untitled

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "untitled"

あおいちゃわんや
5 years ago
Views:

1 Lakoff(1987) Taylor([1989] 2004) Lakoff(1987) 1 2 p.14,,,, (semantic prosody) (Louw 1993, Stubbs 1995, Partington 1998, Sinclair 1996, Hunston and Francis 1999)

2 (BCCWJ) ,000 10, ,500 Yahoo! , ( 2007) ( 2003) vs. vs. vs. vs. closed class 1 [[ ](AJ)N[ ]N]NN [[ ]AJN [ ]N]AN (constructional meaning) Langacker 6,938 3, ,164 1, ,064 9, , , , ,319 5, ,457 2, ,528 2, , ,255 28,029 1,747 2,484

3 (204) (143) (133) (122) (119) (108) (98) (95) (72) (64) (62) (55) (55) (49) (47) (36) (33) (33) (32) (32) (31) (31) (31) (29) (28) (103) (67) (56) (45) (43) (32) (29) (26) (25) (22) (22) (22) (19) (18) (18) (18) (18) (17) (17) (17) (17) (16) (16) (16) (412) (328) (286) (263) (237) (185) (174) (154) (153) (146) (143) (120) (118) (115) (111) (110) (108) (103) (93) (92) (84) (83) (71) (70) (66) (17) (3) 2 1 (21) (19) (18) (18) (20) (14) (13) (9) (9) (3) (17) (6) (6) (5) (5) (39) (22) (22) (20) (19) (15) (15) (7) (4) (3) 3 1

5 (82) (43) (27) (23) (16) (15) (14) (13) (13) (10) (10) (9) (8) (8) (8) (124) (67) (54) (35) (22) (7) (6) (5) (2) (2) (348) (337) (204) (190) (157) (146) (146) (142) (132) (130) (95) (93) (83) (75) (68) (67) (64) (56) (51) (49) (128) (107) (49) (46) (44) (42) (36) (33) (32) (31) (30) (29) (29) (26) (26) (20) (8) (7) (2) (2) (2) (33) (20) (15) (14) (3) (3) (2) (73) (49) (32) (23) (22) (18) (17) (15) (14) (14) (42) (22) (21) (19) (19) (16) (13) (13) (9) (6)

6 (Stubbs 2001, Hunston 2007) (487) (193) (166) (131) (128) (118) (98) (80) (55) (50) (42) (20) (18) (15) (14) (14) (13) (12) (6) (59) (52) (37) (30) (15) (13) (10) (10) (8) (8) (5) (5) 2

7 20 (4) (3) (2) (2) (7) (23) (15) (14) (9) (6) (6) (4) (4) (4) ,

8 3.3 augmented unit Langacker (2) 2010 (36)(37) ibid, p.196 (2010) (3) 2010 (39) (ibid, p196) (3)

9 (2008) Stewart (2010) Whitsitt (2005) Hunston (2007), 15 14

10 (28) (2007), 1 4. (2010), 4 5. KOTONOHA, Online at ex_8.html.. (2010)., (2009). (1995). (2003) version2.3.2,. (2007). ver.1.3,. (2008). Hunston, S. (2007) Semantic prosody revisited. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 12(2) Hunston, S. and Francis, G. (1999) Pattern Grammar. A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English. John Benjamins. Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. University of Chicago Press Langacker, R. (2001) Discourse in Cognitive Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 12(2), Louw, B. (1993) Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer? The diagnostic potential of semantic prosodies. In M. Baker et al. (eds) Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair. John Benjamins, Partington, A. (1998) Patterns and Meanings: Using Corpora for English Language Research and Teaching. John Benjamins. Sinclair, J. (1996) The search for units of meaning. Textus, 9, Stewart, D. (2010) Semantic Prosody: A Critical Evaluation (Advances in Corpus Linguistics 9). Routledge. Stubbs, M. (1995) Collocation and semantic profiles: On the cause of the trouble with quantitative studies. Functions of Language 2, Stubbs, M. (2001) Words and Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Blackwell. Taylor, J. R. [1989] (2004) Linguistic Categorization. Third edition. Oxford University Press. ( ( ) ) Whitsitt, S. (2005) A critique of the concept of semantic prosody. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 10(3),

11 <abstract> Semantic Prosodies Attendant on Japanese Nouns of Chinese Origin Representing Abstract Concepts Akira OISHI Meisei University This paper investigates Japanese nouns of Chinese origin which represent abstract concepts such as BUSSITSU (substance) or KOUI (act). The concepts represented by these nouns lie at the top of the concept hierarchy. Therefore, according to logical reasoning, we might suspect that the nouns were transparent in meaning and were used neutrally because they should include all subordinate concepts located lower in the concept hierarchy. However, the results obtained by examining a large-scale electronic corpus showed a surprising polarization in their evaluative meaning. Most of the nouns co-occur typically with other words that belong to a particular semantic class. This phenomenon is referred to as semantic prosody, which describes the way in which certain seemingly neutral words can come to carry positive or negative associations through frequently occurring with particular collocations (Louw 1993, Stubbs 1995, Partington 1998, Sinclair 1996, Hunston and Francis 1999). We examined four nouns for each of the three broadest categories: action, state, and thing. As for action category, the collocates of the four nouns are analyzed: KOUI (act), KOUDOU (behavior), KATSUDOU (activity), and DOUSA (action). When KOUI is used as a head of a compound noun or modified by an adjectival noun, the noun preceding it tends to carry illegality except when it is used as a technical term in the administrative or legal area. On the other hand, KATSUDOU is habitually associated with a favorable expression such as keizai (economy), borantia (volunteer), etc. and characterized by a semantic prosody of contribution to society. Other two nouns do not show such negative or positive associations. The nouns included in state category are GENSYOU (phenomenon), JITAI (situation), JOUKYOU (state of affairs), and JOUTAI (state). GENSYOU is associated with a semantic prosody of incomprehensibility while JITAI is associated with a semantic prosody of emergency. In addition, JITAI, JOUKYOU and JOUTAI are all similarly modified by adjectival nouns which represent seriousness or difficulty. These results can be explained by the pragmatic principle that a steady state need not be mentioned. As for thing category, BUSSITSU (substance), BUTTAI (object), JIBUTSU (things), and SONZAI (being) are examined. BUSSITU constitutes compound nouns with collocates that imply noxiousness and BUTTAI is associated with a semantic prosody of weirdness. These results are brought about by the abstractness of the concepts they represent. On the other hand, SONZAI carries a positive association through the collocates which represent centrality or representativeness. This is because SONZAI refers to the presence felt by others rather than things themselves. The fact that these abstract nouns have little informational value in their own meaning makes hearers (readers) to focus on the preceding nouns, which function as a factor to foreground speakers (writers ) construal of the events described in the sentences.

11_寄稿論文_李_再校.mcd

11_寄稿論文_李_再校.mcd 148 2011.4 1 4 Alderson 1996, Chapelle 2001, Huston 2002, Barker 2004, Rimmer 2006, Chodorow et al. 2010 He & Dai 2006 2 3 4 2 5 4 1. 2. 3. 1 2 (1) 3 90 (2) 80 1964 Brown 80 90 British National Corpus