語義關(guān)系與詞庫

內(nèi)容概要

《語義關(guān)系與詞庫/西方語言學(xué)與應(yīng)用語言學(xué)視野》編著者M(jìn).Lynne
Murphy。
《語義關(guān)系與詞庫/西方語言學(xué)與應(yīng)用語言學(xué)視野》內(nèi)容提要：本書主要討論詞匯之間的多種聚合語義關(guān)系，如同義關(guān)系、反義關(guān)系、上下義關(guān)系，以及這些關(guān)系與我們心理詞匯結(jié)構(gòu)的關(guān)系。作者提出了一個(gè)研究語義關(guān)系的語用學(xué)方法，認(rèn)為聚合關(guān)系構(gòu)成元語言知識(shí)，可以通過一個(gè)單一的關(guān)系原則生成，并且可以作為我們對(duì)詞的概念表征而存儲(chǔ)。
本書分為兩個(gè)部分：第一部分講述作者提出的方法如何對(duì)詞匯關(guān)系的特征作出解釋；第二部分則詳細(xì)地考察了各種語義關(guān)系。對(duì)于研究和學(xué)習(xí)語言學(xué)及認(rèn)知科學(xué)，并且關(guān)注詞匯的心理表征的學(xué)者來說，本書是一本信息豐富的工具書。

作者簡介

　　墨菲（M.Lynne Murphy），英國蘇塞克斯大學(xué)（University of Sussex）的語言學(xué)與英語講師，研究興趣為：心理詞庫的結(jié)構(gòu)、可分級(jí)的形容詞意義，以及關(guān)于社會(huì)群體名稱語義發(fā)展的心理社會(huì)制約等。

書籍目錄

《西方語言學(xué)視野》總序
《語義關(guān)系與詞庫》導(dǎo)讀
英文目錄
致謝
符號(hào)與字體凡例
第一部分：聚合關(guān)系概論
　第1章 為什么要討論詞匯關(guān)系？
　　1．1 語義關(guān)系研究方法
　　1．2 語義關(guān)系：一些相關(guān)定義
　　1．3 心理詞庫是什么？
　　1．4 詞、概念和關(guān)于詞的概念
　　1．5 小結(jié)和下面的內(nèi)容概覽
　第2章 研究語義關(guān)系的語用方法
　　2．1 語義關(guān)系的性質(zhì)
　　2．2 語義相關(guān)性屬于元語言知識(shí)
　　2．3 元詞匯處理方法的蘊(yùn)含
　　2．4 小結(jié)
　第3章 其他研究方法
　　3．1 不同學(xué)科對(duì)詞匯關(guān)系的興趣
　　3．2 關(guān)系的派生觀：詞典模式
　　3．3 意義之外的關(guān)系：詞典／匯編模式
　　3．4 關(guān)系的初始觀：語義假定
　　3．5 詞匯關(guān)系的概念狀態(tài)
　　3．6 小結(jié)和下面的內(nèi)容概覽
第二部分：聚合關(guān)系專論
　第4章 同義關(guān)系與相似性
　　4．1 同義詞的語用研究法
　　4．2 意義的不同方面和同義詞的下位類
　　4．3 以往討論到的同義聚合的性質(zhì)
　　4．4 同義關(guān)系對(duì)詞匯的影響
　　4．5 同義關(guān)系與其他關(guān)系
　　4．6 小結(jié)
　第5章 反義關(guān)系與對(duì)比
　　5．1 語義對(duì)立與對(duì)比的元詞匯處理分析方法
　　5．2 反義詞和對(duì)比集合的性質(zhì)
　　5．3 反義詞的類型
　　5．4 自然語言中的詞匯語義對(duì)立
　　5．5結(jié)論
　第6章 上下位關(guān)系、整體部分關(guān)系和其他語義關(guān)系
　　6．1 上下位關(guān)系
　　6．2 整體部分關(guān)系
　　6．3 其他關(guān)系
　　6．4 小結(jié)：在元詞匯研究方法中的不對(duì)稱關(guān)系
　第7章 詞庫和元詞庫：蘊(yùn)含與探索
　　7．1 詞庫的語義組織有必要嗎？
　　7．2 可行的詞庫模式是什么？
　　7．3 元語言學(xué)家前途如何？
附錄：關(guān)系要素
注釋
參考文獻(xiàn)
索引

章節(jié)摘錄

　　The second problem for the lexicon-as-dictionary metaphor is the fact that lexical items can map to many different concepts， and thus be polysemous， but there is no principled limit to a word's polysemy. A dictionary deals with polysemy by listing a small number of senses for any word in an entry， and some lexical semantic theories have treated polysemous words as having multiple senses within lexical entries （e.g.， Ullmann 1957; Katz and Fodor 1963）. So， like a dictionary， the lexical entry for horseradish might list three possible meanings: a type of plant， the vegetable that consists of the root of that plant， and a condiment made from that vegetable. But listing meanings in the lexiconis doomed to failure since， as Nunberg （1978） has argued， the number of usable senses for any lexical item is limitless. Nunberg's argument is based on the observation that different criteria for establishing reference can be invented and used within the particulars of a context - so nonce meanings are possible and not uncommon. Nunberg uses the example of jazz， but tea illustrates the point as well. Tea can refer to a drinkable herbal infusion or the prepared herbs for making such an infusion. It can also refer. to a cup- or glass-sized portion of that infusion， as in I'd like a tea， please. It can also refer particularly to a hot version of this drink （in contrast to iced tea）， but in the southern United States it refers to the iced version， in contrast to hot tea. It is also sometimes used to refer to certain types of tea （especially those with caffeine）， so that we may contrast it to others， as in I can't drink tea after supper - just herbal tea. Such conventional uses are probably countable in number， and some may be excluded from any particular English speaker's lexicon because they are not part of that person's dialect. But even within a single language user， the range of concepts that a lexical item indicates is not necessarily limited or static. For example， let us say that in South Africa I grew to like rooibos tea and that I visit Nancy in New York who asks Would you like some teal Now， knowing that Nancy has probably never heard of rooibos， I assume that when she says tea， rooibos is not a member of the set of things that she intends to refer to， so I reply， No， I don't care for tea. For the purpose of this exchange， the sense I use for tea does not include rooibos， but in another context I may refer torooibos as tea， as in The only tea I like is rooibos. I leave it to the reader to imagine other contexts in which a speaker might use a sense of tea that denotes all teas but chamomile or only peppermint tea. The point is that the category that the speaker intends to refer to with the word tea （and that the audience may identify when the speaker uses tea） shifts with the speaker's knowledge and expectations of the context. Thus， the number of possible senses of tea that may be reasonably intended and understood is limited only by the number of possible combinations of beliefs that the speaker and hearer have about the world and the situation in which the utterance is made. Thus， one cannot take an inventory of a word's senses. Instead， a word's sense in any particular on text is the result of some implicit negotiation between the members of the talk exchange along with beliefs about how that word is conventionally used.　　……

圖書封面

圖書標(biāo)簽Tags

無

評(píng)論、評(píng)分、閱讀與下載

---

    語義關(guān)系與詞庫 PDF格式下載

---