Wierzbicka, Anna (1967). On the semantics of the verbal aspect in Polish. In Robert Abernathy et al. (Eds.), To honor Roman Jakobson: Essays on the occasion of his seventieth birthday. Vol. 3 (pp. 2231-2249). The Hague: Mouton.
(1974) English – Direct, indirect, free indirect discourse
Wierzbicka, Anna (1974). The semantics of direct and indirect discourse. Papers in Linguistics, 7, 267-307. DOI: 10.1080/08351817409370375
The claim that every utterance contains in its deep structure the component “I say to you” has been referred to as the performative hypothesis. I do not accept that every utterance contains the component “I say to you”, but I do adhere to a weaker version, i.e. I believe that every utterance contains in its deep structure the component “I say”. In this paper, I argue that, in light of the semantics of direct, indirect, and so-called free indirect discourse, it looks stronger and more resilient than ever. Direct discourse does underlie indirect discourse (a view questioned by some), but the relation between the two is not as straightforward as it appears: direct discourse is “show” as well as speech, indirect discourse is speech only. Moreover, it is an essential aspect of the meaning of both direct and indirect discourse (as well as of all the transitional forms between the two) that they involve an act of imagination. I suggest that “imagine” is an indispensable element in human thinking as well as in semantic analysis, in other words, it is a semantic primitive (alongside with “say”, “you”, “I” and ten others). An investigation of the semantics of different forms of reported speech seems to corroborate this hypothesis.
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
(1975) Action sentences
Wierzbicka, Anna (1975). Why “kill” does not mean “cause to die”: The semantics of action sentences. Foundations of Language, 13(4), 491-528. Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25000935
No abstract available.
(1975) Topic, focus, deep structure
Wierzbicka, Anna (1975). Topic, focus, and deep structure. Papers in Linguistics, 8(1/2), 59-87. DOI: 10.1080/08351817509370390
The interpretation of the phenomena associated with the terms “topic” and “focus” which will be proposed here forms a part of a general semantic theory, the main assumption of which is that the semantic representation of an utterance should be its “explication”, i.e. its paraphrase in natural
language which would employ only indefinable expressions. It is claimed that the indefinable expressions be found in any natural language correspond to a universal set of elementary semantic units.
(1976) English
Wierzbicka, Anna (1976). Mind and body. In James McCawley (Ed.), Syntax and semantics: Vol. 7. Notes from the linguistic underground (pp. 129-157). New York: Academic Press.
Abstract:
The underlying idea of this paper, the first draft of which was written five years before the publication of the author’s Semantic primitives, is that every natural language contains a subdomain that can be used as the language of semantic representation for the natural language in question. This subdomain reflects in an isomorphic way the universal and non-arbitrary lingua mentalis – the language of human thought. Sets of indefinable expressions, found in every natural language, correspond to universal ‘semantic primitives’ (1970s terminology for what is now known as semantic primes) that can be thought of as lexical items of the mental language, or ‘atoms of thought’. Proper semantic representation consists in paraphrase into these indefinable expressions drawn from natural language; no artificial symbols, features, markers, abstract elements, labels, or indices are acceptable.
(1978) English, Chinese – Causatives
Chappell, Hilary M. (1978). Semantics of some causatives in Chinese and English. BA(Hons) thesis, Australian National University.
(1979) English – Connective particles
Goddard, Cliff (1979). Particles and illocutionary semantics. Paper in Linguistics, 12(1-2), 185-229. DOI: 10.1080/08351817909370468
The aim of this paper is to come up with a semantic analysis of a number of English connective particles, including those usually referred to as “concessive” and “quasi-causal”. A semantic theory on the nature and representation of speech acts is argued to be a necessary preliminary to the semantic analysis of particles and other connectives. The paper seeks to discern the outlines of such an “illocutionary semantics”. The hypothesis that emerges is that particles are used as exponents of illocutionary force. Semantic representations for although, but, however, then and since are then developed on the basis of their role as exponents of illocutionary force.
(1980) English – GET (passive)
Chappell, Hilary (1980). Is the get-passive adversative? Papers in Linguistics, 13(3), 411-452. DOI: 10.1075/sl.l0.2.02cha
A new analysis of the get-passive is advocated, based on the belief that the study of semantics is fundamental and prior to the study of syntax. The initial assumption leads to the postulation of a discrete number of intuitively verifiable interpretations of the get-passive construction in the main section of the article. Natural language is used as the semantic metalanguage in the analysis of the passive. Each interpretation is subsequently reduced into less complex but more readily comprehensible units.
The article begins with an outline of earlier attitudes towards the use of get, followed by a brief description of several different kinds of passive constructions in other languages. An appraisal of two comparatively recent articles that specifically deal with the get-passive precedes the presentation of the semantic analysis.
Research carried out in consultation with or under the supervision of one or more experienced NSM practitioners
(1981) English, Japanese – Speech acts
Nevile, Ann (1981). A comparison of selected speech acts in Japanese and English. BA(Hons) thesis,
Australian National University.
Rating:
Research carried out in consultation with or under the supervision of one or more experienced NSM practitioners
(1982) English – Phraseology
Wierzbicka, Anna (1982). Why can you have a drink when you can’t *have an eat? Language, 58(4), 753-799.
This paper argues that sentences in the have a V frame are not a jungle of idiosyncrasies, but exhibit orderly and systematic behavior, governed by strict semantic rules. These rules can be stated in precise formulae with full predictive power. Ten subtypes are singled out: each has a slightly different semantic formula, but all have a common core, which is a semantic invariant of the have a V frame. These semantic formulae, which account for differences both in acceptability (have a drink and *have an eat) and in meaning (drink and have a drink), are stated not in terms of ad-hoc features or labels, but in an independently justified semantic metalanguage based on natural language.
(1983) Chinese (Mandarin) – Passive, causative and dative constructions
Chappell, Hilary Margaret (1983). A semantic analysis of passive, causative and dative constructions in Standard Chinese. PhD thesis, Australian National University.
A semantic analysis of passive, causative and dative benefactive constructions in Chinese is carried out in this thesis.
In Part I, the view of the bèi passive as an adversity passive in its traditional use is upheld and supported principally by the evidence of the synchronic semantic analysis and secondarily by other considerations such as its evolution from verb to grammatical exponent, its restricted usage when compared with the neutral topic-comment constructions and its function as a warning in the negative imperative mood. The treatment of the bèi passive as a polysemous structure results in its division into two main types: the traditional bei passive, comprising four constructions, and the ‘Europeanized’ literary bèi passive where the influence of European languages in translation has led to the loss of the adversity feature and the modification of the semantic requirements pertaining to the agent with respect to its two constructions.
The analysis of the get passive in English as forming a complex of constructions – some adversative and others beneficial in their overall interpretation – serves as the link between the discussion of adversity passives in Part I and the discussion of the purely colloquial passives formed by ràng and jiào in Part II, where parallels are drawn between the non-reflexive adversative get passive and the rang passive.
In Part II, an argument in favour of considering the ràng and jiào passives to be semantically distinct both from one another and from the bèi passive is presented. It is contended that ràng forms passives of “avoidable events” whereas jiào forms passives expressing the unexpected nature of the event. The causative constructions formed by ràng and jiào are also treated in Part II and shown to differ considerably in their syntactic behaviour from their respective passive constructions despite the sharing of the same syntactic form. Evidence is adduced to support the view that none of the jiào causatives express the meaning of ‘let’ or ‘allow’ whereas some of the ràng causatives do. In this way, ràng and jiào causatives are shown not to be interchangeable.
In Part III, an argument is presented against the claim that the preverbal gěi construction in Chinese is polysemous to the extent of being a benefactive construction that is mutually substitutable with the meanings of two other constructions formed by ti ‘on behalf of’ and wei ‘for the sake of’. Secondly, it is argued that the benefactive gěi construction is not mutually transformable with either of the two dative constructions formed by gěi as each of these three constructions not only has a unique syntactic form but consequently a unique semantic structure.
Research carried out in consultation with or under the supervision of one or more experienced NSM practitioners
(1983) English – Clothing
Wierzbicka, Anna (1983). Skirts and trousers: Lexikography and conceptional analysis. Wiener Slawistischer Almanach, 11, 229-255.
Abstract:
Trying to replace dictionary definitions with something more adequate turns out to be a task much more laborious and much more sophisticated than anyone would assume who has never attempted to do it. This paper pursues the goal of capturing the ‘true’ meaning of a set of words for kinds of clothing. To avoid circularity, it defines the meaning of these words in terms of a small set of indefinables: not necessarily ultimate, truly irreducible indefinables, but at least relative indefinables, i.e. items that are indubitably simpler in meaning than the definienda themselves.
The title of the paper is as printed above: lexikography instead of lexicography, and conceptional instead of conceptual.
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
(1984) English – Categorization
Wierzbicka, Anna (1984). Apples are not a “kind of fruit”: The semantics of human categorization. American Ethnologist, 11(2), 313-328.
Translated into Polish as chapter 3 of:
Wierzbicka, Anna (1999). Język – umysł – kultura [Language, mind, culture]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
This paper examines the semantic structure of English classificatory terms in the area of concrete lexicon, linking differences in semantic structure with differences in grammatical characteristics of different classes of nouns. I argue that in recent literature on human categorization the strictly taxonomic categories (i.e., categories based on hierarchies of kinds) have not been distinguished from
other types of categories. I discuss four types of supercategory that do not stand for “a kind of thing”: two different types of collective supercategories that stand for heterogeneous collections of things, a supercategory that stands for heterogeneous classes of materials, and a supercategory of purely functional concepts.
(1984) English – Drinking utensils
Wierzbicka, Anna (1984). Cups and mugs: Lexicography and conceptual analysis. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 205-255.
DOI: 10.1080/07268608408599326
A more recent publication building on this one is chapter 1 (pp. 10-103) of:
Wierzbicka, Anna (1985). Lexicography and conceptual analysis. Ann Arbor: Karoma.
Abstract:
In contrast to most other recent [1984] writings on the subject, this paper tries to demonstrate not only that it is possible to say what ordinary words mean, but also that both the process and the results of establishing these meanings can be exciting and illuminating. It tries to do this not by arguing theoretically that it is possible to define everyday words, but by actually defining them in practice. The focus is on names of simple artefacts, and in particular on the words cup and mug, which have acquired a special notoriety in the literature.
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
(1985) English – Arbitrariness
Wierzbicka, Anna (1985). Oats and wheat: The fallacy of arbitrariness. In John Haiman (Ed.), Iconicity in syntax (pp. 311-342). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/tsl.6.16wie
It is the purpose of the present paper to challenge a Bloomfieldian dogma and to explore the opposite view: that form classes are semantically motivated, and that differences in grammatical behavior reflect iconically differences in meaning. As my test case I will take the very area which apparently gives the tenet of arbitrariness the strongest possible support: mass nouns. I investigate the very restricted grammatical category singular/plural, the arbitrariness of which is a standard topos in all the linguistic textbooks. I undertake to show that seemingly arbitrary distinctions like the one between wheat and oats are in fact motivated by a set of principles with predictive power.
It emerges from the present study that the syntax of mass nouns in English is iconic to a degree previously undreamt of either by linguists or by philosophers who have written on the subject. Grammatical behavior which has previously been regarded as idiosyncratic has been shown to be semantically motivated. The grammar of mass nouns reflects iconically the way in which different classes of things and ‘stuffs’ are conceptualized. The apparent idiosyncrasies, far from being arbitrary, are revealing of subtle distinctions in the underlying conceptualizations. The relationship is iconic in the sense that the system of formal distinctions and the system of conceptual distinctions are mutually isomorphic.
(1985) English – Speech act verbs
Wierzbicka, Anna (1985). Challenge, dare, defy: The semantics and lexicography of speech act verbs. Beiträge zur Phonetik und Linguistik, 48, 77-92.
Abstract:
Lexicographers have done a tremendous amount of work that, though lacking in the glamour of fashionable linguistic theories, may well prove to be of more use, and of more lasting value. It would be impardonable if, in undertaking new kinds of lexicographic activity, the semanticists and lexicographers of today and of tomorrow failed to acknowledge the great debt they owe to the classical dictionaries of the past. Nonetheless, the time has come to explore new avenues of lexicographic research. The present paper, and the dictionary (published 1987) on which it is based, is an attempt in this direction. It provides definitions of three English speech act verbs: challenge, dare, and defy.
In the author’s analysis, no speech act verb can be defined in terms of another speech act verb. The only verb referring to speech that can occur in the explications is say, which is regarded as indefinable and has the status of a universal semantic prime. The other words used in the explications do not always have this status, but they are all relatively simple. The strict separation of the words that are being defined from the small set of relatively simple words used for defining prevents vicious circles; rather than translating unknowns into other unknowns, the analysis reduces ‘posteriora’, i.e. complex and relatively obscure concepts, to ‘priora’, i.e. simpler and relatively clear concepts.
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
(1985) English, Polish – Double life of a bilingual
Wierzbicka, Anna (1985). *The double life of a bilingual. In Roland Sussex, & Jerzy. Zubrzycki (Eds.), Polish People and Culture in Australia (pp. 187-223). Canberra: Australian National University.
(1985) English, Polish – Speech acts
Wierzbicka, Anna (1985). Different cultures, different languages, different speech acts: Polish vs. English. Journal of Pragmatics, 9(2-3), 145-178.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(85)90023-2
Abstract:
This paper discusses a number of differences between English and Polish in the area of speech acts, and links them with different cultural norms and cultural assumptions. It is shown that English, as compared with Polish, places heavy restrictions on the use of the imperative and makes extensive use of interrogative and conditional forms. Features of English which have been claimed to be due to universal principles of politeness are shown to be language-specific and culture-specific. Moreover, even with respect to English, they are shown to be due to aspects of culture much deeper than mere norms of politeness. Linguistic differences are shown to be associated with cultural differences such as spontaneity, directness, intimacy and affection vs. indirectness, distance, tolerance and anti-dogmaticism. Certain characteristic features of Australian English are discussed and are shown to reflect some aspects of the Australian ethos. Implications for a theory of speech acts and for interethnic communication are discussed. In particular, certain influential theories of speech acts (based largely on English) are shown to be ethnocentric and dangerous in their potential social effects.
Translations:
Into Polish:
Chapter 6 (pp. 228-269) of Wierzbicka, Anna (1999), Język – umysł – kultura [Language, mind, culture]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
More information:
A more recent publication building on this one is:
Chapter 2 (pp. 25-65) of Wierzbicka, Anna (1991), Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Rating:
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
(1985) Lexicography and conceptual analysis [BOOK]
Wierzbicka, Anna (1985). Lexicography and conceptual analysis. Ann Arbor: Karoma.
Abstract:
This book is about the meaning of words – simple everyday words, such as bottle or jar; trousers or skirt; tree, flower or bird. Stating the meaning of such words is infinitely more difficult and challenging than might be expected. However, the book proves that everyday words are definable; it does so not just by reasoning (which can always turn out to be fallacious) but by way of demonstration ad oculos. The definitions provide evidence towards resolving the much debated issue of dictionaries vs. encyclopedias.
At the same time, the book is an attempt to narrow the gap between lexicography and semantics. The latter has an obligation to provide theoretical foundations for the former. But it will never be able to do so if it doesn’t come down from its speculative heights and engage in the humble task of actually trying to define something. Serious analysis of concrete lexical data requires a well thought-out theoretical framework; but a theoretical framework cannot be well thought-out if it is not grounded on a solid empirical basis. What is needed is a union of the two, lexicography and semantics, and this is the goal to which the present book aspires. Both the definitions and the discussion are free of any technical items, and can be followed by the intelligent layperson.
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Reviews:
Peeters, Bert (1989). Journal of English Linguistics, 22(2), 249-250.
DOI: 10.1177/007542428902200209
(1986) Emotions
Wierzbicka, Anna (1986). Human emotions: Universal or culture-specific? American Anthropologist, 88(3), 584-594.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1986.88.3.02a00030
Abstract:
The search for ‘fundamental human emotions’ has been seriously impeded by the absence of a culture-independent semantic metalanguage. The author proposes a metalanguage based on a postulated set of universal semantic primitives, and shows how language-specific meanings of emotion terms can be captured and how rigorous cross-cultural comparisons of emotion terms can be achieved.
More information:
A more recent publication building on this one is:
Chapter 3 (pp. 119-134) of Wierzbicka, Anna (1992), Semantics, culture, and cognition: Universal human concepts in culture-specific configurations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rating:
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
