Irony behind diminutives: a cognitive linguistic analysis of popular technical terms

• Authors: Rafał Augustyn , Agata Gniecka
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Based on a study of English popular technical terms the article claims that in order to properly account for the ironic use of diminutives, one has to assume a cognitive view of meaning. Following Fauconnier and Turner’s (2002) Conceptual Integration Theory and Langacker’s (2008) notion of Current Discourse Space, we suggest that the ironic meanings of the stemaffix combinations involving diminutives should be seen as instances of conceptual blending that are determined by the context in which such formations occur, including the speakerhearer interaction in the specific context of a given usage event within the current discourse space.

Keywords

EN

Conceptual Integration Theory; Current Discourse Space

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej
• Journal: Lublin Studies in Modern Languages and Literature
• Year: 2011
• Issue: 35
• Pages: 31-49

Contributors

author

Rafał Augustyn

• Maria Curie-Skłodowska University Lublin, Poland

author

Agata Gniecka

• Maria Curie-Skłodowska University Lublin, Poland

References

• Blank, A. 2003. Polysemy in the lexicon and in discourse. In B. Nerlich, Z. Todd, V. Herman, D. Clarke (eds.), 267-293.
• Dirven, R. and M. Verspoor. 2004. Cognitive Exploration of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Fauconnier, G. 1994. Mental Spaces. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Fauconnier, G. 1997. Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Fauconnier, G. and M. Turner. 2002. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
• Gibbs, R. 1986. On the psycholinguistics of sarcasm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 115: 3-15.
• Giora, R. 1995. On irony and negation. Discourse Processes 19: 239-264.
• Giora, R. 1997. Understanding figurative and literal language: the graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics 7: 183-206.
• Giora, R. and I. Gur. 2003. Irony in conversation: salience, role and context effects. In B. Nerlich, Z. Todd, V. Herman, D. Clarke (eds.), 297-316.
• Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Speech Acts. Syntax and Semantics Vol. 3, ed. P. Cole and J. Morgan, 41-58. New York: Academic Press.
• Jurafsky, D. 1996. Universal Tendencies in the Semantics of the Diminutive. Language, Vol. 72, No. 3: 533-578.
• Kardela, H. 2010. ‘Fakty hipotetyczne’: kognitywna analiza twórczego wykorzystania języka na stronach internetowych Muzeum IV RP. In M. Czerwiński, P. Nowak, R. Przybylska (eds.), Język IV Rzeczpospolitej (411-417). Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.
• Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
• Langacker, R. W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Langacker, R. W. 2000. Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Langacker, R. W. 2005. Wykłady z gramatyki kognitywnej. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.
• Langacker, R. W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar. A Basic Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Lehrer, A. 2003. Polysemy in derivational affixes. In B. Nerlich, Z. Todd, V. Herman, D. Clarke (eds.), 217-232.
• Libura, A. 2007. Amalgamaty kognitywne w sztuce. Kraków: Universitas.
• Nerlich, B., Z. Todd, V. Herman and D. Clarke (eds.). 2003. Polysemy. Flexible Patterns of Meaning in Mind and Language. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Raskin, V. 1985. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht, Boston, Lancaster: D. Reidel.
• Schneider K. P. 2003. Diminutives in English Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
• Sperber, D. and D. Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Tabakowska, E. 2001. Językoznawstwo kognitywne a poetyka przekładu. Kraków: Universitas.
• Taylor, J. R. 2002. Cognitive Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Taylor, J. R. 2003. Linguistic Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Turner, M. 1991. Reading Minds: The Study of English in the Age of Cognitive Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Tyler, A. and V. Evans. 2003. The Semantics of English Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Wierzbicka A. 1984. Diminutives and depreciatives: Semantic representation for derivational categories. Quaderni di Semantica 5: 123-30.
• Wierzbicka, A. 1990. Podwójne życie człowieka dwujęzycznego. In Język polski w świecie, ed. W. Miodunka, 71-104. Warszawa, Kraków: PWN.
• Wierzbicka, A. 1999. Język – Umysł – Kultura. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.