I learned a new word today,
a branch of linguistics concerned with the question "how do you express X?". ...as a part of lexicology, departs from a concept (i.e. an idea, an object, a quality, an activity etc.) and asks for its names. The opposite approach is known as semasiology: here one departs from a word and asks what it means, or what concepts the word refers to.
It seems to be a field relevant to the distinctions in lexical field.
I should gather data for these concepts from several Central Philippine languages, and see what it tells me about shared derived characters.
English | Cebuano | Tagalog |
Seed | Lisu | Butó |
Bone (Tetrapod) | Bukóg | Butó |
Bone (Fish) | Bukóg | Tiník |
Thorn | Tunók | Tiník |
I should gather data for these concepts from several Central Philippine languages, and see what it tells me about shared derived characters.
"The coinage of a new designation can be incited by various forces (cf. Grzega 2004):
- difficulties in classifying the thing to be named or attributing the right word to the thing to be named, thus confusing designations
- fuzzy difference between superordinate and subordinate term due to the monopoly of the prototypical member of a category in the real world
- everyday contact situations
- institutionalized and non-institutionalized linguistic pre- and proscriptivism
- flattery
- insult
- disguising things (i.e. euphemistic language, doublespeak)
- taboo
- avoidance of words that are phonetically similar or identical to negatively associated words
- abolition of forms that can be ambiguous in many contexts
- word play/punning
- excessive length of words
- morphological misinterpretation (creation of transparency by changes within a word = folk-etymology)
- deletion of irregularity
- desire for plastic/illustrative/telling names for a thing
- natural prominence of a concept
- cultural-induced prominence of a concept
- changes in the world
- changes in the categorization of the world
- prestige/fashion (based on the prestige of another language or variety, of certain word-formation patterns, or of certain semasiological centers of expansion)
The following alleged motives found in many works have shown to be invalid by Grzega (2004): decrease in salience, reading errors, laziness, excessive phonetic shortness, difficult sound combinations, unclear stress patterns, cacophony."
- Onomasiology, Wikipedia, citing:
Grzega, Joachim (2004), Bezeichnungswandel: Wie, Warum, Wozu? Ein Beitrag zur englischen und allgemeinen Onomasiologie. Heidelberg: Winter, ISBN 3-8253-5016-9. (reviewed by Bernhard Kelle in Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik vol. 73.1 (2006), p. 92-95)
No comments:
Post a Comment