The purpose of this paper is to propose a framework of lexical meaning, broadly along the lines of Cognitive Semantics (Langacker 1987a). Within the proposed model, all aspects of meaning are to be explained in terms of properties of ontologies in conceptual space, i.e. properties of content ontologies and schematic ontologies and construals which are imposed on the conceptual structures on the occasion of use. It is through the operations of construals on ontological structures that different readings of lexical expressions (...) arise. Lexical meanings are dynamic and sensitive to contextual demands, rather than fixed and stable. In a dynamic, usage-based model like this, polysemy and multiple readings emerge as a natural consequence of the human ability to think flexibly. Another more specific purpose of this paper is to draw attention to the usefulness of ontologies in linguistic research in general and semantic modelling in particular. (shrink)

The ArgumentErnst Cassirer's theory of language as a symbolic form, one of the richest and most insightful philosophies of language of the twentieth century, went virtually unnoticed in the mainstreams of modern linguistics. This was so for what seems to be a good metatheoretical reason: Cassirer insisted on the constitutive role of meaning in the explanation of linguistic phenomena, a position which was explicitly rejected by both American Structuralists and Chomskian Generativists. In the last decade, however, a new and promising (...) linguistic framework has emerged — the framework of lexical semantics — which seems to bear close theoretical resemblance to Cassirer's theory. In this paper, I show how the empirical results accumulated within the framework of lexical semantics serve to validate Cassirer's most fundamental philosophical insights, and suggest that Cassirer's philosophy helps position these empirical results in their appropriate epistemological context. I discuss the following fundamental points, which, for me, constitute the backbone of both Cassirer's philosophy and the theory of lexical semantics: natural language grammars constitute structural reflections of a deeply-rooted, highly structured level of semantic organization; the representational level of linguistic meaning, which is prior to experience in the Kantian sense, comprises a partial set of semantic notions, which language selects as centers of perceptual attention; this partial set is potentially different from the sets selected by other symbolic forms, such as myth, science, and art; and linguistic variability is to be explained in universalistic terms, thus allowing for specific patterns of variability within universally-constrained limits. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Cognitive Linguistics Jahrgang: 25 Heft: 4 Seiten: 701-741.

El texto aborda una de las cuestiones metodológicas fundamentales que Heidegger se planteaba en las Frühe Freiburger Vorlesungen (1919-1923), a saber, el problema de la indicación formal. En efecto, si la vida misma (Dasein) es un acontecimiento de sentido cerrado en sí mismo es necesario establecer un punto de vista que exprese conceptualmente la vida sin objetivarla. El gran problema con el que Heidegger se enfrenta es encontrar un metalenguaje no objetivante. El concepto de indicación formal es lo que le (...) permite elaborar un discurso sobre el origen. (shrink)

El objetivo de este trabajo es determinar la posición domintante de Heideggerfrente a la relación entre teoría y modalidad impropia de la existencia. Partiendo de la ambivalencia frente a esta cuestión en Sein und Zeit, el trabajo recorre distintas lecciones del periodo de Marburg donde Heidegger aborda la misma problemática. El texto examina la explicación heideggeriana de la noción fenomenológica de conciencia y de los conceptos aristotélicos “sofía”, “dóxa” y “episteme” a fin de establecer la posición dominante de Heidegger respecto (...) del origen impropio de estos conceptos teóricos.The purpose of this study is to determine Heidegger’s dominant position in frontof the relationship between existence improper modality and theory. From theambivalence of this issue in Sein und Zeit, the study goes through the different lectures of the Marburg period where Heidegger talks about this same issue. The text examines Heidegger’s explanation of the phenomenological notion of conscience and the Aristotelian concepts “sofía”, “dóxa” and “episteme” in order to establish Heidegger’s dominant position in relation to the improper origin of these theoretical concepts. (shrink)