (Nasib & Izanloo, 2016), (Rasekh Mahand & Ranjbar Zarabi, 2013), (Rezaee & Rafiee, 2016), (Seargeant, 2009), (Sorahi, 2012), (Zahedi & Mohammadi Ziyarat, 2011).The common point that can be found among these researches and similar ones is that they try to determine different meanings of a word and draw its semantic network. The point that has usually been ignored is the grounds or inspirations that these meanings originated from. In the current research, based on the assumption that meanings are inspired by concrete or abstract features (social, psychological, cultural, etc.), the motivations of the meanings of bread in Farsi are going to be investigated.
3- Methodology
For collecting different meanings of bread, 18 Persian dictionaries and a corpus containing more than 2,600,000 words were covered. Meanings were elicited by referring to dictionaries' explanation for that special entry, then the prominent feature of bread that played the most salient role in making the meaning, was gained. For instance, the idiom "naan-e sefid-e falak" that could literally be translated as "white bread of sky" means (is record ed in the dictionaries as) "moon". When it is asked what feature of bread has inspired this meaning, it leads to "appearance": Similarity between a white round bread and the moon. Therefore, the shape and appearance of bread has been the ground and motivation for this idiom.
4- Results
In this research, the role of experience in creating various secondary meanings is studied. According to Fillmore (1982), meaningful elements in a language are created based on recurring experiences. Concepts are frames containing a collection of experiences that in contact with new phenomenon, one of their aspects can be triggered. On the other hand, for using the idiom "yek loghmeh naan"/"a bite of bread" meaning "a little amount of food or money", the concept of amount has been triggered, or in another idiom "nan-daani"/"bread's place" meaning "stomach", the place of bread has been triggered. Therefore, it can be said that tracing the semantic triggers of concepts leads to valuable information about different aspects of life and culture of societies.
5- Conclusion
According to Lakoff and Johnson (2003), our conceptual system is the result of our interaction with our culture and physical environment. It is interesting that in some idioms the meaning of bread refers to high value and in some to low value. The low value of bread can be traced through history in periods that Farsi speakers were suffering from drought and famine and vice versa, the high value of bread can be traced in periods that this foodstuff has been abundant. This research showed that meanings are not arbitrary and there are not any meanings out of the circle of features and interaction concerning them. It approved results of Buccino, Colagè, Gobbi & Bonaccorso, (2016) that by neuro-physiological investigation and analyzing the linguistic meaning reached to the conclusion that neurological structure of brain of human is responsible for perceiving sensual, dynamic and emotional meaning of words that proves embodied meaning in linguistics. The most important role of embodiment is generating commonalities from experiences of various people in a language society. These experiences build the infrastructure of common linguistic meanings.
