【作者】 杨玉娟；

【导师】 陈建生；

【作者基本信息】 长沙理工大学 ， 外国语言学及应用语言学， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 多义现象是一个词语有多种具有互相联系意义的语言现象。一个词在实际使用的语境中能指示不同的实体或不同的情况,因此自然语言中的绝大部分词语在或多或少的程度上都是多义的。单义词只有一种意义,而多义词是在一种语言形式下两种以上相互联系的词义的联结体。Taylor(1989:100)认为,如果一个词语的不同使用方式要求在对该词的解释中涉及两个不同的域或两种不同的域,就强烈暗示着该词是多义词。即使一个词的不同意义在同一个域中表现出,该词仍可以是多义词。1999年,Langacker详细阐述了他在意象网络基础上提出的基于语言使用的模型理论。Langacker在其著作《认知语法基础》中认为,多义是词汇语义学中司空见惯、能够预想的现象。在基于语言使用的模型中,他重点强调语言系统的实际使用和说话者对于语言规约整套系统的了解,无论这些语言规约是否可以被包含在上一层更总括性的概括中。多义现象在自然语言中无处不在。因此,多义现象是语言学中关注的一个热点。关于多义现象的出现频率、表现方式、表达形态及定义在语言学界中仍有诸多争论。然而,语言学家们总体一致的观点是,当词语含超过一个的意义时,便出现了多义现象。除此之外,语言学上对多义现象的定义要求多种意义之间有联系,在很大程度上由多义现象、单义现象和同音异义现象的区分决定。在多义现象和同音异义现象的区分中,笔者认为多义现象是词义变化中更基本的形式,而同音异义现象更有可能是由于词义变化过程中有些必要的意义丧失了地位,对词义变化的不完整记录造成。本文由引言、正文(共分四章)和结论组成:引言部分:概述目前语言学界对多义现象的研究现状,指出该研究领域存在的不足,引出本文研究的主要内容,即以“set”一词为例,从基于语言使用模型的角度更深入地探讨多义现象。第一章首先回顾了多义现象的定义和传统语言学中几大流派对多义现象的研究,然后对多义现象、同音异义现象和单义现象做了区分。第二章奠定了本研究的理论框架。对多义现象的看法在某个程度上激发了二十世纪八十年代认知语言学的兴起。由于从认知路径分析多义现象是认知语言学中不可或缺的部分,本章第一节概括介绍了认知语言学和某些认知语言学家对多义现象研究所做的贡献。第二节着重论述认知语言学中与多义现象研究紧密相关的几个理论。第三节探讨了借喻和隐喻两个语义扩展机制。第三章在阐释了Langacker的基于语言使用的动态模型理论后,审视了“set”一词的多义网络。笔者首先介绍基于语言使用的动态模型含义、前提、认知机制和作用过程。“set”一词的几个意义是相互联系的,本文认为多义词的各个义项之间是在强化、抽象化、范畴化、组件和联想这五种认知机制的作用下发展联系起来的,多义现象的研究就要找出这些义项之间的关系,而强化的程度和语境激发或语境中的适应性两个因素对义项的选取产生影响。笔者将“set”一词的7个基本义做了详尽的分析,构造了数个多义网络。针对含有“set”的动词词组、由“set”动词转换的名词、形容词以及由“set”构成的复合词也做了详细的研究。从分析中笔者认为,基于语言使用的动态模型理论可以阐释多义现象的本质和多义词的语义扩展。第四章进一步说明了本研究能为词汇教学、教师、学生和教科书编纂者提供的启示。结论部分强调,多义现象研究中应注重不同意义之间的联系和多义网络的组建。由于从认知的视角分析多义现象有别于传统视角,多义现象在当今的语言学研究中是一个重要的课题。如果词义变化是基于概念之间或概念和语言符号间的相互联系,多义现象就可以描述为共时下这些相互联系的关系间的延续。更多还原

【Abstract】 The overwhelming majority of words in a natural language are polysemous to a greater or lesser degree, that is, a word may typically denote different kinds of entities, or different kinds of situation, in different contexts of its use. A monosemous lexical item has a single sense, while polysemy is the association of two or more related senses with a single linguistic form. Taylor (1989:100) holds that if different uses of a lexical item require, for their explication, reference to two different domains, or two different sets of domains, this is a strong indication that the lexical item in question is polysemous. An item can still be polysemous even if its different meanings need to be characterized against the same domain.Later on in 1999, Langacker elaborated in detail his usage-based model as a development of the previous schematic network. It is worth noting that Langacker, on the opening page of his Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, is able to maintain that polysemy constitutes the normal, expected state of affairs in lexical semantics. In a usage-based model (Langacker 1999:91), substantial importance is given to the actual use of the linguistic system and a speaker’s knowledge of the full range of linguistic conventions, regardless of whether these conventions can be subsumed under more general statements.Polysemy is endemic in natural languages. It has been a central concern in linguistics. There has been significant disagreement regarding the frequency, representation, behaviors and definition of polysemy. Yet there is agreement that polysemy occurs when words have more than one meaning. In addition, linguistic definitions of polysemy require these multiple meanings to be related. This is largely due to the distinctions drawn between polysemy, monosemy and homonymy. In the distinction between polysemy and homonymy, we tend to take polysemy as the more basic form of semantic change, while homonymy is regarded as being largely caused by the incomplete process of semantic change after some necessary meanings having lost their prestige.The dissertation consists of four chapters in addition to an introduction and a conclusion.The introduction briefly reviews the studies on polysemy both at home and abroad, and points out that it is necessary to carry out further exploration of the polysemous phenomena.In Chapter 1, first, the definition of polysemy is reviewed. Then a brief survey of studies on polysemy in several classical approaches is made, followed by the distinctions among polysemy, homonymy and monosemy.Chapter 2 sets up the theoretical framework for the present research. The popularity of cognitive linguistics in the 1980s was triggered by its treatment of polysemy. Since the cognitive approach to polysemy is an important component of cognitive linguistics, the first section of this chapter gives a general introduction to cognitive linguistics and the contributions some linguists have made to the study of polysemy in cognitive semantics. Section Two focuses on some theories of cognitive linguistics which are closely related to the study of polysemy. In the third section, focus is narrowed to two semantic extension devices, metonymy and metaphor before the author builds up the framework for the present study.In Chapter 3, the examination of the polysemous network of SET is adopted to illustrate the theory of dynamic usage-based model by Langacker. The author introduce the dynamic usage-based model, its premise, its cognitive devices and its processes. The word SET has several meanings that are related to each other, and this thesis claims that the 5 cognitive devices—entrenchment, abstraction, categorization, composition and association—are the main links, which connect the various meanings of a polysemous word. The author figures out that the study of polysemy is simply to find the possible relations among these meanings. Two factors, level of entrenchment and contextual priming, or accommodation in context, affect the selection of meaning. There is a detailed analysis of the seven basic meanings of SET to form a number of polysemous networks. Illustrations of the phrasal verbs containing SET, as well as extensions from verb to noun and adjective are also made for the detailed study. The author holds that the dynamic usage-based model can elucidate the nature of polysemy and the semantic extension of polysemy according to the above analysis.Chapter 4 provides some implications for vocabulary teaching from the above study for teachers as well as suggestions for vocabulary learners and textbook designers.The conclusion stresses that in the study of polysemy, substantial attention should be paid to the connections of the different meanings and the construction of a polysemous network. Polysemy has now come to be an important issue in the current linguistic study as it is being analyzed from a cognitive view different from traditional ways. If semantic change is being based on associations between concepts or concepts and linguistic signs, polysemy could be described as the continuation of these associative relations in synchrony.更多还原