构式语法中的语义与语用

Benoît Leclercq
{"title":"构式语法中的语义与语用","authors":"Benoît Leclercq","doi":"10.1075/BJL.00048.LEC","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This squib provides a theoretical discussion on the use of the terms semantics and\n pragmatics in Construction Grammar. In the literature, the difference between semantics and pragmatics is often\n conceptualized either in terms of conventionality or in terms of truth-conditionality (Huang\n 2014, 299). It will be shown that, even though constructionists claim that there is no semantics–pragmatics distinction, both these\n underlying concepts are central to the study of constructions. Therefore, the aim is twofold. First, in keeping with Cappelle (2017), it will be argued that constructionists should make more explicit the distinction between the two\n types of (encoded) meaning. Second, it will be shown that constructionists need to be more terminologically consistent and agree on how to\n use the terms semantics and pragmatics. Following Depraetere\n (2019), I will argue that the terms semantics and pragmatics are most explanatory when defined in\n truth-conditional terms. In this way, finer-grained understanding of the meaning of constructions can be achieved.","PeriodicalId":414884,"journal":{"name":"Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Volume 34 (2020)","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Semantics and pragmatics in Construction Grammar\",\"authors\":\"Benoît Leclercq\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/BJL.00048.LEC\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This squib provides a theoretical discussion on the use of the terms semantics and\\n pragmatics in Construction Grammar. In the literature, the difference between semantics and pragmatics is often\\n conceptualized either in terms of conventionality or in terms of truth-conditionality (Huang\\n 2014, 299). It will be shown that, even though constructionists claim that there is no semantics–pragmatics distinction, both these\\n underlying concepts are central to the study of constructions. Therefore, the aim is twofold. First, in keeping with Cappelle (2017), it will be argued that constructionists should make more explicit the distinction between the two\\n types of (encoded) meaning. Second, it will be shown that constructionists need to be more terminologically consistent and agree on how to\\n use the terms semantics and pragmatics. Following Depraetere\\n (2019), I will argue that the terms semantics and pragmatics are most explanatory when defined in\\n truth-conditional terms. In this way, finer-grained understanding of the meaning of constructions can be achieved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":414884,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Volume 34 (2020)\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Volume 34 (2020)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/BJL.00048.LEC\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Volume 34 (2020)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/BJL.00048.LEC","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

本文对构式语法中语义和语用这两个术语的使用进行了理论探讨。在文献中,语义学和语用学之间的差异通常被概念化为约定性或真-条件性(Huang 2014, 299)。我们将会看到,尽管建构主义者声称没有语义-语用的区别,但这两个潜在的概念都是建构研究的核心。因此,目的是双重的。首先,根据Cappelle(2017)的观点,我们认为建构主义者应该更明确地区分两种类型(编码)的意义。其次,建构主义者需要在术语上保持一致,并就如何使用语义和语用术语达成一致。在Depraetere(2019)之后,我将论证语义学和语用学这两个术语在用真理条件术语定义时最具解释性。通过这种方式,可以实现对结构意义的更细粒度的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Semantics and pragmatics in Construction Grammar
This squib provides a theoretical discussion on the use of the terms semantics and pragmatics in Construction Grammar. In the literature, the difference between semantics and pragmatics is often conceptualized either in terms of conventionality or in terms of truth-conditionality (Huang 2014, 299). It will be shown that, even though constructionists claim that there is no semantics–pragmatics distinction, both these underlying concepts are central to the study of constructions. Therefore, the aim is twofold. First, in keeping with Cappelle (2017), it will be argued that constructionists should make more explicit the distinction between the two types of (encoded) meaning. Second, it will be shown that constructionists need to be more terminologically consistent and agree on how to use the terms semantics and pragmatics. Following Depraetere (2019), I will argue that the terms semantics and pragmatics are most explanatory when defined in truth-conditional terms. In this way, finer-grained understanding of the meaning of constructions can be achieved.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信