• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI FACULTY OF ARTS TAPANI MÖTTÖNEN TAPANI | CONSTRUAL IN EXPRESSION: AN INTERSUBJECTIVE COGNITIVE GRAMMAR TO APPROACH ISBN 978-951-51-1901-8 UNIGRAFIA CONSTRUAL IN EXPRESSION HELSINKI 2016 AN INTERSUBJECTIVE APPROACH TO COGNITIVE GRAMMAR TAPANI MÖTTÖNEN Department of Finnish, Finno-Ugrian and Scandinavian Studies University of Helsinki Finland CONSTRUAL IN EXPRESSION AN INTERSUBJECTIVE APPROACH TO COGNITIVE GRAMMAR Tapani Möttönen ACADEMIC DISSERTATION To be presented, with the permission of the Faculty of Arts of the University of Helsinki, for public examination in Auditorium XII, University Main Building, on 5 February 2016, at 12 noon. Helsinki 2016 Supervisors: Professor Tiina Onikki-Rantajääskö (University of Helsinki) University Lecturer, Docent Minna Jaakola (University of Helsinki) Pre-examiners: Professor Gábor Tolcsvai Nagy (Eötvös Loránd University) Professor Jordan Zlatev (University of Lund) Opponent: Professor Jordan Zlatev (University of Lund) ISBN 978-951-51-1901-8 (pbk.) ISBN 978-951-51-1902-5 (PDF) Helsinki 2016 ABSTRACT This doctoral dissertation is a metatheoretical survey into the central semantic concepts of Cognitive Grammar (CG), a semantics-driven theoretical grammar developed by Ronald W. Langacker. CG approaches language as a semiotic system inherently intertwined with and structured by certain cognition-general capacities, and it defends a usage- based conception of language, therefore denying the strict dichotomy between language and other realms of conceptualization and human experience. For CG, linguistic meaning is thus defined relative to our general cognitive and bodily disposition, as well as to the contents of experience the former structure. The cognitive and experiential aspects of meaning are described relative to so-called dimensions of construal. In this study, I will provide a systematic critical account of the theoretical explanation CG provides for the dimensions of construal. My point of departure will be in social ontology of linguistic meaning developed and defended by Esa Itkonen, who has accordingly criticized CG for inconsistent psychologism. According to Itkonen, linguistic meaning is an object of common knowledge and cannot be reduced into an individual’s conceptualization; the dimensions of construal capture experiential meaning that is part of language as a social semiotic resource. This entails that linguistic semantics assume as its object of description non-objective, perspectival meanings that are commonly known. I argue that the usage-based nature of CG provides a way to release this tension between objective and non-objective aspects of meaning by explaining how perspectivity of semantics results from the acquisition and adjustment of meanings in actual discourse. This, however, necessitates an ontological revision of CG and rehabilitation of the sociality of a linguistic meaning, which is the topic of this study. In addition to the work by Itkonen, prominent socially oriented cognitive linguists, such as Jordan Zlatev, have emphasized the necessary intersubjective basis of experiential meaning. Within the Fennistic studies, on the other hand, the intersubjective approach to CG and Cognitive Linguistics in general has taken the form of combining cognitive linguistic methodologies with Conversation Analysis. This study combines elements from both of these approaches in order to provide a comprehensive assessment of the notion of construal in CG. In so being, the main task of this study is to critically evaluate the cognition-based explanation for the dimensions of construal, provide a socially grounded alternative, and apply the alternative into analysis of construal in (written discourse). 3 The objectives of this study are: 1. clarification of the definitions, contents and analytical functions of the dimensions of construal 2. metatheoretical analysis of the theoretical justification of the dimensions of construal 3. description of the conceptual prerequisites necessary for a coherent conception of construal. This study shows that the dimensions of construal are not dependent on the aspects of cognitive theory on the basis of which they are argue for. Instead, the notion of construal is shown to be inherently intersubjective and context- sensitive. Construal captures aspects of semantic organization that are correlates of intersubjective alignment between conceptualizing subjects in a given discursive context. 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The process of writing a doctoral thesis is like a Necker cube with different, mutually inconsistent appearances. When still ongoing, the process tends to feel like fumbling around in the dark. In retrospect, every choice made seems either perfectly rational or rationally incomprehensible. Now that my own writing process of six years is coming to its end, an overwhelming, deceitful feel of mastery over “writing a thesis” has appeared. This feel could not be further from the truth. In reality, writing a thesis is never mastered by an individual cognition, nor is it an unmotivated trajectory guided solely by arbitrary impulses, even though it certainly may assume either or both of these appearances. Rather, it is a process that one grows into and lives through as eloquently as one’s mental fitness and the collective wisdom of academia together allow. It is indeed the intersubjectivity found in the lecture halls and hallways of University of Helsinki that has brought the present study to this point. While the possible weaknesses of the study are entirely on my responsibility, there is a serious debt of gratitude that I wish to amortize here even for a bit. The first two people I need to thank are those whose linguistic intuition allowed me to begin this journey in the first place: my supervisors Tiina Onikki-Rantajääskö and Minna Jaakola. Tiina: it is your enormous expertise and steadfast insistence on linguistic grounding of my study that guided this book through the roughest patches of confusion and overwhelming, and obviously self-inflicted, abstraction. Minna: your steady support and empathy has been an irreplaceable source of strength both in times of self-doubt and success. I want to thank you both for the comradery that has lasted throughout these years. On this same occasion, I would like to thank the two pre-examiners of this thesis, Gábor Stolcsvai Nagy and Jordan Zlatev, for lending me your thorough expertise and perspicacious advice. Here it is also in place to thank Professor Emeritus Pentti Leino for guiding me to Tiina’s door in autumn 2009. This transition also reintroduced to me to the hospitality of Department of Finnish, Finno-Ugrian and Scandinavian studies that I had only sensed from a distance as a busy Vantaa-based graduate student. I want to thank the department as a whole, as I wish to do also to Kone Foundation for being the undisputed main benefactor of my research. I also thank my home department, the Faculty of Arts and Alma Mater for all the financial and administrative support I have received. There are two academic circles that made me feel like home from the very beginning when I started as a post-graduate student, and I want to begin with the more unconventional one. Team Norsu, a loose but warm network of administrative people and post-grads that tiptoed in their wool socks, slippers and sandals the hallways of Fabianinkatu 33: Hannamari Helander, Jukka 5 Hirvonen, Tanja Stepanova, Nico Wendelin, Saija Pyhäniemi, Tanja Asikainen-Kunnari, Hanna-Ilona Härmävaara, Niina Niskanen, Rigina Ajanki, Maria Fremer, Saša Tkalčan and Mari Siiroinen. You are the originals, and you are original. I am ever grateful for your company. At the same time, I wish to thank also the fresher assortment of administrative agents for the professional touch, so thank you Kaarina Walter and Tiina Kärki. The second academic circle that made me feel home was one formed by my colleagues (in more strict sense) at the Department. The original team 5042: Mikko Virtanen, Mai Frick and Anna Vatanen: thank you for putting up with me in the same room, for your company and support. The beer connoisseurs that met at Seminaarikaljat: Tomi Visakko, Jarkko Niemi, Aino Koivisto, Riitta Juvonen, Antti Kanner, Lauri Haapanen, Heini Lehtonen, Elina Pallasvirta, Marjo Savijärvi, Heidi Vepsäläinen and Saija Merke. Thank you for letting me stay in the glow of your co-suffering and humor. You were the first to introduce me to the human aspect of Fennistic studies. As Beerhouse Kaisla has now been selected for the setting, let us march in other connoisseurs: Tapani Kelomäki, Kimmo Svinhufvud, Tuomas Huumo and Markus Hamunen. For some reason, I wish to visualize you in a bar setting, so there you go. Thank you for your jolly company which made it a pleasure to absorb your expertise and historical trivia. Back at the department, persons that I would surely have a drink with: Jaakko Leino, Markku Haakana and Jyrki Kalliokoski. In various situations (incl. Tvärminne), you have shown your great sensitivity and wisdom with regard to a post-graduate’s mindset and different academic challenges. I am in debt for that. For the collegial support by the fifth floor photocopier, and in other less linguistic contexts, I wish to thank Toini Rahtu, Susanna Shore, Anne Mäntynen, Taru Nordlund and Sari Päivärinne. On the same occasion, l wish to show gratitude to the later inhabitants of room 5042. Maija Kallio, Jenni Viinikka, Jutta Salminen, Elina Vitikka and Lasse Hämäläinen: thank you for your company, for our conversations, and for being the least unpleasant aspect of spending long hours in that penthouse of ours. This study took an intersubjective turn because of a hunch, and a group of extraordinary linguists helped that hunch to become a book. Huuhailijat: Laura Visapää, Marja Etelämäki, Ilona Herlin, Anni Jääskeläinen and Lea Laitinen. I invite you to celebrate with me, for if there is something good to this book, it belongs to you as much as much as it belongs to me. And Laura, bring Verónica (Muñoz Ledo), for she is responsible for each and every grammatical sentence in this book. This book would not be without the groundbreaking work by Professor Emeritus Esa Itkonen, whom I wish to thank for all that work, inspiration and vision.

Load more

  253

Copy Link