1. 35 years of Cognitive Linguistics Session 13: Summary session Martin Hilpert

2. What is Cognitive Linguistics? psycholinguistics? ‘functional’ linguistics? anti-Chomskyan? about metaphors?

3. 1. Categorization

4. prototype categories – human beings generalize over multiple events that are experienced as ‘the same’ – categories (‘dog’, ‘breakfast’, ‘relative clause’) are formed through experience – categories have central and non-central members, i.e. prototype structure

5. family resemblances

6. categorization influenced by context when people were told nothing about the content when people were told the vessel was for food

7. prototype effects in grammar better ratings for prototypical examples 1.WH Prototypical: What do you think the witness will say? 2.WH Subject: What does Claire think the witness will say? 3.WH Auxiliary: What would you think the witness will say? 4.WH Verb: What do you believe the witness will say? 5.WH that: What do you think that the witness will say? 6.WH Long: What do you think Jo believes the witness will say? 7.WH Unprototypical: What would Claire believe that Jo thinks the witness will say? 4,31 4,25 3,93 3,23 3,84 3,85 2,54

8. 2. Metaphor

9. TEMPERATURE INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS sympathy loneliness developing a stronger relationship alienation warmth coldness warming up chilling source domain target domain mappings

10. the metaphoric structuring view “metaphors provide relational structure to those domains where the structure may not be obvious from world experience”

11. SPACE TIME

12. place distance between places movement going back

13. SPACE TIME point /event in time time between events aging ‘time travel’ place distance between places movement going back

14. Warmth makes you feel sympathy Sympathy feels warm, exclusion feels cold

15. 3. Polysemy

17. same form two clearly distinct meanings weakly related through a common meaning summit ‘mountain top’ ‘meeting of decision makers’

18. same form two distinct meanings clearly related through a common meaning string ‘thin rope’ ‘part of a guitar’

19. same form very similar meanings obviously related through a common meaning wing ‘body part of a bird’ ‘part of an airplane’

20. same form barely distinguishable meanings common meaning more accessible than the different meanings grandmother ‘mother’s mother’ ‘father’s mother’

21. 1. I can say ‘How are you’ in Italian. 2. Make sure to get that in writing. 3. I saw him in my dreams. 4. There is a hole in your sweater. 5. Are you putting onions in the stew? 6. Don’t put that in your mouth. 7. My pen is in the drawer. 8. I looked him straight in the eyes. 9. In Japan, they eat raw fish. 10. Please come in. 11. What would you have done in my place? 12. What line of work are you in?

22. sorting task How often are two particular sentences of the 20 put into the same group? –Don’t put that in your mouth. –My pen is in the drawer. –In Japan they eat raw fish. Often together ) Rarely together )

23. spatial time abstract

24. 4. Conceptual integration

25. Conceptual Integration Networks Input 1 Input 2............. Blend

27. CMT: source and target vs. CI: several input spaces

28. six different races as inputs

29. CMT: mappings from source to target vs. CI: emergent structure

30. domain of WAR domain of ARGUMENTS Participants in an argument Raising objections Maintaining one’s opinion Giving up your opinion Fighting parties Attacking Defending Surrendering source domain target domain mappings

31. Conceptual Integration Networks Input 1 Input 2............. Blend

32. emergent structure: race of the winners

33. emergent structure That surgeon is a butcher. – Whence the idea of incompetence? The senator is a puppet of the oil industry. – Whence the idea of corruption?

34. CMT: the invariance principle vs. CI: the topology constraint

35. the invariance principle Metaphorical mappings preserve the cognitive topology (that is, the image-schema structure) of the source domain, in a way consistent with the inherent structure of the target domain. Entire image-schemas are mapped from source to target – balance: entity 1, entity 2, comparison between them

36. the topology constraint the image-schematic structure of the input spaces is mapped into the blend, so as to create a ‘match’

37. the topology constraint the image-schematic structure of the input spaces is mapped into the blend, so as to create a ‘match’ this ‘match’ may lead to the creation of a new image-schematic structure: ‘encounter’ is not present in either of the input spaces

38. 5. Frame semantics

39. Imagine that your country is preparing for the outbreak of an unusual disease, which is expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed. The exact scientific estimates of the consequences of the programs are as follows.

40. Program A: 200 people will be saved Program B: There is a 1/3 probability that 600 people will be saved, and a 2/3 probability that no people will be saved. Program A: 400 people will die. Program B: There is a 1/3 probability that nobody will die, and a 2/3 probability that 600 people will die.

41. Program A: 200 people will be saved Program B: There is a 1/3 probability that 600 people will be saved, and a 2/3 probability that no people will be saved. Program A: 400 people will die. Program B: There is a 1/3 probability that nobody will die, and a 2/3 probability that 600 people will die. SAVE LIVES Priority: If you can save at least some of the people, do that.

42. Program A: 200 people will be saved Program B: There is a 1/3 probability that 600 people will be saved, and a 2/3 probability that no people will be saved. Program A: 400 people will die. Program B: There is a 1/3 probability that nobody will die, and a 2/3 probability that 600 people will die. SAVE LIVES Priority: If you can save at least some of the people, do that. PREVENT DEATH Priority: If there is a chance to avoid deaths, take it.

43. frames cognitive schemas that you use to interpret events and situations in the world The frame that you use gives you a certain ‘world view’. The same event may be interpreted in very different ways.

44. Words denote parts of frames

45. frame-dependent words goal, offside, penalty, referee, goalie, corner, foul

46. frames and their elements (FEs) going to a restaurant – customer – waiter – food and drink – check – exchange of money – tip

47. 6. The usage-based model

48. What is usage-based linguistics? language use shapes linguistic knowledge language use shapes language change language is grounded in general cognitive processes communicative functions shape language form

49. domain-general cognitive processes cognitive processes that are also important for non-linguistic cognition: – categorization – chunking – rich memory – analogy – cross-modal association

50. frequency, i.e. the recurrence of specific material in language use, underlies – the formation of exemplar-based categories frequent experiences shape the prototype – analogy analogies are formed on the basis of frequent patterns past tense regularization with -ed – articulatory reduction frequently produced forms undergo reduction – resistance against analogical change the more frequent an irregular form, the more resistant it is against regularization

51. two frequency effects – reduction: the more frequently a string of linguistic forms is produced, the more likely it is to form a chunk and to undergo articulatory reduction (I don’t know vs. We don’t negotiate) – preservation: the more frequently a linguistic form is produced, the more entrenched it becomes in memory, and hence the more resistant it becomes to analogical change (weep > weeped vs. sleep > *sleeped)

52. alternative to rule-based generalizations: – regular allophony: ship-s, word-s, flash-es – memory representations of individual tokens are not necessary when you have a rule usage-based view: – even when generalizations exist, there will be redundant representations of regularly formed tokens, if those tokens are encountered frequently enough – cats, walked, dancing redundant representations

53. 7. Cognitive Grammar

54. All linguistic structures are meaningful. – subject, noun, preposition, relative clause, progressive aspect, infinitive, past tense, finiteness, modal auxiliary,... The meanings of these structures can be fully described in cognitive terms. the preposition into the present progressive to walk a walk

55. reducing grammar to symbols The stuff grammars are made of: 1.sounds and structures you’ve heard before tree, I don’t know, Could you pass the salt? 2.schemas on the basis of the sounds and structures that you’ve heard before NOUN, SUB VP, AUX, SUB, VP 3.categorizing relationships between 1 and 2 ‘tree’ is a NOUN

56. “Symbolic units vary along the parameters of complexity and specificity.” Complexity: cat blackboard football coach

57. “Symbolic units vary along the parameters of complexity and specificity.” Schematicity: tree noun verb

59. gestalt perception “A relational predication elevates one of its participants to the status of figure. I refer to this participant as its ‘trajector’; other salient participants are referred to as ‘landmarks’.” the preposition into

60. construal The neighbors are gone. The neighbors are away. – same profile, different base

61. 8. Construction Grammar

62. syntax is meaningful Constructions carry meaning, just like lexical items. Evidence: non-compositional meaning of sentences, the whole means more than the sum of the parts. – John knitted Mary a sweater. – One step closer and I’ll shoot!

63. coercion The construction dictates a certain interpretation of the verb. coercion: – If a lexical item is semantically incompatible with its morphosyntactic context, the meaning of the lexical item conforms to the meaning of the structure in which it is embedded. John plays the piano. John plays the piano to pieces.

64. Knowledge of language in CxG: a network of interlinked constructions

65. the construct-i-con a large inventory of form-meaning pairs, representing speakers’ knowledge of language important addendum – no chaotic ‘bag of constructions’, but instead: – hierarchically structured – links between constructions In what ways can constructions be linked?

66. instance links (X IS A Y - relationship) Verb Phrase intransitive transitive ditransitive spill the beans face the music give a hoot

67. actual transfer intended transfer future transfer enabled transfer blocked transfer Polysemy links

68. subpart links relate cxns with either semantic or formal overlap do not classify cxns as instances of one another John wrote a letter. John wrote Mary a letter.

69. 9. Language acquisition

70. item-based learning Children start out by memorizing and repeating concrete words and phrases. As a child recognizes similarities across different phrases, a process of schematization sets in. POS categories and syntactic constructions emerge as generalizations over concrete phrases Generalizations get increasingly abstract, until they resemble adult grammar.

71. five socio-cognitive abilities 1.joint attention 2.intention reading 3.schematization 4.role reversal 5.pattern recognition

72. 1. joint attention Words become meaningful in situations in which both the child and a caretaker focus on an object and are mutually aware of this. Before 9 months of age, children can only engage in dyadic joint attention (mutual eye gaze). Triadic joint attention means inspecting an object together. With the ability to engage in triadic joint attention comes word learning.

73. 2. intention reading Young children interpret other people’s actions as purposeful and goal-directed. Theory of mind: other people too have ideas, feelings, knowledge. Toddlers imitate actions of others, but only those that they see as ‘successful’, not those that are ‘accidental’.

74. all done, all wet>> all X where’s daddy?, where’s cookie?>> where’s X let’s go!, let’s find it!>> let’s X I’m holding it, I’m pulling it>> I’m X-ing it the ability to form pivot schemas – Pivot: the fixed part of a schema – Open slot: the variable part of a schema 3. schematization

75. 4. role reversal In linguistic interaction, speakers are also hearers, and vice versa. the capability of conceptual blending – What would it be like if I were in the position of my interlocutor? – Creating a model of other people’s current knowledge.

76. 5. pattern recognition the ability to recognize regularities in speech 8-month old infants listened to nonce words – bidaku, padoti, bidala, tupiro, gobida,... – bi always followed by da exposure to new words – bidaka >> in line with previous words – dabiko >> different from previous words infants showed greater interest towards words that violated established patterns

77. 10. Language and thought

78. --------- sauce ------------gravydressingtopping --------------------- Soße ------------------------ Kompott

79. --------------- green ----------------------------- blue --------------- ------------------------------------ grue -----------------------------------

80. English: 0.3 0.4 Tarahumara: 0.3 0.2

81. ------------ goluboy --------------------------- siniy ---------------- ------------------------------------ blue -----------------------------------

89. 11. Cognitive Sociolinguistics

91. Sociolinguistics – the study of variation in language Cognitive Sociolinguistics – the study of speakers’ knowledge of linguistic variation

92. knowledge of variation the traditional goal of linguistic research: – finding out what speakers know when they know a language – typically implemented as the ability to distinguish ‘grammatical’ and ‘ungrammatical’ sentence-level constructions it’s more complicated than that: – knowledge of language includes knowledge of variation – speakers know which variants of a construction are appropriate in which contexts

93. lectal awareness Your experience with other language users allows you to form exemplar-based categories of ‘other’ language varieties. You can identify – British vs. American English – L2 English with a French accent – Austrian German

94. Overview

95. What is Cognitive Linguistics? psycholinguistics? ‘functional’ linguistics? anti-Chomskyan? about metaphors?

96. That’s all folks! martin.hilpert@unine.ch