Abstract
The goal of this paper is to offer an overview of polysemy patterns in Mandarin’s chief spatial categories: prepositions (e.g.,zai) and simple and compound localisers (respectively,qianandqian-mian). The paper presents data from an elicitation study that shows how speakers can access multiple senses and hyponymy relations for the vocabulary items belonging to these categories. The paper shows that while prepositions can potentially cover different spatial relations in the opportune context (e.g.,zai“at”), localisers select increasingly specific senses (e.g.,qian“front” andqian-mian“front side”). The paper also shows how speakers can access hyponym-like sense relations emerging from these patterns (e.g.,qian-biancovering a more specific sense thanqian). Semantic dimensions such as “distance” and “location type” determine the strength of these hyponymy relations. The paper offers an account of these data based on the “semantics maps” model, which captures polysemy and hyponymy patternsviathe clusters of locations they refer to. It is shown that this novel model is consistent with previous works on the polysemy of spatial categories and sheds light on how Mandarin offers a unique organisation of this domain.
Highlights
Polysemy is usually defined as the ability of a vocabulary item to cover distinct but related senses (Apresjan 1974)
When items from different categories enter hyponym relations, we contend that the context must confirm their semantic “relatedness”. We suggest that such a multi-domain view of polysemy can be captured via our novel semantic maps model, in which localisers and prepositions refer to possibly overlapping regions of space
The results suggest that a certain degree of nuanced intra-speaker variation emerged when testing the polysemy of prepositions
Summary
Polysemy is usually defined as the ability of a vocabulary item to cover distinct but related senses (Apresjan 1974). The nature of polysemy is still the topic of intense debate. Some proposals suggest that polysemy is a pragmatic phenomenon based on speakers’ use of language in context (e.g., Falkum 2011, 2015, 2017). Other proposals suggest that polysemy is a reflection of the rich semantic content of lexical categories (e.g., Pustejovsky 1995; Asher 2011; Evans 2015). Other proposals offer intermediate positions attempting to integrate semantic and pragmatic views into coherent. Polysemy and Sense Relations in Mandarin models with conceptual underpinnings (e.g., Tyler and Evans 2003). The first is establishing whether this phenomenon is semantic or pragmatic (or both) in nature. The second is establishing whether and how it can emerge across grammatical/functional categories
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
