2
MINISTRY OF SCIENCE AND HIGHER EDUCATION OF THE RUSSIAN
FEDERATION
FEDERAL STATE BUDGETARY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION
OF HIGHER EDUCATION
«MOSCOW STATE LINGUISTIC UNIVERSITY»
(MSLU)
Faculty of English
Department of Grammar and History of the English Language
A. L. Pletneva
Diachronic Changes of the Representation of the Concept ‘State’
in English
Master’s thesis
Group 0-17-46
Academic supervisor:
Advanced Doctor
(Philology),
Professor T.S. Sorokina
Moscow 2019
3
Table of contents
1. Introduction…………………………………………………………….....4
2. Chapter 1: Theoretical background of the present investigation:
methodology and methods………………………………………………………….6
2.1. Linguistic concepts. Concept of state……………………………….6
2.2. Functional grammar and semantic functions……………………...13
2.3. Gestalt analysis and gestalt functions……………………………...16
2.4. Conclusions…………………………………………...…………...18
3. Chapter 2: Means of expressing the concept “State” in Modern
English…………………………………………………………………………….20
3.1. Models of non-resultative state……………...…………………….20
3.2. Models of potential resultative state…………………...…………..23
3.3. Models of actual resultative state………………………...………..24
3.4. Conclusions………………………..………………………………32
4.
Chapter
3:
Representation
of
the
concept
“state”
viewed
diachronically……………………………………………………………………..34
4.1. XVII century – overall results………………………...…………...36
4.2. XVIII century – overall results……………...…………………......42
4.3. XIX century – overall results…………………...…………………48
4.4. XX century – overall results……………………………………….54
4.5. Metaphoric usage of resultative constructions…………………….59
4.6. Possible cognitive interpretation of the turning point (XIX c.) in the
development of state semantics…………………………………………………...61
4.7. Conclusions………………………………………………………..64
5. General conclusions……………………………………………………..65
6. Linguistic literature………………………………………………..…….68
7. Material for analysis…………………………………………………..…72
8. Supplement…………………………………………………………..…..74
9. Teacher resource………………………………………………………..113
4
1. Introduction.
As is known, language gradually transforms itself over the centuries
adapting to the needs of the times [Aitchinson 2001]. Diachronic approach to
cognitive linguistics makes it possible to expand the studies in conceptual analysis
to historical explorations and get a better and more prolific view of the content and
structure of a concept [Кузнецов 2007].
The goal of the present paper is to observe the diachronic transformations in
the representation of the concept “State” from the 17 th to the 20th century and trace
its possible interface with linguistic worldview.
The subject matter of the present investigation is historical changes of the
content and structure of the concept “State” during the 17 th, the 18th, the 19th and
the 20th centuries. The object of our analysis is language representations of the
concept “State” and its subconcepts (Resultative state and Non-resultative state).
To pursue the goal priority is given to functional linguistics, cognitive
semantics and diachronic conceptology.
The methodology of the present paper includes functional grammar,
construction grammar, diachronic conceptology.
The methods used are functional semantic analysis, conceptual analysis,
structural analysis, gestalt analysis, random selection and frequency distribution.
The corpus of the analysed material amounts to 2021 examples taken from
twenty written records of the above historical periods.
Structurally, the paper consists of Introduction, three Chapters, General
Conclusions, Linguistic literature, Supplement, and Teacher Resource. The actual
text is supplied with tables, diagrams, and graphs.
In Chapter 1, the theoretical background of the investigation is presented.
The notion of linguistic concept and the concept “State” in English are discussed,
the premises of functional semantic and gestalt analyses are considered.
Chapter 2 surveys the representation of the concept “State” in Modern
English.
5
In Chapter 3, we focus on diachronic analysis of the representatives of the
concept “State” during the given historical periods and the ways of their
metaphorization. A cognitive approach is endevoured to account for the fluctuation
in the frequency of some gestalt functions in the XIX century.
General Conclusions summarize the results of the analysis as to the
possible interface of the historical changes of the English language and the
linguistic worldview.
Supplement presents some examples of semantic functions and gestalt
functions revealed in the diachronic analyses of the twenty written records (five for
each century under examination).
Teacher Resource offers some exercises based on the research that can be
applied in the course of ‘Theoretical grammar’.
Our proposal is as follows: diachronic changes in the representation of the
concept “State” reflect the changes in the linguistic worldview resulting from the
development and ordering of human conceptual sphere in the process of historic
evolution. Metaphorization of resultative constructions goes from fuzzy to concrete
in the semantics of the verb during the historical periods under analysis.
6
2. Chapter 1: Theoretical background of
the present investigation: methodology and
methods.
The tasks of the chapter are as follows:
1. To specify how “concept” is understood in modern linguistics.
2. To derive the definition of the concept “state”, based on the cognitive
linguistics’ understanding of the phenomenon of “concept”.
3. To reveal the subconcepts of the concept “state” and the semantic
functions representing it.
4. To amalgamate the revealed semantic functions into gestalt functions.
2.1. Linguistic concepts. Concept of state.
Before proceeding directly to the analysis of the results, we note the
following points regarding the status and content of the concept of "concept" in
modern linguistics:
1.
At the moment there is no common understanding of this concept in
linguistics, which is a consequence of the multidimensionality of this phenomenon.
There is no consensus on the number of semantic parameters needed to study it.
This includes both conceptual and figurative, value, behavioral, etymological and
cultural dimensions, each of which may have a priority status in the study.
2.
From the point of view of cognitive linguistics, a concept is an
operational substantive unit of the conceptual level (conceptual system), or
conceptual picture of the world, which reflects the results of human cognitive
activity in the form of certain ideal and abstract units. This understanding of the
concept was developed in the cognitive-discursive paradigm of Russian linguists
[Кубрякова 1997, 2004; Беляевская 2008; Болдырев 2008; Фурс 2004;
Беседина 2006].
7
3.
Although the concept is non-verbal by its nature, access to its content
is possible only through language. At the same time, none of the concepts has its
own complete language realization; not the whole concept is verbalized, but only
its
part:
lexically
phraseologically,
(through
dictionary
interpretations
grammatically (through phrases,
and
sentences,
contexts),
grammatical
categories and forms) or whole texts. In addition, the representation of the concept,
as a rule, involves means of several language levels.
4.
The content of the concept is not permanent. The dynamism of the
concept is manifested through the appearance of new significant features that
enrich the structure of the concept, or through the disappearance of pre-existing
features, which also leads to changes in its structure.
5.
Conceptual analysis is the identification of language-specific
conceptual foundations on which the semantic content of a language form is based.
6.
The conceptual system includes all the variety of concepts: it includes
both the concepts of natural objects and the linguistic concepts. In the process of
lexical conceptualization, structures of extra-linguistic knowledge about natural
objects, phenomena, its characteristics, and various conceptual areas are formed. In
the process of syntactic and morphological conceptualization, structures of
linguistic knowledge are formed. These are the most generalized abstract
meanings, represented by propositions / sentences and morphological categories
and forms.
7.
A number of concepts, both lexically and grammatically represented,
owing to its abstract content and fuzziness of the structure, are gestalts and, as
such, require clarification and specification. Gestalt consists of the most
generalized and abstracted conceptual characteristics that make up its content.
8.
Representation of conceptual content in the language reflect several
stages of conceptualization:
1)
initially, concepts as units of knowledge or units of a conceptual
system exist in our mind in the form of integral, gestalt units that are not structured
prior to their verbalization [Кубрякова, Демьянков 2007];
8
2)
in the process of verbalization of a concept (or its part), a multitude of
characteristics of the concept or meanings of different degrees of abstraction are
activated. These characteristics make up the content of the concept and are
represented through means of different levels (lexically, morphologically,
syntactically, etc.)
3)
then, the specification of generalized meanings at the sentence /
utterance level takes place, namely, the formation of specific lexical and
grammatical meanings. Additional linguistic factors include lexical semantics
(semantic factor), sentence / utterance structure (syntactic factor), the immediate
linguistic context (contextual factor). Since grammar is closely linked to lexis, and
morphology to syntax, i.e. these levels do not exist autonomously, conceptual
characteristics, as a rule, are represented at different language levels. Thus, the
same feature can be represented at different levels using different means, and the
same language means can represent several conceptual features simultaneously.
The points stated above led us to two conclusions that are important for this
study:
1)
conceptual characteristics forming the content of the concept, which
are specified at the third stage of conceptualization as lexico-grammatical
meanings (semantic functions (SFs)) can be represented at three levels: lexical,
morphological and syntactic;
2)
since access to the content of a concept is possible only through
language, the reconstruction of the concept can go through the stages of
conceptualization in a reverse order: from specific lexico-grammatical meanings to
generalized meanings (conceptual characteristics) and then to the verbalized
concept.
Basing on the above theoretical assumptions, we will try to formulate some
principles of the reconstruction of the concept of STATE which is the subject
matter of this paper.
First of all, we will define the concept of “STATE” and describe its status.
9
In this paper, “state” is understood as an ontological and linguistic, partially
verbalized, lexically, morphologically and syntactically represented concept; as a
unit of knowledge, holistically conveying language representation of world
knowledge as a gestalt. [Сорокина 2013]. The concept of "state" includes the most
abstract meanings - different types of state. Combinations of these abstract
meanings form the conceptual characteristics of the concept of "state", which form
its content.
As an ontological concept, “state” has two subconcepts: non-resultative state
and resultative (actual and potential) state. The resultative state was studied in
detail in the form of so-called resultative constructions by representatives of
Construction Grammar (CxG), whose theory was proposed by C. Fillmore
[Filmore 1989]. In this case, a construction is understood as “a linguistic
expression that has an aspect of the expression plan or the content plan that is not
deducible from the meaning or form of the constituent parts. Its elements can be
morphemes, words, sentences” [Goldberg 1995: 4].
Hence the basic postulates of Construction Grammar:
1.
elements of one level constantly interact with elements of another
2.
analysis at different levels is conducted not consecutively, but
level;
simultaneously;
3.
the meaning of the structure is not a simple sum, but the result of a
complex interaction of many features of individual components.
“…Construction grammar integrates different kinds of linguistic information
– semantic, pragmatic and syntactic information among others – in such a way that
allows to determine the extent to which the different kinds of information are
related and influence each other” [Boas 2003:85].
H. Boas, one of the leading representatives of Construction Grammar,
writes: “The form of a construction can be associated with different kinds of
grammatically relevant information that can be semantic, pragmatic, syntactic,
morphological, phonological or lexical in nature” [Boas 2003:87].
10
The ideas stated above, in our opinion, closely lead Construction Grammar
researchers to understanding structures as a gestalt, which prototypically represents
the concept of “state”.
Let us recall our definition of “state” as a linguistic concept: it is a unit of
knowledge conveying the language representation of world knowledge as a gestalt.
However, language does not directly represent knowledge about the world
“as it is”, but about a world that has already been projected into our consciousness
[Кубрякова 2004]. Consequently, a state is a gestalt that has received conceptual
processing, that is, a concept. Why is "world knowledge" transmitted as gestalts?
Because gestalts are integrated and unified conceptual structures with a broad
meaning that are not formed by simple adding the information about their
components. The concept “state” as a linguistic concept can be viewed as a way of
correlating meanings with surface forms. In other words, the concept of “state” has
different linguistic representatives, combining morphological, lexical, and
syntactic ways of forming and transmitting conceptual semantics.
The representation of the concept of “state” is expressed linguistically by
propositional (mainly predicate-argument) structures as a sentence, text and extralinguistic (encyclopedic) information, which at speech level is realized as a
statement, discourse and background knowledge, and at the cognitive level as
knowledge about the language, the situation and the world.
The nuclear semantic structure of a simple sentence (proposition), as a rule,
includes a subject, a predicate, and an object. In the verbal semantics, there is
usually an implicit indication of the number of actant positions in the verb. But in
reality, not all the actants of the verb are actualized in the process of forming the
sentence. For example, there are non-actant structures «The vase broke», where the
performer of the action and the object are not encoded. At the same time, the
semantics of the representatives of the concept “state” can be determined by
inference, when the situation is “completed” on the basis of world knowledge.
Compare the following examples:
(1)
The dog barked itself hoarse.
11
The dog barked the postman off the property.
(2)
Joyce hung on and broke himself decisively in the ninth game [Boas
2003].
In the first case (1), the linguistic knowledge of the polysemy of the verb
“bark” predetermines the semantics of the construction; in the 2nd example, the
semantics of state is derived inferentially from a proposition based on the sports
context (knowledge about the world).
Although the representation of the concept of “state” is realized in different
formats, we assume that it is the predicate-argument structure (in the format of
sentence) that has prototypical properties. And here we find a direct
correspondence to gestalt constructions, which are the object of Construction
Grammar.
Now we will try to prove,
1) that the prototypical representation of the concept “state” holistically
expresses the semantics of state, i.e. that a change in one of the levels inevitably
affects the whole structure, and
2) that “state” is a partially verbalized ontological and linguistic concept.
Let us consider the following cases:
1.
Resultativeness / non-resultativeness of state is determined by the
lexical meaning and morphology of the verb:
a. My feet ache.
b. The lake froze.
In (a) the verb “ache” lexically indicates a process at the present moment in
time, in (b) the verb “freeze” is lexically “resultative”. The attribution of the result
to the past is expressed morphologically.
2.
Actual resultative state and potential resultative state are differentiated
by the morphology of the verb, e.g.:
а. She sank into silence (actual state).
b. She is sinking into silence (potential, possible state).
12
3.
The lexical meaning of the verb predetermines syntactic status of the
resultative phrase: AP, NP or PP, e.g.:
a. He dyed the skin black (AP).
b. Her hair was dyed a brutal red (NP).
c. The salmon was cut into pieces (PP).
4.
A change in the verb’s transitivity leads to metaphorization of the
construction semantics, e.g.:
a. She sneezed.
b. She sneezed the napkin off the table. (with the change of the verb class from intransitive to transitive - a new actant appears, and the matrix meaning is
replaced by the metaphorical one: to sneeze = to blow =to move).
5.
The resultativeness of the semantics of state is created either by the
lexical meaning of the verb or by a resultative phrase (AP, NP or PP), e.g.:
a. The lake froze («resultative» verb).
b. Martha feeds chickens flat (resultative phrase AP).
6.
The semantics of the resultative state is created by the lexical meaning
of the verb in combination with contextual information, e.g.:
Having spent all night working at the restaurant, Matt had gotten really tired.
After he had wiped some ketchup and mayonnaise off a table, he forgot to clean
his sponge before wiping the next table. Thus, he wiped it dirty [Boas 2003:100].
In this case, contextual information determines the acceptability of the
resultative construction, although the verb “wipe” originally means “to rub a
surface with a cloth in order to remove dirt, liquid etc.” [Longman Dictionary of
Contemporary English 2001: 1642].
7.
The semantics of state is formed under the influence of background
knowledge (world knowledge), e.g.:
a. He froze to death (state of numbness from cold as a natural condition).
b. He froze himself so that he could return years later (a state of numbness as
a result of a medical cryogenic procedure involving a subsequent return to life).
13
Cognitive understanding of this phenomenon is found in the works of E.S.
Kubryakova and N.V. Yudina. The latter presumes that in the minds of native
speakers there is a latent meaning of constructions (due to certain knowledge of the
world and the peculiarities of perception of this world; although the compositional
semantics of such units is largely derived from the meanings of the components)
[Кубрякова 2004].
It follows from the above that the perception of representatives of the
concept “state” occurs simultaneously at all three levels - lexical, morphological
and syntactic. At the same time, it is the verb that imposes the properties of
instability, temporality, and propensity to change. However, with the leading role
of the verb, all the components of the structure are important, as well as discursive
and background knowledge. Therefore, the concept "state" as a gestalt is realized
verbally and non-verbally. In other words, at the conceptual level, linguistic and
non-linguistic knowledge is combined.
At the first stage of our reconstruction of the concept "state", we will try to
reveal
the
specific
lexical
and
grammatical
meanings
that
lexically,
morphologically and syntactically represent conceptual semantics. For this we turn
to functional grammar and the concept of semantic function.
2.2. Functional grammar and semantic functions.
In Introduction it was mentioned that as a methodology of this study we
have chosen the model of functional grammar, developed by A.V. Bondarko and
his followers and focused on the study and description of functioning units of the
grammatical structure of the language to express mental content. The key-point of
functional grammar is the notion of semantic function (SF).
The adoption of the functional semantic approach implies that, a) semantic
functions exist as a real aspect of the semantic content of the language; b) in an
utterance, semantic functions are represented through various language means,
including grammatical means.
The following criteria are used to reveal semantic functions:
14
1) semantic functions, that are the core of functional grammatical
description, are derived from the meanings of language units in utterances. In
particular, such meanings can be singled out through comparison of utterances
(texts) characterized by differences in their language content, but similarity in
some of the invariant content elements;
2) semantic functions must have a formal representation (a possible nongrammatical one);
3) semantic functions are generalized meanings that do not come down to
the meanings typical of grammar semantics only. Actually, these are the meanings
that are expressed by grammatical forms, form (grammatical) words, special types
of syntactic constructions, or meanings of lexico-grammatical classes of words
[Бондарко 1983:51-52].
All these criteria were taken into consideration while determining the
semantic functions of the prototypical constructions representing the concept
“state”.
Based on the analysis of written records of four historical periods (from the
17th to the 20th centuries), we revealed 30 semantic functions of representatives of
the concept “state” at different stages of the English language history.
1.
Physical state + stability
My feet ache.
2.
Physical state + accidentalness
He bleeded to death.
3.
Physical state + potential change
She is growing fat.
4.
Physical state + duration
The audience is sinking into silence.
5.
Physical state + spatial localization
She was always growing fat in her mother's house.
6.
Physical state + cause/source
He broke her favorite vase to pieces.
15
7.
Physical state + manner
The lake froze rock solid.
8.
Psychological state + stability
He adores this painting.
9.
Psychological state + accidentalness
I was amazed to see my father there.
10.
Psychological state + potential change
She was slowly starting to panic.
11.
Psychological state + duration
She felt filled with excitement for nearly an hour.
12.
Psychological state + spatial localization
His name tasted delicious on her tongue.
13.
Psychological state + cause/source
She was surprised by her brother's behavior.
14.
Psychological state + manner
She felt deeply ashamed of her actions.
15.
Involvement into movement + accidentalness
Mary urged Bill into the house.
16.
Involvement into movement + duration
She has been dancing Pat off the stage for half an hour.
17.
Involvement into movement + spatial localization
She has danced the poor guy off the stage.
18.
Involvement into movement + cause/source
He was danced off the stage by the crowd.
19.
Involvement into movement + manner
He fiercely coaxed George under the table.
20.
Involvement into action + stability
She always paints the walls blue.
21.
Involvement into action + accidentalness
My frock was ironed by that time.
16
22.
Involvement into action + potential change
She was tearing the blouse to pieces.
23.
Involvement into action + duration
She was ironing her clothes for half an hour.
24.
Involvement into action + spatial localization
They laughed him out of the room.
25.
Involvement into action + cause/source
The house is painted red by the old master.
26.
Involvement into action + manner
They cruelly laughed him out of the room.
27.
Social status + duration
They have been married for 20 years.
28.
Social status + spatial localization
They were married in church.
29. Social status + stability
She is married.
30. Social status + accidentalness
My mother was twice married.
At the second stage of our analysis these semantic functions were
amalgamated into gestalt functions in the process of gestalt analysis.
2.3. Gestalt analysis and gestalt functions.
Gestalt holds a specific position among the tools of the cognitive approach.
Although this notion is actively used, it has not been clearly defined. The term was
originally borrowed from neuropsychology. The most general definition is as
follows: gestalts are integrated and unified conceptual structures with broad
meaning, which are not equal to a sum total of their components. It is accepted that
any image, either simple or complex, is mapped as a holistic phenomenon in our
mind [Чесноков 2009]. It is difficult to find an absolute linguistic equivalent to the
17
German word ‘gestalt’ in the English language. To be precise, it is a specific
organization of parts that form a unified whole.
Gestalt theory along with the cognitive approach finds its application in
many disciplines: social psychology, personality psychology, gestalt consulting,
management, etc. In his work ‘Phenomenology of Dialogues in Gestalt Theory,
Mathematics and Logic’, S.V. Chesnokov writes that all the phenomena of the
mind can only be explained through gestalts, connections between them, means of
creating (deleting) and updating gestalts; and that human mind only deals with
gestalts [Чесноков 2009:49].
The notion of gestalt was introduced into linguistic research by G. Lakoff in
his work ‘Linguistic gestalts’: “...thought, perception, emotions, cognitive
processing, motor activity, and language are all organized in terms of the same
kind of structures, which I am calling gestalts” [Lakoff 1977:246]. The author
points out that the term ‘gestalt’ as he uses it “bears some relation to the concept of
the same name used by gestalt psychologists, but obviously differs in many
respects” [Lakoff 1977:247]. G. Lakoff lists fifteen properties of linguistic gestalts.
Although the author himself admits that his definition of the notion of gestalt is
vague and that he does not have a clearly formulated theory, some of the properties
of linguistic gestalts can be of use in the present study, namely:
1. Gestalts are at the same time holistic and analyzeable. They are
analyzeable as to its parts in more than one way depending on the adopted
viewpoint.
2. Parts of a gestalt are connected by internal relations grouped be type. The
type of relation between and among its parts is included into the gestalt itself.
3. Gestalts are structures used in processing (language and thought
processing, perceptual processing, motor activity, etc.).
4. Linguistic gestalts may include several types of properties: grammatical,
semantic, phonological, and functional.
5. Linguistic gestalts can be viewed as a means of manifesting
correspondence between surface forms and meanings.
18
Two of these claims, namely, a) inclusion into gestalts of at least two types
of properties: grammatical and semantic, and b) gestalt as a means of creating
correspondence between surface forms and meanings, are crucial to our idea of
gestalt. In this context, the main goal of gestalt analysis is the study of the ways of
relating the content components of the concept "state" and its language
representation. To do this, we introduce the concept of "gestalt function».
As follows from the above, the main aim of gestalt analysis is to study the
correspondence between content components of the concept "state" and their
language representation. For this purpose, we introduce the notion of gestalt
function (GF) [Сорокина 2014].
Gestalt functions are the result of amalgamation of semantic functions. GFs
as most generalized abstract meanings are conceptual characteristics (content
components) of the concept of "state" and its two subconcepts: resultative state and
non-resultative state.
A survey of the written records mentioned above made it possible to
amalgamate all the revealed 30 SFs into five GFs: physical state, psychological
state, involvement into movement, involvement into action, social status.
1.
Physical state
The sun began to grow hot.
2.
Psychological state
I never liked long walks.
3.
Involvement into movement
I am being swept off my feet at last.
4.
Involvement into action
Clarissa was suspended on one side of Brook Street.
5.
Social status
But she's not married; she's young
2.4. Conclusions.
1) In this chapter we defined the concept of “concept” as follows: a concept
is an operational substantive unit of the conceptual level (conceptual system), or
19
conceptual picture of the world, which reflects the results of human cognitive
activity in the form of certain ideal and abstract units.
2) We derived the definition of the concept “state”, based on the cognitive
linguistics’ understanding of the phenomenon of “concept”: “state” is understood
an ontological and linguistic, partially verbalized, lexically, morphologically and
syntactically represented concept; as a unit of knowledge, holistically conveying
language representation of world knowledge as a gestalt.
3) We revealed the two subconcepts of the concept “state” (resultative and
non-resultative) and at the first stage of our analysis we detected 30 semantic
functions representing it.
4) At the second stage of our analysis we amalgamated the semantic
functions into five gestalt functions: Physical state, Psychological state,
Involvement into movement, Involvement into action, Social status.
Chapter 2 is devoted to means of expressing the concept “state” in Modern
English.
20
3. Chapter 2: Means of expressing the
concept «State» in Modern English.
The representation of the concept “State” at the language level is expressed
by propositional (as a rule, predicate-argument) structures in sentences, texts, or
with extra-linguistic information, which at the speech level is expressed as a
statement or discourse; or is transmitted taking into account background
knowledge.
The ways of expressing state in the format of sentence have been actively
studied by representatives of Construction Grammar, as the so-called effective
constructions [Goldberg 1995; Boas 2003]. Their research provides the key to
understanding prototypical structures, i.e. cases most frequently and verbally
representing different aspects of state, and non-prototypical structures, which
require consideration of discursive information or background knowledge.
To describe different models of state, we will resort to the notation used in
Construction Grammar:
NP - nominal phrase; AP - effective phrase, expressed by the adjective; PP effective phrase with a preposition; QP is an effective phrase expressed by an
adverb or a combination with it, XP is a generalized notation of an effective phrase
that has different lexical and grammatical content.
The study of language material allowed us to distinguish 23 prototypical
structural-semantic models representating the concept “State” in the English
language.
3.1. Models of non-resultative state.
1. Models with lexical verbs (without an effective phrase).
[NP V (lex)]
e.g. My feet ache.
These non-resultative models, as a rule, include verbs expressing the
mandatory localization of certain states in certain parts of the body.
21
2. Models representing a combination of a state verb-link with an effective
phrase expressed by an adjective or an adjectivized participle.
[NP V (link) AP]
e.g. The beautiful is empty.
e.g. The soup tastes delicious.
Studying state as a semantic predicate, V.I. Korotina [Коротина 2004]
distinguishes several types of semantic predicates that are involved in the
formation of these models:
1) the “physiological state of living beings”. This group includes:
. predicates of «fatigue» (be tired, exhausted, etc.);
. predicates of «vigour and physical activity» (be energetic, active, full of
energy, etc.);
. predicates of “sleep” (be asleep, dormant, etc.);
. predicates of «wakefulness» (be awake, out of bed, etc.);
. predicates of “disease” (be ill, sick, unwell etc.);
. predicates of “healing” (be all right, better, etc.);
. predicates of «hunger and thirst» (be hungry, thirsty, starved, feel hunger,
etc.);
. predicates of “satiety” (be full of food or drink, be filled, etc.);
. «intoxication» predicates (be drunk, intoxicated, etc.);
. «sobriety» predicates (be sober, abstinent, etc.);
. predicates of the “thermal characteristics of the organism” (be hot, be cold,
freeze, be warm, etc.);
. predicates of “life / death” (be dead, be at piece, be alive, etc.);
2) the “human psychological state”:
. “mood” predicates (be depressed, be cheerful, be eager, feel like, etc.);
. predicates of “excitement” (“anxiety”) (be worried, be excited, worry, be
anxious, be concerned etc.);
. predicates of “discontent” (“anger”, “anger”) (be angry, etc.);
. predicates of "satisfaction / dissatisfaction" (be satisfied / dissatisfied, be
22
pleasant, be disappointed, etc.);
. “joy / grief” predicates (be merry, be sad, etc.);
. predicates of “shame”, “regret” (be ashamed, feel shame, etc.);
. “surprise” predicates (be surprised, be shocked, be astonished, etc.);
. “fear” predicates (be afraid, be fearful, etc.);
. predicates of "state of mind" (be mad, be sane, be conscious etc.);
3) the “social status of a person”:
. marital status predicates (with the meaning “being married”, etc.);
. predicates of “dependance / independance” (be dependent (on), be free, be
independent, etc.);
. property status predicates (be rich, be poor);
4) the "physical state of the environment":
. predicates of the state of the natural environment, manifested in the
sensations of cold and heat (be hot, be cold, etc.);
. predicates of the state of air, manifested in the olfactory sensations (be
malodorous, be smelly, be aromatic, smell stink, etc.);
. predicates of the light state of the atmosphere (be light, be dark, etc.);
. precipitation predicates (be rainy, be foggy, be misty, etc.);
. predicates of the state due to the degree of saturation with moisture (be dry,
be wet, be damp etc.);
. predicates of state perceived as clean or dirty (be clean, be pure, be dirty,
be filthy, etc.)
3. Models with lexical verbs (the resulting phrase is expressed in a noun
phrase).
[NP V (lex) NP]
e.g. He adores this painting.
Predicates of “state-relation” can be attributed to these models:
. predicates of “emotional relation” (like, dislike, love, hate, etc.);
. predicates of "desire" (want, wish, desire, covet, crave, need, miss, etc.);
. predicates of "spatial position" (stand, sit, lie, stay, etc.);
23
. “possession” predicates (have, own, possess, keep, exhibit (talent), etc.);
. “opinion / faith” predicates (believe, think, suppose, consider, etc.);
. “remember / forget” predicates (remember, recall, retrieve, recollect, think
back, reminisce, retrospect, etc.);
. knowledge predicates (know, experience, recognize, etc.);
. predicates of “understanding” (understand, see, apprehend, etc.).
4. Models representing a combination of a state verb-link with an effective
phrase expressed by a prepositional combination
[NP V (link) PP]
e.g. She is angry at a rude neighbor.
e.g. Local residents are disappointed with the decision.
e.g. He is tired of the same old sandwiches.
3.2. Models of potential resultative state.
Transition to a new state is possible with the help of such link verbs as
become, turn, go, grow, get, etc. The morphological form of the verb is also
important. Thus, the use of verbs in the Continuous form does not convey the value
of the achieved actual state, but rather transmits a potential resultative state.
Potentiality implies a transition, the beginning of this transition, but not the
achievement of a final result.
1. Model with an effective phrase expressed by an adjective.
[NP V (link) AP]
e.g. She is growing fat.
e.g. She is going gray.
In these examples, the potential resultative state is expressed through the use
of the Continuous form of the verbs “go” and “grow”, whose semantics imply a
transition to a new state, i.e. in these examples, potentiality is expressed at the
lexical-grammatical level by an intensification the role of the grammatical
component.
2. Model with effective phrase expressed by a nominal group.
[NP V (lex) NP]
24
e.g. She has been dancing for half an hour now.
3. A model with an effective phrase expressed by a prepositional
combination.
[NP V (lex) PP]
e.g. She is sinking into silence.
4. Model with an effective phrase expressed by a noun phrase and an
adjective.
[NP V (lex) NP AP]
e.g. She is painting the house red.
Constructions 2, 3, 4 can serve as an example of the expression of a potential
resultative state by combining the full meaning verb in the Continuous form with
effective phrases. The potentiality of the state in these examples is expressed at the
lexical level (the semantics of these verbs implies a change and the achievement of
some result), but only the grammatical form marks these constructions as
potentially resultative.
3.3. Models of actual resultative state.
A. Simple verbal constructions:
1. A model with a link verb and an effective phrase expressed by an
adjective.
[NP V (link) AP]
e.g. The door was open.
This model expresses a state that occurred as a result of a certain event (The
door was in state of having become open). This example, according to D. Embik,
describes a simple state, and the term “stative” applies to it [Embick 2004].
2. Model with a resultative phrase expressed by a prepositional combination.
[NP V (lex) PP]
e.g. He bleeded to death.
e.g. The engine groans into life.
e.g. The audience has sunk into silence.
As follows from the examples, an inanimate object can metaphorically act as
25
an experiencer. In this structure, the relevance of the state is expressed through the
integral value of the structure, i.e. both at the grammatical and lexical levels, since
the Simple and Perfect forms emphasize the fact of reaching the state. In addition,
the Perfect form conveys the idea of completeness. The combination of verbs with
prepositions, the main lexical meaning of which is movement, change of location,
contributes in this context to the actualization of the state expressed by the noun
phrase.
3. Model without effective phrase.
[NP V (result)]
e.g. The lake froze.
e.g. His entire body ached.
Here, the construction with Past Simple expresses the actual resultative state
with the help of a verb that conveys the result (froze is a resultative verb) [Boas
2003].
4. Model with an effective phrase expressed by a prepositional combination.
[NP V (result) PP]
e.g. The vase broke to pieces
If it is necessary to highlight the result, the effective phrase emphasises the
part of the event which is worth special mention from the point of view of the
speaker. The resultative construction conveys specific information. In addition to
the function of highlighting the result of an event, the resultative constructions
perform another communicative function - they specify the actual resultative state
of the participant.
5. Model with a verb in the form of participle II and an effective phrase
expressed by a prepositional combination.
[NP V (be + Part II) PP]
This is a construction in which the combination to be + Participle II, on the
one hand, signifies a static state, and on the other hand, a state closely associated
with the action, since it occurs only as a result of reaching the limit of action
embodied in the verb of a limiting character. In such constructions an active-
26
passive transformation is possible, but the types of tense forms are different. An
active correlate of this construction comes in the Perfect form. Such constructions
can also be combined with an indication of the actor, source, cause of the action,
but less often than the passive voice.
e.g. The school was united by long adherence to the Cathedral.
e.g. The picture is painted by a beautiful girl.
However, reference to the actor cannot be made in all cases. Thus, for
example, it is easy to introduce the actor:
e.g. Every table was engaged, but as they came in a couple got up and they
took the empty place.
Every table was engaged (by the customers)…
In the next sentence, such changes are theoretically possible, however, the
understanding of the sentence by a native speaker is almost impossible due to this
transformation. Compare:
e.g. He had ambitions that were vaguely political, he described himself as a
Whig, and he was put up for a club which was of Liberal but gentlemanly flavor.
*He had ambitions that were vaguely political, he described himself as a
Whig, and he was put up (by the authorities) for a club [Болдырева 1970].
In such constructions there is also an indication of the actor or the presence
of any object with with.
e.g. His face was covered with freckles.
e.g. The Coffee House was stuffed with regular buffers.
It should be noted that there are few such examples, since the function of the
actor, reason or source of action in the English language is performed by the object
with the preposition by.
There are also other cases of the use of the prepositional combination with
«with» in the sense of indicating the presence of an object (The Concise Oxford
Dictionary of Current English gives the following definition of this meaning of the
prepositional combination with «with»: “By addition or supply or acquisition of
possession as material”).
27
e.g. The walls were decorated with sporting prints.
e.g. The table is littered with pamphlets.
e.g. It was paved with red and yellow tiles.
6. Model with participle II and an effective phrase expressed by an adverb
(or a combination with it).
[NP V (be + Part II) QP]
In this case, adverbs (or combinations with them) serve as indications of
time, place, mode of action:
a) indication of indefinite time: just, now, then in the meaning of “at that
time”, but not frequency (for example: often, sometimes); not a successive change
of events (for example: soon, a bit later, then in the meaning of “then, then, then”
and not an exact specific time (for example: at three o'clock, in 1982), or moment
(for example: the moment she saw us).
e.g. The demon which possessed him was exercised now.
b) indication of time characteristics “already” or its antonym “not yet”:
e.g. It was not yet ended.
e.g. The door wasn’t yet closed.
e.g. Lord Darlington: You break my heart.
Lady Windermere: Mine is already broken.
c) time indication showing that the state has been reached by a certain
moment (by this time):
e.g. My skirt was ironed by this time.
The function of the indication "up to a certain moment" can be performed by
a subordinate clause or a separately used sentence:
e.g. It was burnt down.
e.g. By eleven it was all over. The castle was occupied.
d) these structures are usually accompanied by location indicators,
answering the question “where?”:
e.g. The car was parked outside.
e.g. He’s locked up in the strongest sell in the place.
28
e) constructions of this type may also include indicators of the mode of
action: well, badly, other adverbs in -ly, often accompanied by an adverb
prepositioned with “very”.
e.g. His face was badly wrinkled.
e.g. It was carelessly done.
e.g. It is very carefully worked out.
e.g. The house was well built.
7. Model with participle II and an effective phrase expressed by an
infinitive.
[NP V (be + Part II) INF (CAUSE)]
e.g. I was so amazed to see my brother.
In this model, the infinitive is often accompanied by indicators “so”, “ever
so”.
8. Model with participle II and an effective phrase expressed by a
subordinate clause of cause or comparison
[NP V (be + Part II) CLAUSE (cause / comparison)]
e.g. The bеd was made as though someone were going to sleep it that night.
e.g. The drawing room was done as if they were going to have guests.
e.g. I’m disappointed that I can’t report his doings.
In the last example Participle II of the verb of emotional impact is used. This
form is often considered an adjectival participle.
In all the examples described above, the meaning of to be + Participle II
depends on certain elements of the environment that are mandatory and necessary
for the grammatical meaning of this structure, because they impact the
combination to be + Participle II the meaning of state resulting from an action. The
absence of these elements of the environment will lead to the ambiguity of the
combination to be + Participle II or to the loss of this static meaning and the
acquisition of a completely different meaning – that of action.
B. Constructions with secondary predication:
29
1. Model with transitive verbs (Transitive resultatives), where the AP
expresses a resultative state:
[NP V (trans) NP AP]
e.g. Polly carefully wiped the area dry.
e.g. She painted the house red.
O.V. Filippova [Filippova 2011: 32] believes that this kind of effective
construction with secondary predication represents the prototypes of the structures
under consideration. Here the semantic structure of the verb does not include new
components, only the result of the action is specified. In this case, adjectives
derived from the present or past participles cannot be included in the resultative
construction [Carrier, Randal 1992]:
* She painted the house reddened,
* She painted the house reddening
In similar constructions with transitive verbs (“resultative phrases”), such
transitive verbs as wipe, stain, destroy, shake, break, shoot, stab, kiss, brush, kill
are most often used.
e.g. She had brushed her hair very smooth.
e.g. He killed it stone-dead.
e.g. That young man wanted her to kiss him unconscious.
With other transitive verbs such as touch, play, see, devour, watch, believe,
the formation of these constructions is impossible:
* Pam played her video game broken.
* Peter saw Richard nice.
* They believed the idea powerful.
2. Model with transitive verbs, where the object is not a regular member of
the actantial model of the predicate verb (Transitive resultatives with a nonsubcategorized NP), and the resulting phrase is expressed by a prepositional
combination PP.
[NP V (trans) NP PP]
(1) e.g. The earthquake destroyed buildings to pieces
30
(2) e.g. Ben drank Larry under the table.
(3) e.g. She ate him out of house and home.
In the second and third examples, the objects have no semantic connection
with the verbs “eat” and “drink”, and the meaning that “something is drunk or
eaten” (“thing eaten or drunk”); instead, they represent a condition that occurs due
to the subject’s excessive action.
In the second example, the post-verbal component Larry is not a regular
member of the actantial model of the predicate “drink”. The meaning of this
sentence is determined by the effective phrase and can be interpreted as:
As a result of drinking with Ben, Larry ended up under the table.
In these constructions the emphasis is placed precisely on the degree of the
action produced by the subject.
In these effective constructions it is impossible to use perception verbs (even
with a certain context). As an example, the myth of Medusa, which turned people
into stone with its eyes, can be presented:
* Medusa saw the hero stone / into stone.
3. Model with intransitive verbs, where the object is not a regular member of
the actantial model of the predicate verb (Intransitive resultatives with a nonsubcategorized NP), and the resulting phrase is expressed by an adjective (AP).
[NP V (intrans) NP AP]
e.g. They drank the pub dry.
Very often, hyperbole is used in these constructions in order to highlight the
expressiveness and exaggeration of the said thought.
e.g. Joggers ran the pavement thin.
4. Model with intransitive verbs and an effective phrase expressed by a
prepositional combination.
[NP V (intrans) NP PP]
e.g. She swept the broom to pieces.
Here, the resultative construction conveys specific information. Although in
this case the use of the effective phrase is motivated by the speaker’s intention to
31
emphasize the outcome of the event, it is limited to the lexical characteristics of
individual verbs, i.e. their collocational features.
5. Model with quasi-reflexive verbs (Fake Reflexive Resultatives)
[NP V (intrans) NP (reflexive) AP]
e.g. He ate himself sick.
e.g. The dogs would bark themselves hoarse.
e.g. John danced himself breathless.
These resultative constructions are often part of collocations with certain
verbs. For example, the verb “eat” is more often combined with “sick”.
When the verb “eat” appears in a resultative construction, eating must be
interpreted as “an action that continues for a period of time leading to a state
associated with overeating”; this cannot mean that it was “the food he ate that was
the cause of his illness”.
Not all adjectives can be used in resultative constructions of this model. The
adjectives
«asleep/awake»,
«open/shut»,
«flat/straight/smooth»,
«free»,
«full/empty», «dead /alive» are the most common.
6. Model with intransitive verbs and an effective phrase expressed by a
quasi-object and an adjective.
[NP V (intrans) NP (fake object) AP]
e.g. She danced her feet raw.
e.g. She sneezed her nose red.
This resultative construction may indicate an actual resultative state of a
patient other than the prototypical one. The post-verbal NP component is usually
called a quasi-object that plays a certain role in the transitivity of non-transitive
variants of the corresponding verbs.
7. Model with unaccusative verbs and an effective phrase expressed by an
adjective (AP):
[NP V (intrans) AP]
e.g. The lake froze rock solid.
G. Boas writes: “... verbs which do not require a fake object are unaccusative
32
verbs” [Boas 2003: 7].
However, not all intransitive verbs can be used in these constructions.
* She talked hoarse.
* At her wedding, she smiled sore.
* They coughed sick.
3.4. Conclusions.
1) Following the principles of Construction Grammar, we regard nonresultative and resultative constructions as gestalts prototypically representing the
concept “state”.
2) As a result of our analysis, we identified a set of means of expression (the
representatives) of the concept “State” in various text formats containing predicateargument groups (23 structural-semantic models).
3) The analysis showed that the formation of these models is possible both
with the help of lexical verbs without an effective phrase, and with the help of
verbs with an effective phrase expressed by an adjective, a noun phrase, an adverb
or a prepositional phrase.
4) When forming models of a potential resultative state, it is also important
to take into account the morphological form of the verb. Continuous forms are
prototypical of this type of resultative state.
5) In the models of actual resultative state, the relevance of the state is
expressed both at the grammatical and lexical levels. In all identified models, the
syntactic structure is determined by the semantics and class of the verb, which
requires certain actant positions.
6) Though non-resultative state is realized by only four models, the semantic
value of the predicate in them is large and versatile: e.g. the semantic function
“physical state” is represented by 12 types of predicates denoting “physical state of
human beings” and by 6 types of predicates denoting “physical state of
environment”. Specifically the model [ NP V(link) AP ] shows abundance of
semantically different adjectives and adjectivised participles in its effective phrase.
7) The largest number of models (14) are bound to represent actual
33
resultative state. Here models with transitive and intransitive verbs are of linguistic
interest, because transitivity of verbs, firstly, in many respects predetermines the
semantics of a resultative construction and, secondly, it tends to undergo historical
transformation thereby changing the semantics of a construction.
In chapter 3 we pass on to the diachronic analysis of the concept “state” and
its representation in the XVII-XX cc.
34
4. Chapter 3: Representation of the
concept «State» viewed diachronically.
The main tasks undertaken in Chapter 3 are:
1.
to illustrate the semantic functions (SFs) forming the gestalt functions
(GFs) of the subconcepts of the concept «State»;
2.
to trace the numerical distribution of semantic functions within the
analysed gestalt functions;
3.
to observe the grammatical means of expressing the gestalt functions
within each of the subconcepts;
4.
to reveal the most frequent means of representing each gestalt
function in the subconcepts;
5.
to find out relative frequency of each gestalt function for the
subconcepts and the concept «State» in general and reveal the predominant gestalt
functions;
6.
to compare the results of the diachronic analysis of representations of
the concept «State» throughout the given historical periods.
The following analysis of four centuries (17c., 18 c., 19c., 20c.) is based on
twenty written records:
17c.: William Shakespeare’s Hamlet; Macbeth; Othello; King Lear;
Christopher Marlowe’s Tamburlaine;
18c.: Henry Fielding’s Tom Jones; Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels; Jane
Austen’s Northanger Abbey; Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe; Ann Radcliffe’s
The Mysteries of Udolpho;
19c.: Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre; Wilkie Collins’ The Woman in White;
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities; Bram
Stoker’s Dracula;
35
20c.: Virginia Woolf’s Mrs Dalloway; William Golding’s Lord of the Flies;
Ethel Voynich’s The Gadfly; J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the
Ring; Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.
36
4.1. XVII century – overall results.
1) Number of written records: 5
Number of examples: 432
Semantic functions fall into 5 gestalt functions.
The non-resultative subconcept is the most frequent.
Number of GFs in each subconcept
Non-resultative
4
Resultative actual
3
Resultative potential
4
2) Number of SFs in each subconcept
Non-resultative
16
Resultative actual
13
Resultative potential
4
3) Structural patterns characterizing GF within the non-resultative
subconcept
Gestalt functions
Non-resultative
Relative frequency
37
[NP V(lex)]
[NP V(link) AP]
Physical state
20%
[NP V(lex) NP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
[NP V(lex)]
[NP V(link) AP]
Psychological state
76%
[NP V(lex) NP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
Involvement into
-
movement
Involvement into action
Social status
0%
[NP V(lex) NP]
2%
[NP V(lex) PP]
[NP V(link) AP]
2%
The most frequently used structural patterns are:
[NP V(lex) PP] (40%) -> It harrows me with fear and wonder (William
Shakespeare – Hamlet)
Structural patterns characterizing GF within the resultative subconcept
Gestalt functions
Resultative actual
Resultative
Relative
potential
frequency
[NP V(link) AP]
63%
[NP V(link) AP]
Physical state
[NP V(be+PartII)
PP]
[NP V (be+PartII)
38
QP]
[NP V(link) AP]
Psychological state
[NP V (be+PartII)
QP]
Involvement into
-
movement
[NP V(link) AP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
19%
[NP V(lex) PP]
13%
[NP V(link) AP]
15%
-
0
[NP V(link) AP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
[NP V (be+PartII)
Involvement into
action
QP]
[NP V (be+Part II)
CLAUSE (CAUSE
/ comparison)]
Social status
-
The most frequently used structural patterns are:
[NP V(link) AP] (20%) -> You are welcome to Elsinore (William
Shakespeare – Hamlet)
[NP V (be+PartII) QP] (18%) -> Thus the Grecians shall be conquered
(Christopher Marlowe – Tamburlaine)
4) Quantitative analysis showed the following composition of the resultative
state subconcept:
Resultative
Gestalt
Resultative actual
Absolute
Relative
Resultative potential
Absolute
Relative
39
functions
frequency
frequency
frequency
frequency
29
58%
6
67%
13
26%
1
11%
0
0%
1
11%
8
16%
1
11%
Social status
0
0%
0
0%
Total
50
100%
9
100%
Physical state
Psychological
state
Involvement
into movement
Involvement
into action
Quantitative analysis showed the following composition of the nonresultative state subconcept:
Non-resultative
Gestalt functions
Absolute frequency
Relative frequency
Physical state
73
20%
Psychological state
286
76%
0
0%
Involvement into action
7
2%
Social status
7
2%
Involvement into
movement
40
Total
373
100%
5) The concept “state” in general includes 5 gestalt functions. The
quantitative data for them are as follows:
•
Physical state GF: 108 examples, 7 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF03, SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07) → 71 non-res, 31 res actual, 6 res
potential
•
Psychological state GF: 300 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF12, SF13, SF14) → 284 non-res, 15 res actual, 1 res potential
•
Involvement into movement GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function
(SF17) → 1 res potential
•
Involvement into action GF: 16 examples, 6 semantic functions
(SF20, SF21, SF23, SF24, SF25, SF26) → 7 non-res, 8 res actual, 1 res potential
•
Social status GF: 7 examples, 1 semantic function (SF29) → 7
non-res
Gestalt functions
Absolute frequency
Relative frequency
Physical state
108
25%
Psychological state
300
69%
1
1%
Involvement into action
16
4%
Social status
7
1%
Total
432
100%
Involvement into
movement
The most frequent GF (355 ex.) – Psychological state -> Into the madness
wherein now he raves and we all mourn for (William Shakespeare – Hamlet)
41
The most frequent SF (173 ex.) – SF08 (Psychological state + stability) ->
Do you know this noble gentleman? (William Shakespeare – King Lear)
42
4.2. XVIII century – overall results.
1) Number of written records: 5
Number of examples: 444
Semantic functions fall into 5 gestalt functions.
The non-resultative subconcept is the most frequent.
Number of GFs in each subconcept
Non-resultative
5
Resultative actual
5
Resultative potential
2
2) Number of SFs in each subconcept
Non-resultative
15
Resultative actual
20
Resultative potential
2
3) Structural patterns characterizing GF within the non-resultative
subconcept
43
Gestalt functions
Non-resultative
Relative frequency
[NP V(lex)]
[NP V(link) AP]
Physical state
39%
[NP V(lex) NP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
[NP V(lex)]
[NP V(link) AP]
Psychological state
59%
[NP V(lex) NP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
Involvement into
[NP V(lex) PP]
1%
Involvement into action
[NP V(lex)]
0,5%
Social status
[NP V(link) AP]
0,5%
movement
The most frequently used structural patterns are:
•
[NP V(link) AP] (32%) -> On the 5th of November, which was the
beginning of summer in those parts, the weather being very hazy (Jonathan Swift
- Gulliver’s Travels)
Structural patterns characterizing GF within the resultative subconcept
Gestalt functions
Resultative actual
Resultative
Relative
potential
frequency
[NP V(link) AP]
54%
[NP V(link) AP]
Physical state
[NP V(be+PartII)
PP]
[NP V (be+PartII)
44
QP]
[NP V(res)]
[NP V(link) AP]
[NP V (be+PartII)
Psychological state
QP]
[NP V(link) AP]
34%
-
2%
-
8%
-
2%
[NP V (be+PartII)
INF (CAUSE)]
Involvement into
movement
[NP V(link) AP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
[NP V(lex) NP PP]
Involvement into
[NP V(link) AP]
action
[NP V(lex) PP]
[NP V(link) AP]
Social status
[NP V (be+PartII)
QP]
The most frequently used structural patterns are:
•
[NP V(link) AP] (30%) -> Twelve of our crew were dead by
immoderate labour and ill food (Jonathan Swift - Gulliver’s Travels)
•
[NP V (be+PartII) QP] (25%) -> My hours of leisure I spent reading
the best authors, …, being always provided with a good number of books
(Jonathan Swift - Gulliver’s Travels)
4) Quantitative analysis showed the following composition of the resultative
state subconcept:
Resultative
Resultative actual
Resultative potential
45
Gestalt
Absolute
Relative
Absolute
Relative
functions
frequency
frequency
frequency
frequency
Physical state
35
58%
2
50%
11
18%
2
50%
2
4%
0
0%
9
15%
0
0%
Social status
3
5%
0
0%
Total
60
100%
4
100%
Psychological
state
Involvement
into movement
Involvement
into action
Quantitative analysis showed the following composition of the nonresultative state subconcept:
Non-resultative
Gestalt functions
Absolute frequency
Relative frequency
Physical state
151
39%
Psychological state
225
59%
2
1%
Involvement into
movement
46
Involvement into action
1
0,5%
Social status
1
0,5%
Total
380
100%
5) The concept “state” in general includes 5 gestalt functions. The
quantitative data for them are as follows:
•
Physical state GF: 188 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF03, SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07) → 151 non-res, 35 res actual, 2 res potential
•
Psychological state GF: 238 examples, 7 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF10, SF11, SF12, SF13, SF14) → 223 non-res, 13 res actual, 2 res
potential
•
Involvement into movement GF: 4 examples, 1 semantic function
(SF17) → 1 non-res, 3 res actual
•
Involvement into action GF: 10 examples, 5 semantic functions
(SF20, SF21, SF24, SF25, SF26) → 1 non-res, 9 res actual
•
Social status GF: 4 examples, 3 semantic functions (SF27, SF29,
SF30) → 1 non-res, 3 res actual
Gestalt functions
Absolute frequency
Relative frequency
Physical state
188
42%
Psychological state
238
53%
4
1%
Involvement into action
10
3%
Social status
4
1%
Involvement into
movement
47
Total
444
100%
The most frequent GF (238 ex.) – Psychological state -> I was sincerely
affected with this discourse (Daniel Defoe - Robinson Crusoe)
The most frequent SF (115 ex.) – SF08 (Psychological state + stability) ->
M. St. Aubert loved to wonder, with his wife and daughter, on the margin of the
Garonne (Ann Radcliffe - The Mysteries of Udolpho)
48
4.3. XIX century – overall results.
1) Number of written records: 5
Number of examples: 513
Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
The non-resultative subconcept is the most frequent.
Number of GFs in each subconcept
Non-resultative
3
Resultative actual
4
Resultative potential
2
2) Number of SFs in each subconcept
Non-resultative
15
Resultative actual
17
Resultative potential
3
3) Structural patterns characterizing GF within the non-resultative
subconcept
Gestalt functions
Non-resultative
Relative frequency
49
[NP V(lex)]
[NP V(link) AP]
Physical state
52%
[NP V(lex) NP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
[NP V(lex)]
[NP V(link) AP]
Psychological state
47%
[NP V(lex) NP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
Involvement into
-
0%
Involvement into action
-
0%
Social status
[NP V(link) AP]
1%
movement
The most frequently used structural patterns are:
•
[NP V(link) AP] (30%) -> I must have been mad for the time…
(Bram Stoker – Dracula)
•
[NP V(lex) PP] (16%) -> I was filled with agitation… (Bram Stoker
– Dracula)
Structural patterns characterizing GF within the resultative subconcept
Gestalt functions
Resultative actual
Resultative
Relative
potential
frequency
[NP V(link) AP]
80%
[NP V(link) AP]
[NP V(be+PartII)
Physical state
PP]
[NP V (be+PartII)
QP]
50
[NP V(link) AP]
[NP V (be+PartII)
Psychological state
QP]
[NP V(link) AP]
7%
-
0%
[NP V(lex) PP]
10%
-
3%
[NP V (be+PartII)
INF (CAUSE)]
Involvement into
movement
[NP V(link) AP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
[NP V (be+PartII)
Involvement into
QP]
action
[NP V(lex) NP PP]
[NP V (be+Part II)
CLAUSE (CAUSE
/ comparison)]
Social status
[NP V(link) AP]
The most frequently used structural patterns are:
•
[NP V(link) AP] (36%) -> My father had been dead some years
(Wilkie Collins - The Woman in White)
•
[NP V (be+PartII) QP] (15%) -> A moment’s mutiny had already
rendered me liable to strange penalties (Charlotte Bronte - Jane Eyre)
4) Quantitative analysis showed the following composition of the resultative
state subconcept:
Resultative
Resultative actual
Resultative potential
51
Gestalt
Absolute
Relative
Absolute
Relative
functions
frequency
frequency
frequency
frequency
Physical state
42
71%
10
90%
9
15%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
6
11%
1
10%
Social status
2
3%
0
0%
Total
59
100%
11
100%
Psychological
state
Involvement
into movement
Involvement
into action
Quantitative analysis showed the following composition of the nonresultative state subconcept:
Non-resultative
Gestalt functions
Absolute frequency
Relative frequency
Physical state
232
52%
Psychological state
209
47%
0
0%
Involvement into
movement
52
Involvement into action
0
0%
Social status
2
1%
Total
443
100%
5) The concept “state” in general includes 5 gestalt functions. The
quantitative data for them are as follows:
•
Physical state GF: 284 examples, 7 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF03, SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07) → 232 non-res, 42 res actual, 10 res
potential
•
Psychological state GF: 218 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF12, SF13, SF14) → 207 non-res,11 res actual
•
Involvement into movement GF: not represented
•
Involvement into action GF: 7 examples, 4 semantic functions
(SF21, SF24, SF25, SF26) → 6 res actual, 1 res potential
•
Social status GF: 4 examples, 3 semantic functions (SF27, SF29,
SF30) → 2 non-res, 2 res actual
Gestalt functions
Absolute frequency
Relative frequency
Physical state
284
55%
Psychological state
218
42%
0
0%
Involvement into action
7
2%
Social status
4
1%
Total
513
100%
Involvement into
movement
53
The most frequent GF (284 ex.) – Physical state -> I am already far north of
London (Mary Shelley – Frankenstein)
The most frequent SF (104 ex.) – SF01 (Physical state + stability) -> Some
of them were just like peasants, …, but others were very picturesque (Bram
Stoker – Dracula)
54
4.4. XX century – overall results.
1) Number of written records: 5
Number of examples: 632
Semantic functions fall into 5 gestalt functions.
The non-resultative subconcept is the most frequent.
Number of GFs in each subconcept
Non-resultative
4
Resultative actual
5
Resultative potential
4
2) Number of SFs in each subconcept
Non-resultative
15
Resultative actual
16
Resultative potential
7
3) Structural patterns characterizing GF within the non-resultative
55
subconcept
Gestalt functions
Non-resultative
Relative frequency
[NP V(lex)]
[NP V(link) AP]
Physical state
37%
[NP V(lex) NP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
[NP V(lex)]
[NP V(link) AP]
Psychological state
61%
[NP V(lex) NP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
Involvement into
[NP V(lex) PP]
0,1%
Involvement into action
[NP V(link) AP]
0,9%
Social status
-
0%
movement
The most frequently used structural patterns are:
•
[NP V(link) AP] (25%) -> Stone-hard are the Dwarves in labour or
journey (J.R.R. Tolkien - Lord of the rings: The Two Towers)
•
[NP V(lex) PP] (23%) -> He was sitting with his back to a great tree
(J.R.R. Tolkien - Lord of the rings: The Two Towers)
Structural patterns characterizing GF within the resultative subconcept
Gestalt functions
Resultative actual
Resultative
Relative
potential
frequency
[NP V(link) AP]
45%
[NP V(link) AP]
Physical state
[NP V(be+PartII)
PP]
56
[NP V (be+PartII)
QP]
[NP V(res)]
[NP V(link) AP]
[NP V (be+PartII)
Psychological state
QP]
[NP V(link) AP]
28%
[NP V(lex) NP PP]
4%
[NP V(lex) PP]
19%
-
4%
[NP V (be+PartII)
INF (CAUSE)]
[NP V(link) AP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
Involvement into
movement
[NP V (be+PartII)
QP]
[NP V (be+Part II)
CLAUSE (CAUSE
/ comparison)]
[NP V(link) AP]
[NP V(lex) PP]
Involvement into
action
[NP V (be+PartII)
QP]
[NP V (be+Part II)
CLAUSE (CAUSE
/ comparison)]
Social status
[NP V(link) AP]
The most frequently used structural patterns are:
•
[NP V(link) AP] (36%) -> All the islands in the world are drawn here
(William Golding - Lord of the flies)
•
[NP V (be+PartII) QP] (18%) -> He was almost too well dressed
57
always (Virginia Woolf - Mrs Dalloway)
4) Quantitative analysis showed the following composition of the resultative
state subconcept:
Resultative
Resultative actual
Resultative potential
Gestalt
Absolute
Relative
Absolute
Relative
functions
frequency
frequency
frequency
frequency
Physical state
30
48%
9
43%
8
13%
9
43%
1
1%
2
8%
20
33%
1
6%
Social status
3
5%
0
0%
Total
62
100%
21
100%
Psychological
state
Involvement
into movement
Involvement
into action
Quantitative analysis showed the following composition of the nonresultative state subconcept:
Non-resultative
Gestalt functions
Absolute frequency
Relative frequency
Physical state
206
37%
Psychological state
338
61%
58
Involvement into
1
0,1%
Involvement into action
4
0,9%
Social status
0
0%
Total
549
100%
movement
5) The concept “State” in general includes 5 gestalt functions. The
quantitative data for them are as follows:
•
Physical state GF: 245 examples, 7 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF03, SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07) → 204 non-res, 32 res actual, 9 res
potential
•
Psychological state GF: 355 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF10, SF11, SF13, SF14) → 338 non-res, 8 res actual, 9 res potential
•
Involvement into movement GF: 4 examples, 2 semantic functions
(SF 16, SF19) → 1 non-res, 1 res actual, 2 res potential
•
Involvement into action GF: 25 examples, 3 semantic functions
(SF20, SF21, SF24, SF26) → 3 non-res, 21 res actual, 1 res potential
•
Social status GF: 3 examples, 2 semantic functions (SF27, SF29)
→ 3 res actual
Gestalt functions
Absolute frequency
Relative frequency
Physical state
245
39%
Psychological state
355
56%
4
0,5%
Involvement into
movement
59
Involvement into action
25
4%
Social status
3
0,5%
Total
632
100%
The most frequent GF (355 ex.) – “Psychological state” -> He was always
unkind to mother… (Ethel Voynich - The Gadfly)
The most frequent SF (118 ex.) – SF08 (Psychological state + stability) ->
I prefer men to cauliflowers (Virginia Woolf - Mrs Dalloway)
4.5. Metaphoric usage of resultative constructions.
If we presume that the main cognitive schema [Болдырев 2016] of the
proposition, representing the concept “state” in different formats, is “state bearer +
static characteristic”, the correlation of the central components of this cognitive
schema can be realized as a structure of relations between members of the Eventframe in two ways: logically and metaphorically. Inference of logical relations
between the components of the structure lies on the surface with the conventional
use of the main member of the proposition - the verb. For example: «He sneezed
his nose red». However, in “nonconventionalized” cases [Boas 2003: 113], the
acceptability of this or that construction as a representative of the concept “state” is
problematic due to the metaphorical nature of the verbal component of the
proposition. For example:
They laughed the poor guy out of the room.
Frank sneezed the tissue off the table.
Lilly coaxed George under the table.
Similar instances of using resultative constructions are regarded by us as
both grammatical metaphors (High-Level metaphors), which record the change in
the transitivity of the verb, and conceptual metaphors.
According to the theory of conceptual metaphor, it is considered as an
analogy principle in semantics [Лингвистика конструкций 2010, с. 295], by
60
which transfer is not confined to an isolated name, but implies a whole conceptual
structure (scheme, frame, model, script) which is activized by some word in the
mind of a native speaker due to the connection of this word with this conventional
structure [Kobozeva 2002]. In the above cases, the verbs, turning from detransitive
into transitive and using their lexico-semantic potential, realize the subsidiary
“force dynamics” inherent in the semantics of the verb. At the same time, the
situation frame (or Event-frame) is replaced by a caused motion-frame - X causes
Y to move Z.
Research shows that few metaphorical constructions are found in the Old
English period [Vesser 1963: §659]. They first regularly appear in the Middle
English period, of the type «He talked himself hoarse», that is, as constructions
with quasi-reflexive verbs.
Men
laughe
hem
selve
to
deaþ.
Men laugh themselves to death (1387; Trevisa, Higden (Rolls) I. 305) [Broccias
2008].
There is an opinion that historically metaphorization goes from fuzzy to
concrete in the semantics of the verb also as well as a result of the analogy process.
Thus, the Old English verb “dōn” (close to modern “make”), that originally had a
wide range of meanings, is replaced, in particular, by verbs with more specific
semantics of effectiveness and mode of action. Moreover, the action is
metaphorically interpreted as a force influencing the object (force dynamics).
Already since the times of W. Shakespeare there are structures where the object is
not a regular member of the actant group. For example:
a lover’s eyes will gaze an eagle blind (1588)
he drinks you with facility your Dane dead drunk (1604)
In these examples, actions expressed by the verbs «gaze» and «drink» can be
interpreted as forces causing the state of a metaphorically manipulated object.
61
4.6. Possible cognitive interpretation of the turning point (XIX c.) in the
development of state semantics.
Our diachronic analysis of “state” semantics (from XVII c. to XX c.)
evidenced a somewhat unexpected result in the XIX c: the two most frequent
semantic functions – “physical state of man and environment” and “psychological
state” started to develop in opposite directions.
Hence, our attempt to find a plausible cognitive account for this turning
point.
SF frequency
69
53
42
55
56
42
39
18C.
19C.
20C.
25
17C.
физ.сост.
псих.сост.
Since the material under analysis was the novels of the XIX th century, we
endeavoured to apply to the literature of the Victorian Age. Victorian literature is
that produced during the reign of Queen Victoria (1837-1901) or the Victorian era.
It forms a link and transition between the writers of the romantic period and the
very different literature of the 20th century. The 19th century is often regarded as a
high point in British literature. The literature of this era was preceded
by romanticism and was followed by modernism [Victorian Literature 2012].
The Victorian period was marked by many important social and historical
changes that altered the nation in many ways. The population nearly doubled, the
British Empire expanded and technological and industrial progress helped Britain
become the most powerful country in the world. In a society where modern
industries were emerging rapidly, many literary works sought to bring out the grim
62
reality of a landless working class and the precarious condition of a declining
gentry.
The genres of the novel form at that time were: romantic novels, realist
novels, sensational novels, domestic novels and gothic novels. It should be
mentioned that romantic motifs existed all through the Victorian Age. Gothic
literature was also famous during the 18th and the 19th century. The material of
our analyses includes novels of different genres: romantic (Ch. Bronte’s Jane
Eyre), sensational (W. Collins’ The Woman in White), realist (Ch. Dickens’ A Tale
of Two Cities), and gothic (Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Bram Stoker’s
Dracula). As is known, the literary traditions were not homogeneous in the
Victorian Age: trying to break with romanticism, flowering in the XVIII c., the
writers very often focus on the traditions of sentimental domestic novel with the
emphasis on commonplace and matter-of-factness. The main themes of the early
novels were Victorian values and descriptions of way of life and customs of
gentry: family, manors, gardens, nature, their form and state. In romantic novels
they describe their characters by projecting inner states through external objects,
secondary characters, places, events, and weather. Realism also placed an
emphasis on describing the material and physical details of life. The gothic novels
included psychological and physical terror; mystery and the supernatural. So,
descriptions of physical state of man and objects are come across rather often in
those literary texts:
“She lay reclined on a sofa by the fireside” (Charlotte Bronte - Jane Eyre)
“The long hot summer was drawing to a close” (Wilkie Collins - The
Woman in White)
“There was a steaming mist in all the hollows” (Charles Dickens - A Tale
of Two Cities)
“Some of them were just like peasants, …, but others were very picturesque”
(Bram Stoker – Dracula)
63
The results of the analysis show the numerical distribution of the two most
frequent semantic state functions in the XIX c.: 55% for “physical state” and 42%
for “psychological state”.
In the XX c. the numerical distribution is different: it is 39% for “physical
state” and 56% for “psychological state”. So, the opposite direction: from “rise to
fall” and “from fall to rise” is evident.
What goes on in the English society in the XX c.? By the end of the XIX c.
it becomes clear that Britain had passed its heyday, and is gradually turning to its
age of uncertainty. This coincided with economic depression, loss of its colonies
and the former privileged position in Europe. The English society is grasped by the
overall feeling of instability, lack of confidence in future life and fear of what is to
come. The literature of the XX c. becomes highly psychological in all genres of the
novel.
The way from Romanticism to Modernism is manifested in the novels of V.
Woolf – a most prominent figure of Modernism (which is also material of our
analysis).
Character in her novels reveals through his inner life, personal impressions,
feelings, thoughts and his psychological state by a stream-of consciousness
technique:
And she felt it, she was convinced, … all because she was coming down to
dinner in a white frock to meet Sally Seton!
Here she is mending her dress; mending her dress as usual, he thought; here
she’s been sitting all the time I’ve been in India; mending her dress; playing
about; going to parties; running to the House and back and all that, he thought,
growing more and more irritated, more and more agitated…
Never, never had he suffered so infernally!
She felt only how Sally was being mauled already, maltreated; she felt his
hostility; his jealousy; his determination to break into their companionship. All this
she saw as one sees a landscape in a flash of lightning — and Sally (never had she
admired her so much!) gallantly taking her way unvanquished.
64
This all, to my mind, reflects the changes in the language world view
[Никитин 1999] from the XVIII to the XIX c., which through literature in its turn
reflects the evolution of the conceptual world view of the English society.
As the result, the use of a cognitive approach seems helpful and productive
in interpreting a purely linguistic phenomenon – development of “state” semantics.
4.7. Conclusions.
1. The frequency of occurance of the representatives of the concept is
increasing (within the same number of text pages) in general (from 432 examples
in the 17th century to 632 in the 20th century), and in separate subconcepts: NonResultative - from 373 examples to 549, Resultative - from 59 examples to 83.
Wherein, the ratio of the Non-Resultative and Resultative examples remains stable
- 6:1. The ratio of the Non-Resultative and Resultative examples remains stable 6:1.
2. The amount of GFs varies from 2 to 5 in different subconcepts. Wherein 2
GFs remain the most frequent for the concept of state: Physical state and
Psychological state.
Their
distribution
within subconcepts
is
different:
Psychological state GF prevails in the Non-resultative constructions, Physical state
GF –in the Resultative constructions.
3. The number of SFs within the GFs remains almost unchanged for NonResultative state and increases for Resultative state: actual - from 13 to 16 SFs and
Potential from 2 to 7 SFs.
65
5. General conclusions.
During the analysed historical period, the following changes occurred in the
functioning of the representatives of the concept "state":
The frequency of occurance of the representatives of the concept is
increasing (within the same number of text pages) in general and in separate
subconcepts. Wherein, the ratio of the Non-Resultative and Resultative examples
remains stable.
The amount of GFs varies in different subconcepts, but Physical state GF
and Psychological state GF remain the most frequent. Their distribution within
subconcepts is different: Psychological state GF prevails in the Non-resultative
constructions, Physical state GF –in the Resultative constructions.
The frequency of use of these GFs shows noticeable fluctuations: the 19 th
century is a turning point where the direction of the development changes to the
opposite. However, in general, the overall analysis of the results shows that these
GFs keep its dominant position throughout the analyzed period.
Metaphorical use of non-resultative and resultative constructions is treated
as a transformation of an Event-frame into a caused-motion frame, which is
accompanied by changes in the transitivity of the main verb. In this case verbs
realize their subsidiary lexico-semantic potential, namely, “force dynamics”.
Viewed historically, the metaphorisation processes are elaboration of the
fuzzy broad verb semantics into concrete semantics of effectiveness and mode of
action.
The fluctuation in the frequency of occurance of the most frequent gestalt
functions – “Physical state” and “Psychological state” in the XIX c. – i.e.
development in opposite directions, can find a plausible cognitive account: the
evolution of the conceptual world view of the English society reflected in
literature.
The Non-resultative state subconcept retains the qualitative and quantitative
composition of the structural-semantic models throughout the period under
66
analysis (4): [NP V (lex)], [NP V (link) AP], [NP V (lex) NP] and [NP V (link)
PP]. The Resultative state subconcept increases the number and composition of
structural-semantic models from two in the 17th century to four in the 20th
century:
Compare:
The 17th century [NP V (lex) NP] e.g. His fiery eyes are fixed upon the earth
(Chr. Marlowe)
[NP V (link) AP] e.g. Yet was his mother fair (W. Shakespeare)
and
the 20th century (there are two new models):
[NP V (result)] e.g. The lake froze
[NP V (lex) NP PP] e.g. The earthquake destroyed buildings to pieces.
The most frequent models for the Non-resultative state subconcept are [NP
V (link) AP] and [NP V (link) PP], and for the Resultative state subconcept: [NP V
(link) AP] and [NP V (lex) PP].
Thus, diachronic changes in the representation of the concept “state” occur
mainly in the growth of their frequency of usage, in the change in the frequency
and content of their gestalt functions, in the composition and frequency of
structural-semantic models that implement gestalt functions.
Historical changes in the functioning of the representatives of the concept
“state”, as well as the dynamics of the processes of their metaphorization, fully fit
into the overall picture of the intralinguistic processes characteristic of the period
under study:
1)
reduction of the morphological potential of the English language and
the need to rely on the lexico-syntactic interlevel resource in the expression of
grammatical meanings;
2)
increasing role of syntax in the history of the English language:
“Functionally, in terms of expressing grammatical meanings, the syntax of the
New English period is loaded significantly more than in the Middle English and
especially in the Old English periods” [Шапошникова 2017];
67
3)
growth of the verb compatibility as the result of the introduction of a
growing number of verb referent classes into the verb paradigmatics (new groups
of “objects”);
4)
development of new syntactic valencies of the verb;
5)
changes in verb transitivity, etc.
The interpretation of the concept “state” as a gestalt, in our opinion, sheds
light on how linguistic and non-linguistic knowledge is represented in the
language, how people perceive language, how they form meanings and choose the
means of its representation using both their own language experience, and their
own linguistic worldview. This is directly related to the problems of the interaction
of lexis and grammar, semantics and syntax, to the questions of the structure of
forming language categories in the human mind.
68
6. Linguistic literature
1. Беляевская Е.Г. Компонентный анализ vs концептуальный анализ. //
Вестник Московского государственного лингвистического
университета, вып. 554, сер. Лингвистика. Грамматика в когнитивнодискурсивном аспекте. – М.: Рема, 2008. – С. 140-177.
2. Беседина Н.А. Морфологически передаваемые концепты. Тамбов:
Тамбов. гос. ун-т, 2006.211 с. [Электронный ресурс_files_kiapdf_volumIV_012
Besedina (1)pdf-Foxit Reader]
3. Болдырев Н.Н. Оценочные категории как формат знания //
Когнитивные исследования языка. Тамбов: Изд-во ТГУ им. Г. Р. Державина,
2008. Вып. III. С. 25-36.
4. Болдырев Н.Н. Когнитивные схемы языковой интерпретации //
Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики, №4. Институт языкознания РАН и
Тамбовский гос. ун-т им. Г. Р. Державина, 2016. С. 10–20.
5. Бондарко А.В. Принципы функциональной грамматики и вопросы
аспектологии. – Л.: Наука, 1983. 208 с.
6. Кобозева И.М. К формальной репрезентации метафор в рамках
когнитивного подхода/ Электронный ресурс [www.dialog21/ru/archive_article.acp?param=7339&vol=6077].
7. Коротина В.И. Семантические типы предикатов состояния в
английском языке: дис. …канд. филол. наук. – М., 2004. 192с.
8. Краткий словарь когнитивных терминов под общей редакцией Е.С.
Кубряковой. – М.: Филологический факультет МГЛУ им. Ломоносова,
1997. – 245 с.
9. Кубрякова Е.С. Части речи с когнитивной точки зрения. – М.: Инст.
языкозн. РАН, 1997. – 331 с.
10. Кубрякова Е.С. Язык и знание. На пути получения знаний о языке:
части речи с когнитивной точки зрения. Роль языка в познании мира /
69
Рос. академия наук. Ин-т языкознания. — М.: Языки славянской
культуры, 2004. — 560 c.
11. Кубрякова Е.С., Демьянков В.З. К проблеме ментальных
репрезентаций // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. М: Институт
языкознания. Тамбов: Тамбов. гос. ун-т. им. Г. Р. Державина. 2007. №4. С. 816.
12. Кузнецов В.Г. Предмет и задачи диахронической сопоставительной
концептологии // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. – №2. – Тамбов:
Тамбов.гос. ун-т, 2007. – С. 35-41.
13. Лингвистика конструкций. Отв. ред. Рахилина Е.В. М.: Изд. Центр.
«Азбуковник», 2010. 584 с.
14. Матханова И.П. Вариативность высказываний с семантикой
непроцессуального состояния в современном русском языке // Проблемы
функциональной грамматики: Семантическая инвариантность /
вариативность. Спб: Наука, 2002. С. 101-109.
15. Никитин М.В. Об отражении картины мира в языке // STUDIA
LINGUISTICA XVIII. Слово, предложение и текст как интерпретирующие
системы. – СПб: Политехника-сервис, 1999. – С. 6-14.
16. Павлова А.В. Состояние как формат знания (на материале
современного английского языка) // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики.
Тамбов: Тамбовский госуниверситет им. Г. Р. Державина, 2016. №3. С.96102.
17. Сорокина Т.С. Диахроническая концептология: некоторые
методики
исследования // Грамматические исследования: когнитивнокоммуникативная лингвистика и современная лингводидактика. – М.:
ФГБОУ ВПО МГЛУ, 2012. – С. 9-21 (Вестник Моск. гос. лингвист. Ун-та,
вып 27 (660) Сер. Языкознание).
18. Сорокина Т.С. Гештальт-анализ как исследовательская методика
диахронической концептологии // Когнитивно-коммуникативная
70
парадигма в лингвистике и лингводидактике: грамматические
исследования. – М.: ФГБОУ ВПО МГЛУ, 2013. – С. 9-20 – (Вестник
Моск. гос. лингвист. Ун-та, вып 26 (686) Сер. Языкознание).
19. Сорокина Т.С. Концепт «отношение» и языковая картина мира
(опыт
исторической интерпретации). // Лингвистика и лингводидактика в
когнитивно-коммуникативном аспекте: грамматические исследования.
- М.: ФГБОУ ВПО МГЛУ, 2014. – С. 9-20 (Вестник Моск. гос. лингвист.
Ун-та, вып 27 (711) Сер. Языкознание).
20. Филиппова О.В. Подходы к исследованию результативных
конструкций в современной англистике // Когнитивно-функциональное
направление
в
лингвистике
и
лингводидактике:
грамматические
исследования. – М.: ИПК МГЛУ «Рема», 2011. – С.22-49. (Вестн. Моск. гос.
лингвист. ун-та; вып. 27(633). Сер. Языкознание).
21. Фурс Л.А. Синтаксически репрезентируемые концепты. Тамбов,
2004. 370 с.
22. Чесноков С.В. Феноменология диалогов в гештальт-теории,
математике, логике. – М.: URSS, 2009. – 160 с
23. Шапошникова И.В. история английского языка. 3-е изд. М.:
Флинта: Наука. 2017. 508.с.
24. Aitchinson, J. 2001. Language Change: Progress or Decay, 3rd edn.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. – 305 p.
25. Boas, H.C. A constructional approach to resultatives. – Stanford: CSLI
Publications, 2003. 400 p.
26. Broccias, Cr. (2008). Towards a history of English resultative
constructions: the case of adjectival resultative constructions. English Language
and Linguistics, 12, pp 2754 doi:10.1017/S1360674307002493.
27. Carrier J., Randall, J.H. The argument structure and syntactic structure
of resultatives // Linguistic Inquiry. – 1992. №23 (2). P.173-234.
71
28. Embick D. On the structure of resultative participles in English //
Linguistic Inquiry. – 2004. №35. P.355-392.
29. Fillmore, Ch. J., Atkins, B.T. Towards a frame-based organization of the
lexicon: the semantics of RISK and its neighbours // Frames, Fields and Contrasts:
New Essays in Semantics and Lexical Organization / Ed. Adrienne Lehrer and Eva
Kittay. – Hillsdale : Lawrence Erlbaum, 1992. P. 75-102.
30. Goldberg A. Constructions: A Constructional Grammar Approach to
Argument Structure. – Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995. 265 p.
31. Lakoff, G. Linguistic gestalts. In Papers from the Thirteenth Regional
Meeting Chicago Linguistic Society, 13. Chicago, 1977, p.236–287.
32. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. England: Pearson
Education Limited, 2001. 1668 p.
33. Visser, F. Th.. An historical syntax of the English language, vol. 1.
Leiden E. J. Brill, 1963. 2470 p.
72
7. Material for analysis.
17c.:
William Shakespeare’s
Hamlet; (https://www.w3.org/People/maxf/XSLideMaker/hamlet.pdf)
Macbeth;( http://shakespeare.mit.edu/macbeth/full.html)
Othello;(https://www.emcp.com/previews/AccessEditions/ACCESS%20ED
ITIONS/Othello.pdf)
King
Lear;
(https://www.ucm.es/data/cont/docs/119-2014-02-19-
6.%20King%20Lear.pdf)
Christopher
Marlowe’s
Tamburlaine
(http://users.ipfw.edu/stapletm/MSA/docs/CaseMarlowev2Tam.pdf)
18c.:
Henry
Fielding’s
Tom
Jones;
(https://www.bartleby.com/ebook/adobe/301.pdf)
Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels; (https://www.planetebook.com/freeebooks/gullivers-travels.pdf)
Jane Austen’s Northanger Abbey; (https://www.planetebook.com/freeebooks/northanger-abbey.pdf)
Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe; (https://www.planetebook.com/freeebooks/robinson-crusoe.pdf)
Ann
Radcliffe’s
The
Mysteries
of
Udolpho;
(http://www.yorku.ca/inpar/radcliffe_udolpho.pdf)
19c.:
Bronte’s
Charlotte
Jane
Eyre;
(http://www.planetpdf.com/planetpdf/pdfs/free_ebooks/jane_eyre_nt.pdf)
Wilkie
Collins’
The
Woman
in
White;
(http://www.gasl.org/refbib/Collins__Woman_in_White.pdf)
Mary
Shelley’s
ebooks/frankenstein.pdf)
Frankenstein;
(https://www.planetebook.com/free-
73
Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities; (https://www.planetebook.com/freeebooks/a-tale-of-two-cities.pdf)
Bram
Stoker’s
Dracula;
(https://www.planetebook.com/free-
ebooks/dracula.pdf)
20c.:
Virginia
Woolf’s
Mrs
Dalloway;
(https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/w/woolf/virginia/w91md/)
William
Golding’s
Lord
of
the
Flies;
(https://d2ct263enury6r.cloudfront.net/X2bpH13Xnjn4ZJspWQzb5LMu7BGp5CU
GaPGFQqVXvLT2M1AW.pdf)
Ethel Voynich’s The Gadfly; (http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/3431)
J.R.R. Tolkien’s
Lord
of
the
Rings:
Fellowship
of
the
Ring;
(https://s3.amazonaws.com/scschoolfiles/112/j-r-r-tolkien-lord-of-the-rings-01-thefellowship-of-the-ring-retail-pdf.pdf)
Lord
of
the
Rings:
The
Two
c/tolkien__the_lord_of_the_rings_2__en.htm)
Towers
(http://ae-lib.org.ua/texts-
74
8. Supplement.
Representation of the concept «State» in the
XVII century
William Shakespeare - Hamlet
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 55
3. Semantic functions fall into 3 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 21 examples, 5 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“Bernardo has my place…”), 8 examples →
7 non-res, 1 res potential
SF02 Physical state + accidentalness (“…’tis bitter cold”), 3 examples → 2
non-res, 1 res actual
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“The wind sits in the shoulder of
your sail…”), 3 examples → 1 non-res, 2 res actual
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“You are the most immediate to our
throne”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF07 Physical state + manner (“Looks it not like the king?”), 6 examples →
5 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 32 examples, 5 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF12, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“it is offended…”), 19 examples →
18 non-res, 1 res actual
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“I am glad to see you well”), 3
examples → 2 non-res, 1 res actual
SF12 Psychological state + spatial localization (“You are welcome to
75
Elsinore”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“Into the madness wherein now he
raves and we all mourn for”), 4 examples → 4 non-res
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“So have I heard and do in part believe
it”), 5 examples → 4 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Involvement into action GF: 2 examples, 2 semantic functions
(SF24, SF26)
SF24 Involvement into action + spatial localization (“My necessaries are
embark’d”), 1 example → 1 res actual
SF26 Involvement into action +manner (“It harrows me with fear and
wonder”), 1 example → 1 non-res
76
William Shakespeare - Macbeth
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 73
3. Semantic functions fall into 3 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 25 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF03, SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“the thane of Cawdor lives…”), 7 examples
→ 6 non-res, 1 res actual
SF02 Physical state + accidentalness (“When the battle’s lost and won”), 5
examples → 4 non-res, 1 res actual
SF03 Physical state + potential change (“Light thickens…”), 1 example →
1 res potential
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“Where hast thou been, sister?”),
3 examples → 1 non-res, 2 res actual
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“…with his brandish’d steel which
smoked with bloody execution”), 2 examples → 2 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“What are these…that look not like
inhabitants o’ the earth?”), 7 examples → 5 non-res, 2 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 41 example, 6 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF12, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“He needs not our mistrust”), 19
examples → 19 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“You seem to understand
me…”), 4 examples → 2 non-res, 2 res actual
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“When I burned in desire…”), 1
example → 1 non-res
SF12 Psychological state + spatial localization (“The sin of my ingratitude
even now was heavy on me”), 4 examples → 4 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“My dull brain was wrought with
77
things forgotten…”), 3 examples → 2 non-res, 1 res actual
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“For brave Macbeth – he well deserves
that name”), 10 examples → 9 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Involvement into action GF: 7 examples, 2 semantic functions
(SF21, SF24)
SF21 Involvement into action + accidentalness (“We are sent to give thee
from our royal master thanks”), 6 examples → 3 non-res, 3 res actual
SF24 Involvement into action + cause/source (“Mine eyes are made the
fools o’ other senses”), 1 example → 1 res actual
78
William Shakespeare - Othello
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 117
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 24 examples, 4 semantic functions
(SF01,SF04, SF05, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“Are your doors lock’d?”), 12 examples →
6 non-res, 5 res actual, 1 res potential
SF04 Physical state + duration (“I bleed still…”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“Signior, is all your family
within?”), 9 examples → 8 non-res, 1 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“He looks sadly…”), 2 examples → 1 nonres, 1 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 89 examples, 5 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“I know my price…”), 47 examples
→ 46 non-res, 1 res potential
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“She loved me for the dangers I
have passed…”), 4 examples → 4 non-res
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“I am bound to thee for ever”), 3
examples → 2 non-res, 1 res actual
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“I hate the Moor…”), 10
examples → 9 non-res, 1 res actual
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“I take it much unkindly…”), 25
examples → 25 non-res
•
Involvement into action GF: 2 examples, 1 semantic functions
(SF25)
SF25 Involvement into action + cause/source (“When the blood is made dull
with the act of sport…”), 2 examples → 1 non-res, 1 res actual
79
•
Social status GF: 3 examples, 1 semantic function (SF29)
SF29 Social status + stability (“Are they married, think you?”), 3 examples
→ 3 non-res
80
William Shakespeare - King Lear
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 106
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 15 examples, 4 semantic functions (SF01,
SF05, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“Yet was his mother fair…”), 10 examples
→ 6 non-res, 2 res actual, 2 res potential
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“She’s there and she’s yours…”),
4 examples → 4 non-res
SF07 Physical state + manner (“Horses are tied by the heads…”), 1 example
→ 1 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 86 examples, 4 semantic functions (SF08,
SF12, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“Do you know this noble
gentleman?”), 59 examples → 59 non-res
SF12 Psychological state + spatial localization (“Thou hadst little wit in thy
bald crown”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“I am made of the same-self metal
that my sister is”), 5 examples → 3 non-res, 2 res actual
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“Thy youngest daughter does not love
thee least”), 21 examples → 20 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Involvement into action GF: 1 example, 1 semantic functions
(SF25)
SF25 Involvement into action + cause/source (“It’s had it head bit off by it
young”), 1 example → 1 res actual
•
Social status GF: 4 examples, 1 semantic function (SF29)
SF29 Social status + stability (“Is not this your son?”), 4 examples → 4
non-res
81
Christopher Marlowe - Tamburlaine
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 80
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 23 examples, 4 semantic functions (SF01,
SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“His fiery eyes are fixed upon the earth…”),
7 examples → 6 non-res, 1 res potential
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“A thousand Persian horsemen
are at hand…”), 9 examples → 5 non-res, 4 res actual
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“the Georgian hills whose tops are
covered with Tartarian thieves…”), 3 examples → 2 non-res, 1 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“There are in readiness ten thousand horse to
carry you from hence”), 4 examples → 1 non-res, 3 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 52 examples, 5 semantic functions (SF08,
SF11, SF12, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“I find myself aggrieved”), 29
examples → 26 non-res, 3 res actual
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“We knew, my lord, before we brought
the crown…”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF12 Psychological state + spatial localization (“So do we hope to reign in
Asia…”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“This is she with whom I am in
love”), 3 examples → 3 non-res
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“I am not wise enough to be a king”),
18 examples → 17 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Involvement into movement GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function
(SF 17)
SF17 Involvement into movement + spatial localization (“Then shall your
82
meeds and valours be advanced to rooms of honour and nobility”), 1 example → 1
res potential
•
Involvement into action GF: 4 examples, 3 semantic functions
(SF20, SF23, SF25)
SF20 Involvement into action + stability (“thus the Grecians shall be
conquered…”), 1 example → 1 res potential
SF23 Involvement into action + duration (“All my youth I have been
governed…”), 1 example → 1 res actual
SF25 Involvement into action + cause/source (“Unhappy Persia, … , now to
be ruled and governed by a man…”), 2 examples → 2 non-res
83
Representation of the concept «State» in the
XVIII century
Henry Fielding - Tom Jones
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 112
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 51 examples, 4 semantic functions (SF01,
SF04, SF05, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“Everything is not agreeable to their
taste…”), 19 examples → 19 non-res
SF04 Physical state + duration (“Mr. Allworthy had been absent a full
quarter of a year in London”), 7 examples → 4 non-res, 3 res actual
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“There lately lived, and perhaps
lives still a gentleman whose name was Allworthy…”), 13 examples → 13 nonres
SF07 Physical state + manner (“This dish is too common and vulgar…”), 12
examples → 9 non-res, 3 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 59 examples, 3 semantic functions (SF08,
SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“Nor do I fear that my sensible
reader…will be offended”), 30 examples → 29 non-res, 1 res actual
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“And such the respect she bore her
master…”), 12 examples → 10 non-res, 2 res actual
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“A very worthy and beautiful woman,
of whom he had been extremely fond…”), 17 examples → 17 non-res
•
(SF21)
Involvement into action GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function
84
SF21 Involvement into action + accidentalness (“Mr. Allworthy is
summoned to breakfast…”), 1 example → 1 res actual
•
Social status GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function (SF30)
SF30 Social status + accidentalness (“In less than a month the captain and
his lady were man and wife”), 1 example → 1 res actual
85
Jonathan Swift - Gulliver’s Travels
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 68
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 38 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF03, SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“On the 5th of November, which was the
beginning of summer in those parts, the weather being very hazy…”), 10 examples
→ 10 non-res
SF03 Physical state + potential change (“The sun began to grow hot…”), 1
example → 1 res potential
SF04 Physical state + duration (“He sent me to Emmanuel College in
Cambridge at fourteen years old, where I resided three years…”), 2 examples → 2
non-res
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“My father had a small estate in
Nottinghamshire”), 10 examples → 6 non-res, 4 res actual
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“Twelve of our crew were dead by
immoderate labour and ill food”), 3 examples → 1 non-res, 2 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“…in Nottinghamshire, his native country,
where he now lives retired”), 12 examples → 10 non-res, 2 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 21 examples, 4 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF10, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“…as I always believed it would be,
some time or other, my fortune to do”), 11 examples → 11 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“The emperor had a mind one
day to entertain me…”), 4 examples → 4 non-res
SF10 Psychological state + potential change (“About three years ago, Mr.
Gulliver growing weary of the concourse of curious people…”), 1 example → 1
res potential
86
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“The hurgo (for so they call a great
lord, as I afterwards learnt) understood me very well”), 5 examples → 5 non-res
•
Involvement into movement GF: 2 examples, 1 semantic function
(SF 17)
SF17 Im + spatial localization (“I was raised and slung into the engine…”),
2 examples → 1 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Involvement into action GF: 7 examples, 4 semantic functions
(SF20, SF21, SF25, SF26)
SF20 Involvement into action + stability (“My hours of leisure I spent
reading the best authors, …, being always provided with a good number of
books”), 1 example → 1 res actual
SF21 Involvement into action + accidentalness (“He is shipwrecked, and
swims for his life”), 3 examples → 1 non-res, 2 res actual
SF25 Involvement into action + cause/source (“I was recommended by my
good master, Mr. Bates…”), 1 example → 1 res actual
SF26 Involvement into action + manner (“My arms and legs were strongly
fastened on each side to the ground”), 2 examples → 2 res actual
87
Jane Austen - Northanger Abbey
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 122
3. Semantic functions fall into 3 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 35 examples, 5 semantic functions (SF01,
SF03, SF04, SF05, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“His name was Richard – and he had never
been handsome”), 15 examples → 12 non-res, 3 res actual
SF03 Physical state + potential change (“At fifteen, appearances were
mending…”), 2 examples → 1 non-res, 1 res potential
SF04 Physical state + duration (“The wheels have been fairly worn out these
ten years at least”), 2 examples → 1 non-res, 1 res actual
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“…and he only was absent”), 5
examples → 4 non-res, 1 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“No one who had ever seen Catherine
Morland in her infancy would have supposed her born to be a heroine”), 11
examples → 11 non-res
•
Psychological state GF: 85 examples, 5 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“He was not in the least addicted to
locking up his daughters”), 44 examples → 44 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“I die to see him”), 5 examples
→ 5 non-res
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“I always wanted you to know her”), 1
example → 1 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“Catherine was delighted with this
extension to her Bath acquaintance”), 7 examples → 6 non-res, 1 res actual
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“Mr. Tilney was polite enough to seem
interested”), 28 examples → 28 non-res
88
•
Social status GF: 2 examples, 1 semantic function (SF29)
SF29 Social status + stability (“Mrs. Thorpe was a widow, and not a very
rich one”), 2 examples → 1 non-res, 1 res actual
89
Daniel Defoe - Robinson Crusoe
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 75
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 34 examples, 5 semantic functions (SF01,
SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“It was a great while before he had any
assurances that I was not drowned”), 7 examples → 2 non-res, 5 res actual
SF04 Physical state + duration (“…and after we had lain four or five days”),
3 examples → 2 non-res, 1 res actual
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“He got a good estate, and …
lived afterwards at York”), 15 examples → 12 non-res, 3 res actual
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“One of our men die of the calenture”),
1 example → 1 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“However, the storm was so violent that…”),
8 examples → 6 non-res, 2 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 38 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF12, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“What became of my second brother I
never knew”), 14 examples → 14 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“I had slept well in the night,
and was now no more seasick”), 7 examples → 7 non-res
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“I was very grave for all that day”), 3
examples → 2 non-res, 1 res actual
SF12 Psychological state + spatial localization (“I was not very easy and
happy in the world”), 2 examples → 2 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“I was sincerely affected with this
discourse”), 2 examples → 1 res actual, 1 res potential
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“He was so moved that he broke off the
90
discourse”), 10 examples → 6 non-res, 4 res actual
•
Involvement into movement GF: 2 examples, 1 semantic function
(SF 17)
SF17 Involvement into movement + spatial localization (“That evil
influence… hurried me into the wild”), 2 examples → 2 res actual
•
Involvement into action GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function
(SF24)
SF24 Involvement into action + spatial localization (“I was recommended to
the house of a good honest man”), 1 example → 1 res actual
91
Ann Radcliffe - The Mysteries of Udolpho
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 67
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 30 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“Emily resembled her mother”), 4 examples
→ 4 non-res
SF03 Physical state + accidentalness (“He was sometimes accompanied in
these little excursions by Madame St. Aubert”), 1 example → 1 res actual
SF04 Physical state + duration (“It is near five years since I have been
there”), 2 examples → 2 non-res
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“On the pleasant banks of
Garonne, …, stood, …, the chateau of Monsieur St. Aubert”), 12 examples → 9
non-res, 3 res actual
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“I live for my family and myself”), 1
example → 1 non-res
SF07 Physical state + manner (“The windows of this room were particularly
pleasant”), 10 examples → 10 non-res
•
Psychological state GF: 35 examples, 5 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“M. St. Aubert loved to wonder, with
his wife and daughter, on the margin of the Garonne”), 16 examples → 16 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“Emily was at first overwhelmed
with the intelligence”), 3 examples → 2 non-res, 1 res actual
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“To this spot he had been attached
from his infancy”), 3 examples → 2 non-res, 1 res actual
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“He never could find amusement
in torturing or destroying”), 2 examples → 2 res actual
92
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“But St. Aubert had too nice a sense of
honour to fulfil the latter hope”), 11 examples → 11 non-res
•
Involvement into action GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function
(SF25)
SF25 Involvement into action + cause/source (“Her father, who was
attacked with a fever”), 1 example → 1 res actual
•
Social status GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function (SF27)
SF27 Social status + duration (“His only surviving sister, who had been for
some years a widow”), 1 example → 1 res actual
93
Representation of the concept «State» in the
XIX century
Charlotte Bronte - Jane Eyre
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 81
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 28 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF03, SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“You have no money…”), 14 examples →
14 non-res
SF03 Physical state + potential change (“I grew by degrees cold as a
stone…”), 1 example → 1 res potential
SF04 Physical state + duration (“Mr. Reed had been dead nine years”), 1
example → 1 res actual
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“She lay reclined on a sofa by the
fireside”), 9 examples → 8 non-res, 1 res actual
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“Mrs. Reed was blind and deaf on the
subject”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF07 Physical state + manner (“How quiet and plain all the girls at Lowood
look”), 2 examples → 2 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 51 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF12, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“I never liked long walks”), 29
examples → 29 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“Further out-door exercise was
now out of the question”), 7 examples → 6 non-res, 1 res actual
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“I felt so sheltered and befriended
94
while he sat in the chair near my pillow”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF12 Psychological state + spatial localization (“But it was always in
her…”), 2 examples → 2 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“I was bewildered by the terror he
inspired”), 2 examples → 1 non-res, 1 res actual
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“She lay… and with her darlings about
her looked perfectly happy”), 10 examples → 10 non-res
•
Involvement into action GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function
(SF26)
SF26 Involvement into action +manner (“…a moment’s mutiny had already
rendered me liable to strange penalties”), 1 example → 1 res actual
•
Social status GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function (SF27)
SF27 Social status + duration (“My mother and father had been married a
year”), 1 example → 1 res actual
95
Wilkie Collins - The Woman in White
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 114
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 58 examples, 5 semantic functions (SF01,
SF03, SF04, SF05, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“My sister Sarah and I were the sole
survivors of the family of five children”), 21 examples → 20 non-res, 1 res actual
SF03 Physical state + potential change (“The long hot summer was drawing
to a close”), 2 examples → 2 res potential
SF04 Physical state + duration (“My father had been dead some years”), 8
examples → 7 non-res, 1 res actual
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“…when I stood before the gate
of my mother’s cottage”), 14 examples → 8 non-res, 6 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“My mother sat by the open window
laughing and fanning herself”), 13 examples → 12 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 52 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF12, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“We don’t want genius in this
country”), 15 examples → 15 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“…and my soul was on fire to
speak but I held my tongue”), 6 examples → 6 non-res
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“They had known each other when
they were children”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF12 Psychological state + spatial localization (“The woman in white was
still on my mind”), 2 examples → 2 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“I am flushed by the recollection
of my own eloquence”), 5 examples → 5 res actual
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“The writer of these introductory lines
96
… happens to be more closely connected than others with the incidents…”), 23
examples → 22 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Involvement into action GF: 3 examples, 3 semantic functions
(SF21, SF24, SF26)
SF21 Involvement into action + accidentalness (“The fading summer left me
out of health”), 1 example → 1 res actual
SF24 Involvement into action + spatial localization (“All the necessary
instructions for my journey were carefully and clearly added in a postscript”), 1
example → 1 res actual
SF26 Involvement into action +manner (“I have been cruelly used and
cruelly wronged”), 1 example → 1 res actual
•
Social status GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function (SF30)
SF30 Social status + accidentalness (“My mother was twice married”), 1
example → 1 res actual
97
Mary Shelley - Frankenstein
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 72
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 30 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF03, SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“Snow and frost are banished”), 9 examples
→ 7 non-res, 2 res actual
SF03 Physical state + potential change (“I am about to proceed on a long
and difficult voyage”), 2 examples → 2 res potential
SF04 Physical state + duration (“The sun is forever visible”), 4 examples →
4 non-res
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“I am already far north of
London”), 7 examples → 7 non-res
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“I feel my heart glow with an
enthusiasm which elevates me to heaven”), 4 examples → 3 non-res, 1 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“I am glowing with the enthusiasm of
success”), 4 examples → 2 non-res, 1 res actual, 1 res potential
•
Psychological state GF: 40 examples, 4 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“Do I not deserve to accomplish some
great purpose?”), 12 examples → 11 non-res, 1 res actual
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“I felt a little proud when my
captain offered me the second dignity in the vessel…”), 2 examples → 1 non-res,
1 res actual
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“he loved a young Russian lady of
moderate fortune”), 9 examples → 9 non-res
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“…yet I was passionately fond of
reading”), 17 examples → 17 non-res
98
•
Involvement into action GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function
(SF25)
SF25 Involvement into action + cause/source (“We wrapped him up in
blankets…”), 1 example → 1 res actual
•
Social status GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function (SF27)
SF27 Social status + duration (“They had not been long married…”), 1
example → 1 non-res
99
Charles Dickens - A Tale of Two Cities
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 112
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 84 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF03, SF04, SF05, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“My friend is dead, my neighbour is dead”),
37 examples → 36 non-res, 1 res actual
SF02 Physical state + accidentalness (“A very remarkable transformation
had come over him in a few seconds. He had no good-humour in his face”), 3
examples → 3 res actual
SF03 Physical state + potential change (“Mr. Lorry’s spirits grew heavier
and heavier”), 1 example → 29 non-res, 1 res actual
SF04 Physical state + duration (“Mr. Lorry had been idle a long time”), 1
example → 1 res potential
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“There was a steaming mist in all
the hollows”), 21 examples → 18 non-res, 3 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“All three were wrapped to the cheek-bones
and over the ears”), 21 examples → 16 non-res, 5 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 26 examples, 4 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“The passenger started, as a nervous
passenger might, and was disturbed in mind”), 17 examples → 17 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“Take that message back, and
they will know that I received this”), 3 examples → 3 non-res
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“In those days, travellers were very
shy…”), 3 examples → 3 non-res
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“Miss Manette had taken some
refreshment on the road, and required non then, and was extremely anxious to see
100
the gentleman…”), 3 examples → 3 non-res
•
Involvement into action GF: 1 example, 1 semantic functions
(SF24)
SF24 Involvement into action + spatial localization (“…when that wine too
would be spilled on the street-stones”), 1 example → 1 res potential
•
Social status GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function ( SF29)
SF29 Social status + stability (“I am an orphan and have no friend who
could go with me”), 1 example → 1 non-res
101
Bram Stoker - Dracula
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 134
3. Semantic functions fall into 3 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 84 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF03, SF04, SF05, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“Some of them were just like peasants, …,
but others were very picturesque”), 23 examples → 18 non-res, 5 res actual
SF02 Physical state + accidentalness (“I had all sorts of queer dreams”), 8
examples → 7 non-res, 1 res actual
SF03 Physical state + potential change (“It grew colder and colder still”), 3
examples → 3 res potential
SF04 Physical state + duration (“I must have been sleeping soundly then”),
5 examples → 5 non-res
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“The crucifix is still round my
neck”), 22 examples → 16 non-res, 6 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“Buda-Pesth seems a wonderful place”), 23
examples → 23 non-res
•
Psychological state GF: 49 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF11, SF12, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“They knew nothing at all”), 19
examples → 19 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“I feared to go very far from the
station”), 15 examples → 15 non-res
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“I must have been mad for the
time…”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF12 Psychological state + spatial localization (“You will enjoy your stay in
my beautiful land”), 2 examples → 2 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“I was filled with agitation…”), 1
102
example → 1 non-res
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“I found my smattering of German very
useful here”), 11 examples → 11 non-res
•
Involvement into action GF: 1 example, 1 semantic functions
(SF24)
SF24 Involvement into action + spatial localization (“The road was cut
through the pine woods”), 1 example → 1 res actual
103
Representation of the concept «State» in the
XX century
Virginia Woolf - Mrs Dalloway
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 238
3. Semantic functions fall into 5 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 68 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF03, SF04, SF05, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“How fresh, how calm… the air was in the
early morning”), 30 examples → 29 non-res, 1 res actual
SF02 Physical state + accidentalness (“She was over fifty and grown very
white since her illness”), 2 examples → 1 non-res, 1 res actual
SF03 Physical state + potential change (“She could remember growing cold
with excitement...”), 3 examples → 3 res potential
SF04 Physical state + duration (“For thirty seconds all heads were inclined
in the same way – to the window”), 9 examples → 8 non-res, 1 res actual
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“The King and Queen were at the
palace”), 14 examples → 11 non-res, 3 res actual
SF06 Physical state + manner (“He was almost too well dressed always”),
10 examples → 29 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 162 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF10, SF11, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“I prefer men to cauliflowers”), 118
examples → 118 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“And she felt it, she was
convinced, … all because she was coming down to dinner in a white frock to meet
104
Sally Seton!”), 8 examples → 8 non-res
SF10 Psychological state + potential change (“Here she is mending her
dress; mending her dress as usual, he thought; here she’s been sitting all the time
I’ve been in India; mending her dress; playing about; going to parties; running to
the House and back and all that, he thought, growing more and more irritated,
more and more agitated”), 5 examples → 3 non-res, 2 res potential
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“They had known each other since
childhood”), 14 examples → 14 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“…of the enduring symbol of the
state which will be known to curious antiquaries”), 4 examples → 4 non-res
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“Never, never had he suffered so
infernally!”), 13 examples → 12 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Involvement into movement GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function
(SF 16)
SF16 Involvement into movement + duration (“The coffee was very slow in
coming”), 1 example → 1 res potential
•
Involvement into action GF: 3 examples, 3 semantic functions
(SF20, SF21, SF24)
SF20 Involvement into action + stability (“There he stood by Miss Parry's
chair as though he had been cut out of wood...”), 1 example → 1 res actual
SF21 Involvement into action + accidentalness (“An ancestor had been with
Marie Antoinette, had his head cut off...”), 1 example → 1 res actual
SF24 Involvement into action + spatial localization (“Clarissa was
suspended on one side of Brook Street”), 1 example → 1 res actual
•
Social status GF: 3 examples, 2 semantic functions (SF27, SF29)
SF27 Social status + duration (“But her husband, for they had been married
four, five years now”), 2 examples → 2 res actual
SF29 Social status + stability (“But she's not married; she's young...”), 1
example → 1 res actual
105
William Golding - Lord of the flies
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 100
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 56 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“…his grey shirt stuck to him”), 19
examples → 19 non-res
SF02 Physical state + accidentalness (“Finally the laughter died away…”), 3
examples → 3 res actual
SF04 Physical state + duration (“And I’ve been wearing specs since I was
three”), 4 examples → 3 non-res, 1 res actual
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“But he wasn’t in the passenger
cabin…”), 13 examples → 11 non-res, 2 res actual
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“…and the spectacles were dimmed
with mist”), 6 examples → 5 non-res, 1 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“The water was warmer than his blood…”),
11 examples → 10 non-res, 1 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 37 examples, 4 semantic functions (SF08,
SF10, SF11, SF13)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“How does he know we’re here?”), 32
examples → 32 non-res
SF10 Psychological state + potential change (“…and we’ll want to know all
their names”), 2 examples → 1 res potential
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“Henry was a bit of a leader this
afternoon”), 1 example → 1 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“…and the eye was shocked and
incredulous at such cheery duplication”), 2 examples → 2 non-res
106
•
Involvement into movement GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function
(SF 19)
SF19 Im + manner (“Their black caps of maintenance were slid over one ear
like berets”), 1 example → 1 res actual
•
Involvement into action GF: 6 examples, 2 semantic functions
(SF20, SF21)
SF20 Involvement into action + stability (“All the islands in the world are
drawn here”), 2 examples → 1 non-res, 1 res actual
SF21 Involvement into action + accidentalness (“…so the fat boy was
forced to continue”), 4 examples → 4 res actual
107
Ethel Voynich - The Gadfly
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 107
3. Semantic functions fall into 3 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 42 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF03, SF04, SF05, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“After the funeral I was ill…”), 5 examples
→ 4 non-res, 1 res actual
SF02 Physical state + accidentalness (“The roses had run wild…”), 1
example → 1 res actual
SF03 Physical state + potential change (“It was growing dark…”), 5
examples → 5 res potential
SF04 Physical state + duration (“She was a slave till the day she died…”), 3
examples → 3 non-res
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“Arthur sat in the library…”), 13
examples → 11 non-res, 2 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“The windows stood wide open”), 15
examples → 13 non-res, 2 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 61 examples, 5 semantic functions (SF08,
SF10, SF11, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“I’m sure you put it here”), 44
examples → 44 non-res
SF10 Psychological state + potential change (“Julia would have driven me
mad…”), 4 examples → 4 res potential
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“The whole family had been staunch
Protestants… ever since Burton&Sons”), 2 examples → 2 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“He was always unkind to
mother…”), 5 examples → 4 non-res, 1 res potential
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“Mr Burton didn’t like at all the
108
idea…”), 6 examples → 6 non-res
•
Involvement into action GF: 4 examples, 1 semantic function
(SF21)
SF21 Involvement into action + accidentalness (“I must rewrite the passage;
it has got torn up”), 4 examples → 1 non-res, 3 res actual
109
J.R.R. Tolkien - Lord of the rings: Fellowship of the Ring
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 89
3. Semantic functions fall into 4 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 19 examples, 4 semantic functions (SF01,
SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“…they now belonged to the legendary
past”), 6 examples → 6 non-res
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“They lived on the Hill itself…”),
6 examples → 6 non-res
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“The road to the gate was blocked with
barrows and handcarts…”), 1 example → 1 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“He goes on living…never looking a day
older”), 6 examples → 4 non-res, 1 res actual, 1 res potential
•
Psychological state GF: 60 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF08,
SF09, SF10, SF11, SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“But he had no close friends”), 18
examples → 18 non-res
SF09 Psychological state + accidentalness (“You’re right, Dad!”), 15
examples → 9 non-res, 6 res actual
SF10 Psychological state + potential change (“It went on until his forties
were running out”), 1 example → 1 res potential
SF11 Psychological state + duration (“Bilbo had been specializing in food
for many years”), 5 examples → 4 non-res, 1 res actual
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“Mr. Baggins was generous with
his money”), 11 examples → 11 non-res
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“...who did not much like the miller”),
10 examples → 10 non-res
•
Involvement into movement GF: 1 example, 1 semantic function
110
(SF 19)
SF19 Involvement into movement + manner (“I am being swept off my feet
at last”), 1 example → 1 res potential
•
Involvement into action GF: 9 examples, 3 semantic functions
(SF21, SF24, SF26)
SF21 Involvement into action + accidentalness (“And the Hobbiton postoffice was blocked”), 3 examples → 2 res actual, 1 res potential
SF24 Involvement into action + spatial localization (“A rumour was spread
about that…”), 4 examples → 4 res actual
SF26 Involvement into action +manner (“…but they were so patched and
weatherstained that…”), 2 examples → 2 res actual
111
J.R.R. Tolkien - Lord of the rings: The Two Towers
1. Number of pages: 100
2. Number of examples: 98
3. Semantic functions fall into 3 gestalt functions.
•
“Physical state” GF: 60 examples, 6 semantic functions (SF01,
SF02, SF04, SF05, SF06, SF07)
SF01 Physical state + stability (“…but the sun seemed darkened”), 8
examples → 6 non-res, 2 res actual
SF02 Physical state + accidentalness (“The world has all grown strange”), 2
examples → 1 non-res, 1 res actual
SF04 Physical state + duration (“Éomer was silent for a moment”), 4
examples → 4 non-res
SF05 Physical state + spatial localization (“He was sitting with his back to a
great tree”), 26 examples → 23 non-res, 3 res actual
SF06 Physical state + cause/source (“He was pierced with manyblackfeathered arrows…”), 3 examples → 2 non-res, 1 res actual
SF07 Physical state + manner (“Many Orcs lay slain…”), 17 examples →
15 non-res, 2 res actual
•
Psychological state GF: 35 examples, 3 semantic functions (SF08,
SF13, SF14)
SF08 Psychological state + stability (“He desired to go there himself”), 29
examples → 29 non-res
SF13 Psychological state + cause/source (“We intend no evil to Rohan”), 3
examples → 3 non-res
SF14 Psychological state + manner (“Stone-hard are the Dwarves in labour
or journey…”), 3 examples → 3 non-res
•
Involvement into action GF: 3 examples, 2 semantic functions
(SF24, SF26)
SF24 Involvement into action + spatial localization (“Upon a stake in the
112
middle was set a great goblin head”), 1 example → 1 res actual
SF26 Involvement into action +manner (“His legs were securely bound…”)
2 examples → 1 non-res, 1 res actual
113
9. Teacher Resource.
Предлагаемые упражнения предназначены для бакалавров 3 года
обучения по направлению «Теория и методика преподавания иностранных
языков и культур» и могут быть использованы при изучении дисциплины
«Теоретическая грамматика (первый иностранный язык)».
Данные
упражнения
общепрофессиональной
лингвистических
фонетических,
могут
способствовать
компетенции
знаний,
ОПК-3
включающей
лексических,
в
формированию
«владение
себя
знание
словообразовательных
системой
основных
явлений
и
закономерностей функционирования изучаемого иностранного языка, его
функциональных разновидностей».
Для этого студент должен
Знать
строевые особенности английского языка и организовать полученные
знания в систему;
основные
закономерности
в
функционировании
грамматических
явлений в составе категорий, определяющих строй данного языка, в
том числе, современные подходы к изучению грамматических явлений
в рамках новой когнитивно-дискурсивной парадигмы;
основные тенденции в развитии грамматических исследований в
рамках отечественной и зарубежных лингвистических школ.
Уметь
объяснять значимость грамматических категорий и явлений в изучении
функционирования английского языка;
соотносить изучаемые языковые явления с грамматическими сферами
морфологии и синтаксиса, а также с особенностями стиля/регистра
речи.
Владеть
дискурсивными
стратегиями
и
тактиками,
представлениями
об
114
иноязычной культуре англоговорящих стран;
набором адекватных терминов для обозначения и характеризации
обсуждаемых понятий.
Texts and exercises.
Text 1 (King Lear by William Shakespeare, Act 1 Scene 3)
The Duke of Albany’s palace.
(Goneril; Oswald)
Enter Goneril and Steward Oswald.
GONERIL
Did my father strike my gentleman for chiding of his Fool?
OSWALD
Ay, madam.
GONERIL
By day and night he wrongs me, every hour
He flashes into one gross crime or other
That sets us all at odds. I’ll not endure it.
His knights grow riotous, and himself upbraids us
On every trifle. When he returns from hunting,
I will not speak with him; say I am sick.
If you come slack of former services,
You shall do well; the fault of it I’ll answer.
Horns within.
OSWALD
He’s coming, madam, I hear him.
GONERIL
Put on what weary negligence you please,
You and your fellows; I’d have it come to question.
If he distaste it, let him to my sister,
115
Whose mind and mine I know in that are one,
Not to be overrul’d. Idle old man,
That still would manage those authorities
That he hath given away! Now by my life
Old fools are babes again, and must be us’d
With checks as flatteries, when they are seen abus’d.
Remember what I have said.
OSWALD
Well, madam.
GONERIL
And let his knights have colder looks among you;
What grows of it, no matter. Advise your fellows so.
I would breed from hence occasions, and I shall,
That I may speak. I’ll write straight to my sister
To hold my very course. Prepare for dinner.
Exeunt.
Text 2 (Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte, extract)
I was a discord in Gateshead Hall: I was like nobody there; I had nothing in
harmony with Mrs. Reed or her children, or her chosen vassalage. If they did not
love me, in fact, as little did I love them. They were not bound to regard with
affection a thing that could not sympathise with one amongst them; a
heterogeneous thing, opposed to them in temperament, in capacity, in propensities;
a useless thing, incapable of serving their interest, or adding to their pleasure; a
noxious thing, cherishing the germs of indignation at their treatment, of contempt
of their judgment. I know that had I been a sanguine, brilliant, careless, exacting,
handsome, romping child -- though equally dependent and friendless -- Mrs. Reed
would have endured my presence more complacently; her children would have
entertained for me more of the cordiality of fellow-feeling; the servants would
have been less prone to make me the scapegoat of the nursery.
116
Daylight began to forsake the red-room; it was past four o'clock, and the
beclouded afternoon was tending to drear twilight. I heard the rain still beating
continuously on the staircase window, and the wind howling in the grove behind
the hall; I grew by degrees cold as a stone, and then my courage sank. My habitual
mood of humiliation, self-doubt, forlorn depression, fell damp on the embers of my
decaying ire. All said I was wicked, and perhaps I might be so; what thought had I
been but just conceiving of starving myself to death? That certainly was a crime:
and was I fit to die? Or was the vault under the chancel of Gateshead Church an
inviting bourne? In such vault I had been told did Mr. Reed lie buried; and led by
this thought to recall his idea, I dwelt on it with gathering dread. I could not
remember him; but I knew that he was my own uncle -- my mother's brother -- that
he had taken me when a parentless infant to his house; and that in his last moments
he had required a promise of Mrs. Reed that she would rear and maintain me as
one of her own children. Mrs. Reed probably considered she had kept this promise;
and so she had, I dare say, as well as her nature would permit her; but how could
she really like an interloper not of her race, and unconnected with her, after her
husband's death, by any tie? It must have been most irksome to find herself bound
by a hard-wrung pledge to stand in the stead of a parent to a strange child she
could not love, and to see an uncongenial alien permanently intruded on her own
family group.
Task 1.
Read the texts twice. Underline constructions or utterances in which a
certain type of state is expressed.
E.g. I will not speak with him; say I am sick.
Task 2.
Gestalt functions within the concept of state:
- physical state
- psychological state
117
- social status
- involvement into movement
- involvement into action
Which gestalt functions of those stated in the list above are represented
in Text 1? Text 2?
E.g. I will not speak with him; say I am sick. -> physical state
Task 3.
Try to identify semantic functions which correspond to the examples you
singled out in Task 1. Do they correspond to those mentioned in the list (see
Supplement)?
E.g. in fact, as little did I love them -> psychological state with a feature of
manner; corresponds to SF14 from the list.
Task 4.
Compare the statistics you’ve got: how many GFs are represented in Text 1?
Text 2? What about semantic functions? Make conclusions about the
representation of the concept of state in the 17 th and the 19th centuries.
Task 5.
How is state expressed in your examples grammatically? Analyze the
grammatical constructions which are used in both texts to express state.
E.g. I will not speak with him; say [I am sick]. -> [ NP V(link) AP ]
Are the constructions from your examples present in both texts? Are there
any differences in terms of grammatical expression of state in the 17 th and the 19th
centuries?
Task 6.
Taking into account the overall statistics (number of GFs and SFs,
grammatical constructions expressing state), make a conclusion about the
118
peculiarities of expressing state in different periods of human history. If there are
any significant differences, what are they? How can you account for them, using
the background knowledge about the sociopolitical situation in the given historical
periods?
Supplement.
Semantic functions:
1.
Physical state + stability
My feet ache.
2.
Physical state + accidentalness
He bleeded to death.
3.
Physical state + potential change
She is growing fat.
4.
Physical state + duration
The audience is sinking into silence.
5.
Physical state + spatial localization
She was always growing fat in her mother's house.
6.
Physical state + cause/source
He broke her favorite vase to pieces.
7.
Physical state + manner
The lake froze rock solid.
8.
Psychological state + stability
He adores this painting.
9.
Psychological state + accidentalness
I was amazed to see my father there.
10.
Psychological state + potential change
She was slowly starting to panic.
11.
Psychological state + duration
She felt filled with excitement for nearly an hour.
12.
Psychological state + spatial localization
119
His name tasted delicious on her tongue.
13.
Psychological state + cause/source
She was surprised by her brother's behavior.
14.
Psychological state + manner
She felt deeply ashamed of her actions.
15.
Involvement into movement + accidentalness
Mary urged Bill into the house.
16.
Involvement into movement + duration
She has been dancing Pat off the stage for half an hour.
17.
Involvement into movement + spatial localization
She has danced the poor guy off the stage.
18.
Involvement into movement + cause/source
He was danced off the stage by the crowd.
19.
Involvement into movement + manner
He fiercely coaxed George under the table.
20.
Involvement into action + stability
She always paints the walls blue.
21.
Involvement into action + accidentalness
My frock was ironed by that time.
22.
Involvement into action + potential change
She was tearing the blouse to pieces.
23.
Involvement into action + duration
She was ironing her clothes for half an hour.
24.
Involvement into action + spatial localization
They laughed him out of the room.
25.
Involvement into action + cause/source
The house is painted red by the old master.
26.
Involvement into action + manner
They cruelly laughed him out of the room.
27.
Social status + duration
120
They have been married for 20 years.
28.
Social status + spatial localization
They were married in church.
29. Social status + stability
She is married.
30. Social status + accidentalness
My mother was twice married.
Lecture: State from the point of view of Construction Grammar
(extract)
As an ontological concept, “state” has two subconcepts: non-resultative state
and resultative (actual and potential) state. The resultative state was studied in
detail in the form of so-called resultative constructions by representatives of
Construction Grammar (CxG), whose theory was proposed by C. Fillmore. In this
case, a construction is understood as “a linguistic expression that has an aspect of
the expression plan or the content plan that is not deducible from the meaning or
form of the constituent parts. Its elements can be morphemes, words, sentences”.
Hence the basic postulates of Construction Grammar:
1.
elements of one level constantly interact with elements of another
level;
2.
analysis at different levels is conducted not consecutively, but
simultaneously;
3.
meaning of the structure is not a simple sum, but the result of a
complex interaction of many features of individual components.
H. Boas: “…Construction grammar integrates different kinds of linguistic
information – semantic, pragmatic and syntactic information among others – in
such a way that allows to determine the extent to which the different kinds of
information are related and influence each other”.
H. Boas, one of the leading representatives of Construction Grammar,
writes: “The form of a construction can be associated with different kinds of
121
grammatically relevant information that can be semantic, pragmatic, syntactic,
morphological, phonological or lexical in nature”.
The ideas stated above, in our opinion, closely lead Construction Grammar
researchers to understanding structures as a gestalt, which prototypically represents
the concept of “state”.
Let us recall our definition of “state” as a linguistic concept: it is a unit of
knowledge conveying the language representation of world knowledge as a gestalt.
However, language does not directly represent knowledge about the world
“as it is”, but about a world that has already been projected into our consciousness.
Consequently, a state is a gestalt that has received conceptual processing, that is, a
concept. Why is "world knowledge" transmitted as gestalts? Because gestalts are
integrated and unified conceptual structures with a broad meaning that are not
formed by simple adding the information about their components. The concept
“state” as a linguistic concept can be viewed as a way of correlating meanings with
surface forms. In other words, the concept of “state” has different linguistic
representatives, combining morphological, lexical, and syntactic ways of forming
and transmitting conceptual semantics.
The representation of the concept of “state” is expressed linguistically by
propositional (mainly predicate-argument) structures as a sentence, text and extralinguistic (encyclopedic) information, which at speech level is realized as a
statement, discourse and background knowledge, and at the cognitive level as
knowledge about the language, the situation and the world.
The nuclear semantic structure of a simple sentence (proposition), as a rule,
includes a subject, a predicate, and an object. In the verbal semantics, there is
usually an implicit indication of the number of actant positions in the verb. But in
reality, not all the actants of the verb are actualized in the process of forming the
sentence. For example, there are non-actant structures «The vase broke», where the
performer of the action and the object are not encoded. At the same time, the
semantics of the representatives of the concept “state” can be determined by
inference, when the situation is “completed” on the basis of world knowledge.
122
Compare the following examples:
(1)
The dog barked itself hoarse.
The dog barked the postman off the property.
(2)
Joyce hung on and broke himself decisively in the ninth game.
In the first case (1), the linguistic knowledge of the polysemy of the verb
“bark” predetermines the semantics of the construction; in the 2nd example, the
semantics of state is derived inferentially from a proposition based on the sports
context (knowledge about the world).
Although the representation of the concept of “state” is realized in different
formats, we assume that it is the predicate-argument structure (in the format of
sentence) that has prototypical properties. And here we find a direct
correspondence to gestalt constructions, which are the object of Construction
Grammar.
Отзывы:
Авторизуйтесь, чтобы оставить отзыв