English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  'Natural concepts' in the spatial topological domain - adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: An exercise in semantic typology

Levinson, S. C., & Meira, S. (2003). 'Natural concepts' in the spatial topological domain - adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: An exercise in semantic typology. Language, 79(3), 485-516.

Item is

Files

show Files
hide Files
:
Levinson_2003_natural.pdf (Publisher version), 421KB
File Permalink:
-
Name:
Levinson_2003_natural.pdf
Description:
-
OA-Status:
Visibility:
Public
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/pdf
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
-
Copyright Info:
eDoc_access: USER
License:
-

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Levinson, Stephen C.1, 2, Author           
Meira, Sérgio1, 2, Author
Affiliations:
1Language and Cognition Group, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society, ou_55204              
2Space, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society, ou_55229              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: Most approaches to spatial language have assumed that the simplest spatial notions are (after Piaget) topological and universal (containment, contiguity, proximity, support, represented as semantic primitives suchas IN, ON, UNDER, etc.). These concepts would be coded directly in language, above all in small closed classes suchas adpositions—thus providing a striking example of semantic categories as language-specific projections of universal conceptual notions. This idea, if correct, should have as a consequence that the semantic categories instantiated in spatial adpositions should be essentially uniform crosslinguistically. This article attempts to verify this possibility by comparing the semantics of spatial adpositions in nine unrelated languages, with the help of a standard elicitation procedure, thus producing a preliminary semantic typology of spatial adpositional systems. The differences between the languages turn out to be so significant as to be incompatible withstronger versions of the UNIVERSAL CONCEPTUAL CATEGORIES hypothesis. Rather, the language-specific spatial adposition meanings seem to emerge as compact subsets of an underlying semantic space, withcertain areas being statistical ATTRACTORS or FOCI. Moreover, a comparison of systems withdifferent degrees of complexity suggests the possibility of positing implicational hierarchies for spatial adpositions. But such hierarchies need to be treated as successive divisions of semantic space, as in recent treatments of basic color terms. This type of analysis appears to be a promising approachfor future work in semantic typology.

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 2003
 Publication Status: Issued
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: Peer
 Identifiers: eDoc: 127700
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Language
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: -
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 79 (3) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 485 - 516 Identifier: -