The linguistic and conceptual systems exhibit a tight relationship considering that words are access sites to conceptual structure. However, linguistic and conceptual structures seem to combine into a sort of homogeneous system which makes the distinction between them fuzzy. The article explores the possibility of positing a type of schematic linguistic content that is unique to the linguistic system. This linguistic content comes in the form of lexical concepts and linguistic parameters. These notions will shed some light on the parametric linguistic knowledge that might be encoded in and externalized via language. This in turn, could be the feature about language that differentiates it from the closely related conceptual system.
[1] J. Allwood, “Meaning potentials and context: Some consequences for the analysis of variation in meaning,” in Cognitive Approaches to Lexical Semantics, Cuyckens, R. Dirven, and J. Taylor, Eds. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2003, pp. 29–66.
[2] E. Clark, “Languages and representations,” in Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, D. Gentner, and S. Goldin-Meadow, Eds. Cambridge/Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2003, pp. 25–46.
[3] V. Evans How Words Mean: Lexical concepts, Cognitive models, and Meaning construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
[4] V. Evans, Language and Time: A Cognitive Linguistics Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
[5] J. Morras, “Conceptual basis of entre and its English equivalents between, among and amid: A cognitive linguistics perspective” [Base conceptual de la preposición entre y sus equivalentes de la lengua inglesa between, among, y amid: una perspectiva en lingüística cognitiva,] RILEX. Revista sobre Investigaciones Léxicas., vol. 1, no. 2, Dec., pp. 52–84, 2018.
[6] J. Morras, and A. Barcelona, “Conceptual structuring of the English prepositions between, among, and amid, and their Spanish equivalent entre: A cognitive linguistic approach to spatial, non-spatial, and temporal scenes,” Cognitive Linguistic Studies., vol. 6, no. 1, Jul., pp. 103–129, 2019.
[7] E. Munnich, and B. Landau, “The effects of spatial language on spatial representation: Setting some boundaries,” in Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, D. Gentner, and S. Goldin-Meadow, Eds. Cambridge/Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2003, pp. 113–156.
[8] S. A. Rice, “Polysemy and lexical representation: The case of three English prepositions,” in Proceedings of the fourteenth annual conference of the cognitive science society, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1992, pp. 89–94.
[9] R.W. Langacker, Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, volume I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987.
[10] R.W. Langacker, Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
[11] L. Talmy, “Foreword,” in Methods in Cognitive Linguistics, M. Gonzálvez-Marquez, I. Mittelberg, S. Coulson, and M.J. Spivey, Eds. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2003, pp. xi–xxi.
[12] L. Barsalou, “Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields,” in Frames, Fields, and Contrasts: New Essays in Lexical and Semantic Organization, A. Lehrer, and E. F. Kettay, Eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1992, pp. 21–74.
[13] A. Tyler, and V. Evans, The Semantics of English Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[14] M. Johnson, The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987.
[15] A. Goldberg, Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, 1995.
[16] K. U. Panther, “Metonymy as a usage event,” in Cognitive linguistics: Current Applications and Future Perspectives, G. Kristiansen, M. Achard, R. Dirven, and F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Eds. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2006, pp. 147–185.
[17] L. Barsalou, “Perceptual symbol systems,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences, vol. 22, Aug., pp. 577–660, 1999.
[18] B. Bergen, Louder than Words: The New Science of How the Mind Makes Meaning. New York: Basic Books, 2012.
[1] J. Allwood, “Meaning potentials and context: Some consequences for the analysis of variation in meaning,” in Cognitive Approaches to Lexical Semantics, Cuyckens, R. Dirven, and J. Taylor, Eds. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2003, pp. 29–66.
[2] E. Clark, “Languages and representations,” in Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, D. Gentner, and S. Goldin-Meadow, Eds. Cambridge/Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2003, pp. 25–46.
[3] V. Evans How Words Mean: Lexical concepts, Cognitive models, and Meaning construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
[4] V. Evans, Language and Time: A Cognitive Linguistics Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
[5] J. Morras, “Conceptual basis of entre and its English equivalents between, among and amid: A cognitive linguistics perspective” [Base conceptual de la preposición entre y sus equivalentes de la lengua inglesa between, among, y amid: una perspectiva en lingüística cognitiva,] RILEX. Revista sobre Investigaciones Léxicas., vol. 1, no. 2, Dec., pp. 52–84, 2018.
[6] J. Morras, and A. Barcelona, “Conceptual structuring of the English prepositions between, among, and amid, and their Spanish equivalent entre: A cognitive linguistic approach to spatial, non-spatial, and temporal scenes,” Cognitive Linguistic Studies., vol. 6, no. 1, Jul., pp. 103–129, 2019.
[7] E. Munnich, and B. Landau, “The effects of spatial language on spatial representation: Setting some boundaries,” in Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, D. Gentner, and S. Goldin-Meadow, Eds. Cambridge/Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2003, pp. 113–156.
[8] S. A. Rice, “Polysemy and lexical representation: The case of three English prepositions,” in Proceedings of the fourteenth annual conference of the cognitive science society, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1992, pp. 89–94.
[9] R.W. Langacker, Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, volume I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987.
[10] R.W. Langacker, Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
[11] L. Talmy, “Foreword,” in Methods in Cognitive Linguistics, M. Gonzálvez-Marquez, I. Mittelberg, S. Coulson, and M.J. Spivey, Eds. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2003, pp. xi–xxi.
[12] L. Barsalou, “Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields,” in Frames, Fields, and Contrasts: New Essays in Lexical and Semantic Organization, A. Lehrer, and E. F. Kettay, Eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1992, pp. 21–74.
[13] A. Tyler, and V. Evans, The Semantics of English Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[14] M. Johnson, The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987.
[15] A. Goldberg, Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, 1995.
[16] K. U. Panther, “Metonymy as a usage event,” in Cognitive linguistics: Current Applications and Future Perspectives, G. Kristiansen, M. Achard, R. Dirven, and F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Eds. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2006, pp. 147–185.
[17] L. Barsalou, “Perceptual symbol systems,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences, vol. 22, Aug., pp. 577–660, 1999.
[18] B. Bergen, Louder than Words: The New Science of How the Mind Makes Meaning. New York: Basic Books, 2012.
@article{"International Journal of Business, Human and Social Sciences:79555", author = "Javier Andrés Morras Cortés", title = "Parametric Knowledge in Linguistic Structure", abstract = "The linguistic and conceptual systems exhibit a tight relationship considering that words are access sites to conceptual structure. However, linguistic and conceptual structures seem to combine into a sort of homogeneous system which makes the distinction between them fuzzy. The article explores the possibility of positing a type of schematic linguistic content that is unique to the linguistic system. This linguistic content comes in the form of lexical concepts and linguistic parameters. These notions will shed some light on the parametric linguistic knowledge that might be encoded in and externalized via language. This in turn, could be the feature about language that differentiates it from the closely related conceptual system.", keywords = "conceptual parameters, conceptual structure, linguistic parameters, lexical concepts", volume = "14", number = "4", pages = "250-4", }
