Asc Page 24 – nsm-approach.net

(1976) NSM primes – I, YOU

Wierzbicka, Anna (1976). In defense of YOU and ME. In Wolfgang Girke, & Helmut Jachnow (Eds.), Theoretische Linguistik in Osteuropa: Originalbeiträge und Erstübersetzungen (pp. 1-21). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.

In 1976 terminology, I and YOU are “semantic primitives”; in more recent times, they have been referred to as semantic primes. They cannot be defined away in terms of other primes and they cannot be dispensed with in favour of some arbitrary indices, such as those used in the artificial languages of symbolic logic. Their status as semantic primes can be confirmed on the basis of empirical semantic studies.

(1977) Mental language and semantic primitives

Wierzbicka, Anna (1977). *Mental language and semantic primitives. Communication and Cognition, 10(3/4), 155-179.

Reviews the history of the concept of a universal mental language that is distinct from particular native languages. 13 fundamental concepts of mental languages are proposed, and examples of the use of these elements are described. The importance of viewing linguistics as a science of the mind is stressed.

(1977) Speech acts (ignorative)

Wierzbicka, Anna (1977). *The ignorative: The semantics of speech acts. International Review of Slavic Linguistics, 2(2/3), 251-313.

(1978) Syntax vs. semantics

Wierzbicka, Anna (1978). *Syntax vs. semantics. Theoretical Linguistics, 5(1), 115-133. DOI: 10.1515/thli.1978.5.1-3.115

(1979) Ethnosyntax

Wierzbicka, Anna (1979). Ethno-syntax and the philosophy of grammar. Studies in Language, 3(3), 313-383.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.3.3.03wie

Abstract:

It is a commonplace to say that every language embodies in its very structure a certain world-view, a certain philosophy. To prove it in a rigorous and verifiable way, however, is quite a different matter. Scholars tend to treat the Humboldtian
(or Whorfian) thesis — despite its compelling intuitive appeal — with suspicion and embarrassment. One suspects that this is precisely because, while being “obviously true”, it is at the same time notoriously difficult to prove.

This paper seeks to explore one way in which insight and rigour might be achieved in this intriguing area. The essence of this approach is signaled by the first word of the title: ethno-syntax. Since the syntactic constructions of  a language embody and codify certain language-specific meanings and ways of thinking, the syntax of a language must determine to a considerable extent this language’s cognitive profile. It is true that lexical items also embody language-specific ways of thinking. But the semantic analysis of an entire lexicon is a gigantic and practically unfeasible task; and a cognitive description of a language that confines itself to selected lexical items is usually open to the charge of being arbitrary and therefore inconclusive. In the case of syntactic constructions, on the other hand, there is more hope of surveying the entire
relevant areas. Moreover, syntactic constructions have on the whole a higher frequency of occurrence in speech than most categories of lexical items; they are also more stable, more resistant to change, less dependent on extra-linguistic
factors. For all these reasons it appears that a rigorous syntactic analysis of language-specific syntactic categories should provide an especially valuable source of insight into the common ways of thinking characteristic of a given speech community.

Translated into Polish as chapter 10 of:

Wierzbicka, Anna (1999). Język – umysł – kultura [Language, mind, culture]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

No abstract available.

Rating:


Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners

(1979) Japanese – Grammatical categories

Wierzbicka, Anna (1979). Are grammatical categories vague or polysemous? (The Japanese ‘adversative’ passive in a typological context). Papers in Linguistics, 12(1/2), 111-162.

DOI: 10.1080/08351817909370466

Abstract:

The number of meanings that the syntax of a language codifies is usually fairly large. The number of available morphological devices is usually much smaller. It is therefore not surprising that languages make the same morphological devices perform a variety of tasks. Seen against this background, the Japanese passive has to be recognized as multiply ambiguous – or, in other words, multifunctional. How do hearers determine which particular meaning a speaker had in mind in any given utterance?

While real ambiguity does occur, in the vast majority of cases utterances contain a sufficient number of clues to guide hearers towards the correct (i.e. intended) interpretation of any given instance of the Japanese passive. Clues that help disambiguate Japanese passive constructions are listed, and it is argued that grammatical categories in general (i.e. including the Japanese passive) are polysemous rather than vague.

More information:

A more recent publication building on this one is chapter 4 (pp. 257-292) of:

Wierzbicka, Anna (1988). The semantics of grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

See also:

(1980) The case for surface case

Wierzbicka, Anna (1980). The case for surface case. Ann Arbor: Karoma.

Abstract:

This volume, a pioneering work in the forefront of theoretical debate, reviews the different perspectives – traditional, structural, and transformational – from which case has been viewed in Chomskyan and post-Chomskyan models and argues for a model of linguistic description that makes it possible to demonstrate the rationale behind the apparent chaos of case usage in rigorous and verifiable ways. The work is of immediate concern to those who regard passivization, ergativity, and deixis as controversial, given the restrictive linearity of the transformational paradigm.

Translations:

Into Russian (pp. XI-XIX, 1-27, 95-109, 147-152, 155-162 only) as:

Chapter 8 (pp. 255-301) of Вежбицкая, Анна (2011), Семантические универсалии и базисные концепты [Semantic universals and basic concepts]. Москва [Moscow]: Языки славянских культуры [Languages of Slavic Culture].

Rating:


Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners

(1980) Lingua mentalis

Wierzbicka, Anna (1980). Lingua mentalis: The semantics of natural language. Sydney: Academic Press.

(1981) Case marking

Wierzbicka, Anna (1981). Case marking and human nature. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 1, 43-80. DOI: 10.1080/07268608108599266

No abstract available.

(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) 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

See also: , , , , ,

(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

See also: , , , , , , ,

(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.

(1985) Speech acts, speech genres

Wierzbicka, Anna (1985). A semantic metalanguage for a crosscultural comparison of speech acts and speech genres. Language in Society, 14(4), 491-514.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500011489

Abstract:

This paper discusses a number of speech acts and speech genres from various languages, approaching them through the words that name them. It is claimed that folk names of speech acts and speech genres are culture-specific and provide an important source of insight into the communicative routines most characteristic of a given society; and that to fully exploit this source one must carry out a rigorous semantic analysis of such names and express the results of this analysis in a culture-independent semantic metalanguage. The author proposes such a metalanguage and illustrates her approach with numerous detailed semantic analyses. She suggests that analyses of speech acts and speech genres carried out in terms of English folk labels are ethnocentric and unsuitable for cross-cultural comparison. She shows how folk labels of speech acts and speech genres characteristic of a given language reflect salient features of the culture associated with that language, and how the use of the proposed semantic metalanguage, derived from natural language, helps to achieve the desired double goal of insight and rigour in this area of study.

More information:

A more recent publication building on this one is:

Chapter 5 (pp. 149-196) 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

See also: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

(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, 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