Anna Wierzbicka, Words and the World

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Anna Wierzbicka, Words and the World

Anna Gladkova^1,2andTatiana Larina³

'Monash University

²Australian National University

³Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)



Abstract

This introduction to the Special Issue summarises Anna Wierzbicka's contribution to the linguistic study of meaning. It presents the foundations of the approach known as the Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM) developed by Wierzbicka. The current state of the approach is discussed in the article with the ideas of 65 semantic primitives, universal grammar and the principle of reductive paraphrase in semantic explications. It traces the origin of Wierzbicka's ideas to Leibniz. The framework has been tested on about thirty languages of diverse origin. The applications of the approach are broad and encompass lexical areas of emotions, social categories, speech act verbs, mental states, artefacts and animals, verbs of motion, kinship terms (among others), as well as grammatical constructions. vezhbitskaya natural semantic metalanguage

Keywords: AnnaWierzbicka, semantics, NaturalSemanticMetalanguage (NSM), semanticprimitives, reductiveparaphrase



Анна Вежбицкая, слова и смыслы

А.Н. Гладкова^1,2, Т.В. Ларина²

'Monash University

²Australian National University

³Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Аннотация

В вводной статье к специальному выпуску, посвященному семантическим исследованиям, обобщается вклад Анны Вежбицкой в языковые исследования смысла. В ней представлены основы разработанного ею подхода Естественного Семантического Метаязыка (ЕСМ) и обсуждаются последние разработки данного подхода, которые включают 65 семантических примитивов, универсальную грамматику и принцип упрощенных перифраз. Прослеживается связь между идеями А. Вежбицкой и Г.В. Лейбница. Универсальность подхода тестировалась на более тридцати языках различного происхождения. Подход имеет широкое применение и успешно используется в анализе терминов эмоций, социальных категорий, глаголов речевого действия, ментальных состояний, артефактов и животных, глаголов движения, терминов родства, а также грамматических конструкций.

Ключевые слова: Анна Вежбицкая, семантика, Естественный Семантический Метаязык (ЕСМ), семантические примитивы, упрощенные перифразы



INTRODUCTION

The current and the next issue of the Russian Journal of Linguistics are dedicated to Anna Wierzbicka. Anna Wierzbicka is an internationally renowned linguist who systematically integrated language, culture and cognition in her studies and demonstrated the logic of culture-specific modes of linguistic interaction. In 2018 Anna Wierzbicka celebrates her anniversary and the Russian Journal of Linguistics highjacks two issues to celebrate her scholarship and the warmth of her personality. Those of us who are fortunate to know her personally are moved by her kindness and moral support. She has been an inspiration to a countless number of colleagues, young scholars, and students in Russia and beyond. Over the years her scholarship, intellectual rigor, and academic integrity have been exemplary. The Editorial Board of the journal, the authors and the readers wish that her intellectual journey will continue for many more years to come.

Professor Anna Wierzbicka is a Professor Emeritus in Linguistics at the Australian National University in Canberra, Australia. She is a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities, the Australian Academy of Social Sciences, the Russian Academy of Sciences, and the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences. She is the recipient of two Honorary Doctoral Awards from the Marie Curie-Sklodowska University, Poland (2004) and from the Warsaw University, Poland (2006). She is also the recipient of the Dobrushin Prize 2010 (established in Russia in honour of the Russian mathematician Roland LvovichDobrushin) and the Polish Science Foundation Prize 2010 for the humanities and social sciences. Anna Wierzbicka is well known for her contributions in the field of semantics and the development of the Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM). Her work spans a number of disciplines, including anthropology, psychology, cognitive science, philosophy and religious studies in addition to linguistics. She has published over twenty books and edited or co-edited several others.

Anna Wierzbicka is a widely acclaimed scholar in the Russian linguistic circles. Five books of hers (Wierzbicka 1996, 1999b, 2001a, b, 2011) along with numerous articles have been published in Russia. In this regard, Elena Paducheva rightly notes (2009[1996]: 629):

Undoubtedly, the influence of Wierzbicka's scholarship on linguistic studies in Russia (in general linguistics and Russian linguistics in the first place) is notably greater than in any other country. This could be due to the original Slavic commonality which successfully overcomes territorial and language barriers, but, most likely, this is due to the consonance of linguistic paradigms [...]. In Russian linguistics, one is unlikely to find another author who is cited as widely and passionately as Wierzbicka [...]. (Translation is ours -- AG, TL)

The first volume relates to Anna Wierzbicka's contribution to the development of the theory of meaning and her methodology of linguistic analysis known as the Natural Semantic Metalanguage. Consequently, the introductory article to the first volume summarises her contribution to the study of meaning. The main focus of the second volume will be Anna Wierzbicka's research dealing with the relationship between meaning and culture as well as other applications of her approach.



NATURAL SEMANTIC METALANGUAGE: A BRIEF OVERVIEW

The most distinctive feature of Anna Wierzbicka's linguistic research is attention to meaning. At the time of linguistics being dominated by formal and structuralist approaches centered on syntax, Wierzbicka suggested a daring shift in the paradigm by stating that meaning is what language is primarily about and that the study of language should first and primarily be conducted through the prism of meaning. Wierzbicka (1996: 3) famously declared:

To study language without reference to meaning is like studying road signs from the point of view of their physical properties (how much they weigh, what kind of paint are they painted with, and so on), or like studying the structure of the eye without any reference to seeing.

Being committed to the principle of the centrality of meaning to linguistic analysis, Wierzbicka set a research agenda of developing a way of studying linguistic meaning that could be versatile enough to give access to a variety of linguistic phenomena and be applicable across languages. In her 1972 book “Semantic Primitives” she launched a theory which is now known under the acronym “NSM” (Natural Semantic Metalanguage) and is being internationally recognized as one of the world's leading theories of language and meaning.

Semanticprimitives

Inspired by Leibniz's idea that all languages have a finite number of concepts by means of which other concepts can be explained Wierzbicka set an agenda of identifying these concepts by the process of a detailed linguistic analysis of different semantic domains (cf. Wierzbicka 1972). Leibniz acknowledged that some words are more basic and simple in meaning than others: “Amongst the words, some are frequently used and serve as auxiliary to the others” (Leibniz 1987[1678]: 162). He called these words “the alphabet of human thoughts” (cf. Wierzbicka 1972: 6).

Goddard and Wierzbicka (2014a: 11) write:

One has to attempt a very large number of definitions to be able to find out which words can, and which cannot, be defined, and consequently, which words (or word-meanings) can be regarded as elementary building blocks out of which all complex concepts (and word-meanings) can be built.

This agenda had been pursued by Wierzbicka throughout her career passionately and diligently.

Wierzbicka's (1972) initial list of universal human concepts, or primes, included 14 words. Over the years, this list considerably expanded and developed into a versatile metalanguage of linguistic analysis. This development was due above all to collaboration with Cliff Goddard (currently Professor of Linguistics at Griffith University in Australia), and also to collaboration with other colleagues who applied and tested the metalanguage in a considerable number of unrelated languages ItisalsoimportanttoacknowledgethesynergybetweentheNaturalSemanticMetalanguageapproach, theMoscowSchoolofSemantics (Apresjan 1992, 2005) andtheMeaning-TextTheory (Mel'cuk 1989, 2012, 2013, 2015).. The metalanguage was given the name the “Natural Semantic Metalanguage” because it is based on the concepts expressed as words of natural language (any natural language) and because it was primarily developed as a tool for semantic analysis. The theory has advanced significantly over more than 40 years. It continues to develop and some aspects continue to be clarified and refined. The current state of the theory is reflected in Wierzbicka (1996), Goddard and Wierzbicka (eds. 2002, 2014a), as well as Goddard (2011, 2018) The NSM Homepageis a goodsourceofupdatedinformationontheapproach. Ithasdownloadablematerialsand a fullbibliographyof NSM-basedpublications..

In identifying universal human concepts the NSM theory accepts Leibniz's hypothesis that they should be shared by people regardless of the language they speak. The NSM theory suggests that there are 65 meanings or human concepts of this kind (see Table 1). These meanings are called semantic primitives or primes and they have been identified by a process of trial and error.



ExponentsofsemanticprimesinEnglishandRussian

(afterGladkova 2010, GoddardandWierzbicka 2014a)

Table 1

JA, TY, кто-то, Cto-to-veSC, ljudi, telo	substantives
1, YOU, SOMEONE, SOMETHIIIG-THIIIG, PEOPLE, BODY
ROD'VID, CAST' KINDS, PARTS	relational substantives
ETOT, TOT ZE, DRUGOJ THIS, THE SAME, OTHER-ELSE	determiners
ODIN, DVA, 1IEK0T0RYE, VSE, MIIOGO, МАЮ ONE, TWO, SOME, ALL, MUCH-MANY, LITTLE-FEW	quantifiers
XOROSIJ-XOROSO, PL0X0J-PL0X0 GOOD, BAD	evaluators
BOL'SOJ, MALEIl'KIJ	descriptors
BIG, SMALL
ZIIAT', DUMAT, xotet', iiexotet', Cuvstvovat', videt', slySat'	mental predicates
KlI0W, THINK, WAI IT, DOI IT WAI IT, FEEL, SEE, HEAR
GOVORIT'-SKAZAT', SLOVA, PRAVDA SAY, WORDS, TRUE	speech
DELAY, PROISXODIT'-SLUCAT'SJA, DVIGAT'SJA DO, HAPPEN, MOVE	actions, events, movement
BYT' (GDE-TO), BYT'-EST', BYT' (KEM-TO/CEM-TO)	location, existence,
BE (SOMEWHERE), THERE IS, BE (SOMEONE/SOMETHING)	specification
M0J/M0JA/M0E	possession
(IS) MINE
ZlT', UMERET'	life and death
LIVE, DIE
KOGDA~VREMJA, SEJCAS, DO, POSLE, DOLGO, KOROTKOE VREMJA, NEKOTOROE VREMJA, MOMENT	time
WHEN-TIME, NOW, BEFORE, AFTER, A LONG TIME, A SHORT TIME, FOR SOME TIME, MOMENT
GDE-MESTO, ZDES', NAD, POD, DALEKO, BLIZKO, STOROIIA, VIIUTRI. KASAT SJA	place
WHERE-PLACE, HERE, ABOVE, BELOW, FAR, NEAR, SIDE, INSIDE, TOUCH
HE, MOZET BYT', MOC, POTOMU CTO, ESLI NOT, MAYBE, CAN, BECAUSE, IF	logical concepts
oCeil, bol'se-esCe VERY, MORE	intensifier, augmenter
KAK-TAK	similarity
LIKE-AS

Notes: * Exponentsofprimescanbepolysemous, i.e. theycanhaveother, additionalmeanings. * Exponentsofprimesmaybewords, boundmorphemes, orphrasemes. * Theycanbeformallycomplex. * Theycanhavelanguage-specificcombinatorialvariants (allolexes, indicatedwith ~). * Eachprimehaswell-specifiedsyntactic (combinatorial) properties.

They constitute the core of human lexicon and can be used to explicate more complex meanings. Apart from words, these meanings can be expressed by bound morphemes or phrasemes. These meanings equal lexical units (cf. Apresjan 1992, Mel'cuk 1988). This means that if a word is polysemous, the meaning of a prime equals only one meaning of this word. To distinguish the meaning of a prime from the other meanings of a given word (in printed text), the primes are, by convention, represented by small capital letters (e.g., think, good, people).

Wierzbicka's inspirational ideas about the universal metalanguage have been tested by different scholars in a number of typologically divergent languages: Malay, Mandarin Chinese, Polish, Spanish, Lao, Mangaaba-Mbula (in Goddard and Wierzbicka eds. 2002), Hawaii Creole English (Stanwood 1997), Korean, Amharic, Cree (in Goddard ed. 2008), French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese (in Peters ed. 2006), Russian (Gladkova 2010), Arabic, Hebrew (Habib 2011), Finnish (Vanhatallo et al. 2014). Partial studies of NSM primes and syntax have been conducted on the basis of another two dozen languages (e.g., Goddard and Wierzbicka eds. 1994).

Universalgrammar

The primes constitute a metalanguage because they have an ability to combine with each other in different ways. As Wierzbicka (1996: 19) notes:

Despite its obvious limitations, Leibniz's old metaphor of an “alphabet of human thoughts” is still quite useful here: conceptual primitives are components which have to be combined in certain ways to be able to express meaning.

The primes are united by a governing syntax. That is, each prime is identified as being able to combine with certain other primes. They form a mini-language which lies at the core of every language. The syntactic properties of primes are revealed in their valency options. For example, the prime SAY allows a universal valency option of “addressee” and “locutionary topic” -- `someone (X) said something to someone else (Y)' and `someone (X) said something about something (Z)'. Similarly, the exponent of SAY in Russian -- GOVORITISKAZAT' -- has the same syntactic properties as its English exponent. In Russian these sentences with GOVORIT'/SKAZAT'are `kto-to (X) skazalcto-to komu-to drugomu (Y)' and `kto-to (X) skazalcto-to o cem-to (Z) respectively.

The `syntactic properties' of the primes are identified in the list of canonical contexts or canonical sentences (Goddard and Wierzbicka eds. 1994, 2002). Canonical contexts are combinations of primes which reflect their syntactic properties and which can be used in semantic explications. The prime SAY has the following canonical sentences (Goddard and Wierzbicka 2002: 60):

X saidsomething

X saidsomethingaboutsomething X said: “---”

X saidsomethingtosomeone X saidsomewords (thesewords)

X saidsomethingwith (orin) somewords

Most recent overview of canonical sentences is presented in Goddard and Wierzbicka (2014b).

Reductiveparaphraseprincipleandsemanticexplications

The primes in their canonical combinations are used to explicate meaning in the form of reductive paraphrase. Wierzbicka (1996) identifies the importance of paraphrase in semantic studies as follows:

Semantics can have an explanatory value only if it manages to “define” (or explicate) complex and obscure meanings in terms of simple and self-explanatory ones. If a human being can understand any utterances at all (someone else's or their own) it is only because these utterances are built, so to speak, out of simple elements which can be understood by themselves (Wierzbicka 1996: 11).

Semantic explications written in NSM present formulae which can be substituted for the meanings explained. A formula of this kind is written in the form of a mini text with each component presented on a new line. Each component is related to the previous component, more precisely, it has an anaphoric relationship with the previous components.

The following is an example of a semantic explication of the English word happy worded in NSM (Goddard and Wierzbicka 2014a: 103):

Hewashappy

a. thissomeonethoughtlikethisforsometimeatthattime:

b. “manygoodthingsarehappeningtomenowas I want

c. I candomanythingsnowasI want

d. thisisgood”

e. becauseofthis, thissomeonefeltsomethinggoodatthattime

f. likepeoplefeelatmanytimeswhentheythinklikethisforsometime

The universality of the “primitive” concepts and their syntactic properties used in the NSM allows for the explications to be translatable into any language without any loss or addition in meaning. The Russian version of this explication would be:

Hewashappy

a. etotkto-todumaltaknekotoroevremja v tovremja:

b. “mnogoxorosixvescejproisxoditsomojsejcaskakjaxocu

c. jamogudelat' mnogovescejkakjaxocu

d. etoxoroso

e. poetomu, etotkto-tocuvstvovalcto-toxorosee v etovremja

f. kakljudicuvstvujutcasto, kogdaonidumajuttaknekotoroevremja

Similarly, this explication can be represented in any version of NSM without any change of meaning due to universality of the metalanguage.

The NSM has developed into a versatile tool that has been successful in the analysis of a large variety of linguistic phenomena. Wierzbicka and her followers have applied it in the study of emotions (e.g., Wierzbicka 1992, 1999, 2009, 2017), social categories (Wierzbicka 1997), speech act verbs (Wierzbicka 1987), mental states (Wierzbicka 2006), artefacts and animals (Wierzbicka 1985), verbs of motion (Goddard, Wierzbicka and Wong 2016), kinship terms (Wierzbicka 2015) (to name just a few). It has also served in explications of meanings of grammatical constructions (e.g., Wierzbicka 1988, 2006, Goddard and Wierzbicka 2016) A fullbibliographyofAnnaWierzbicka'sworkisavailableonherANU webpageandtheNSM Homepage..

With the pool of knowledge acquired from the analysis of diverse vocabularies and grammars, especially in a cross-linguistic perspective, Wierzbicka developed a way of applying her approach to the study of cultural phenomena embedded in language. This led to the idea of the salience of cultural key words (Wierzbicka 1997) and cultural scripts (Wierzbicka 2002, 2003). We will cover these aspects of Wierzbicka's approach and work in the next issue of the Russian Journal of Linguistics.



THE ARTICLES OF THIS ISSUE

The current issue comprises articles written by Anna Wierzbicka's colleagues, friends and collaborators who either directly use her approach of linguistic analysis or are considerably influenced by it.

The first article is written by Igor Mel'cuk(Montreal, Canada), the creator of the Meaning-Text linguistic approach (Mel'cuk 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016). In this article he argues that the main contribution of Anna Wierzbicka to linguistics is the idea of semantic decomposition--that is, representing meaning in terms of structurally organized configurations of simpler meanings. He further demonstrates how this idea can be applied using two Meaning-Text mini-models for English and Russian at four levels--semantic, deep-syntactic, surface-syntactic, and deep-morphological. Examples of formal rules relating the representations of two adjacent levels are presented.

In the next article, Cliff Goddard (Brisbane, Australia) -- a long-term Anna Wierzbicka's collaborator and a co-developer of the Natural Semantic Metalanguage, follows the seminal work of Wierzbicka (1985, 2013), and proposes and discusses a set of semantic analyses of words from three different levels of the English ethno- zoological taxonomic hierarchy: creature (unique beginner), bird, fish, snake, and animal (life-form level), dog and kangaroo (generic level). The research is conducted using the analytical framework of the Natural Semantic Metalanguage approach (Wierzbicka 1996, 2014, Goddard and Wierzbicka 2014a). The work implements NSM constituents -- semantic primes, semantic molecules and semantic templates (Goddard 2012, 2016). Other issues considered include the extent to which cultural components feature in the semantics of ethnozoological categories, and the extent to which semantic knowledge may vary across different speech communities.

Sally Rice and John Newman (Edmonton, Canada) investigate the usage in English of basic verbs of ideation (think, know) and physical activity (strike, hit, go, run) as they take on new epistemic meanings and functions. The choice of words and meanings overlaps with some semantic primes from Wierzbicka's Natural Semantic Metalanguage. The authors find that many verbs and phrasal expressions, ideational or not, seem to be associated with rather narrow collocational patterning, argument structure, and inflectional marking in almost idiom-like and constructional fashion. Moreover, it is argued that expressions associated with 1sg and 2^nd person “cognizers” are, to a large extent, in complementary distribution, giving rise to fairly strong semantic differences in how I and you “ideate”. This study demonstrates the extent of inflectional and collocational specificity for verbs of cognition and physical activity and discuss implications that lexico-syntactic idiosyncracy has for cognitive linguistics.

Jock Onn Wong (Singapore) demonstrates how the Natural Semantic Metalanguage can be applied in language teaching. In particular, he uses it to capture the meaning of three logical connectors, therefore, moreover and in fact for English language teaching purposes. He demonstrates that the knowledge and understanding of the meaning of these words is essential for constructing logical texts and building logical connections. The author explains that the advantages of using simple universal concepts for explicating such words for pedagogical purposes are their accessibility and non-ethnocentric nature.

The paper by Ekaterina Rakhilina(Moscow, Russia) and AimgulKazkenova(Almaty, Kazakhstan) also relates to the issues of language pedagogy and deals with a well-known problem of the distribution of grammatical markers within a certain category and whether this distribution is motivated semantically or not. It discusses the choice of singular and plural forms of nouns in Russian texts. The paper builds on Anna Wierzbicka's seminal work recognizing that the rules which regulate the usage of number markers in Russian are language-specific (Wierzbicka 1988). The research relies on data from Kazakh-Russian bilinguals. The paper demonstrates that the deviations in nominal number marking in the texts of bilinguals are not arbitrary but semantically motivated. They follow semantic strategies which are characteristic of speakers appealing to both systems at once. The paper argues that the violation of standard usage observed in the learner corpus can specify the rules governing Russian number usage which have been violated.

Anna Zalizniakand Elena Paducheva(Moscow, Russia) address their article to the analysis of discourse markers with the meaning “speaker's opinion about a certain state of affairs”. The paper builds on Wierzbicka's research discussing the presence of the speaker in the utterance (e.g., Wierzbicka 1972, 1987, 2003[1991]). The paper presents an analysis of three Russian discourse words pozhaluj, nikak, vsjo-taki based on the National Corpus of Russian data. The study offers the prospect of an integral research of discourse words which combines methods of classical semantic analysis, contextual-semantic method, conceptual analysis and narratology.

ValentinaApresjan(Moscow, Russia) presents a corpus-based study of Russian reduplicated constructions with colour terms. The study establishes that absolute frequencies of non-reduplicated colour terms in Russian reflect both AnnaWierzbicka's “universals of visual semantics” (Wierzbicka 1990, 2005), as well as certain language and culture-specific tendencies. Her findings establish the importance of corpus methods in the study of colour terms and reduplication, demonstrate that the use and interpretation of lexical and syntactic items hinges both on semantic and pragmatic factors, and add to the understanding of semantics and pragmatics of Russian colour terms and reduplication construction.

The article by Alexei Shmelev(Moscow, Russia) deals with the Russian words referring to `freedom' (svoboda, volja, and their derivatives svobodnyj, vol'nyj, vol'nost', etc.) in both synchronic and diachronic aspects. It seeks to elaborate and to refine the analysis given in some earlier publications by Wierzbicka (1997) and Shmelev (Shmelev 2003, 2013). The paper analyzes the spatial dimension in the meaning of the words under consideration, the contrast between svoboda and volja before the Revolution, their semantic development during Soviet times and their current semantic status. In addition, the author considers the use of the words in question in the translations of various texts into Russian (with reference to the parallel corpora of the Russian National Corpus).

The issue concludes with a Review Article by ElizavetaKotorova(Zielona Gora, Poland). The author reviews three recent articles by Anna Wierzbicka on kinship terminology. It demonstrates how Wierzbicka introduces a novel way of analysing the semantics of kinship terms by using the methodology of Natural Semantic Metalanguage. It is shown that this kind of approach allows the researcher to successfully overcome Eurocentrism in studying kinship terminology in diverse languages by relying on univer- sals of human cognition.



CONCLUDING REMARKS

The Special Issue dedicated to Wierzbicka in recognition of her contributions to linguistics will be continued in the next issue. It will focus on Anna Wierzbicka's research aimed at the relationship between language and culture and other applications of her approach to studying meaning.

We would like to express sincere gratitude to all authors contributing to this issue. We would also like to congratulate again Anna Wierzbicka on her anniversary and to thank her for her inspiring work, generosity, moral support and kindness.



REFERENCES / СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ

1. Apresjan, Juri(1992). Lexical Semantics: User's guide to contemporary Russian vocabulary. [Translation of Apresjan, J. 1974.Leksiceskajasemantika: sinonimiceskiesredstvajazyka. (In Russ.)] Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers, Inc.

2. Goddard, Cliff (2011). Semantic analysis: A practical introduction. 2^nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

3. Goddard, Cliff (2016). Semantic molecules and their role in NSM lexical definitions.Cahiers de Lexicologie,2 (109), 13--34.

4. Goddard, Cliff (2018). TenLecturesonNaturalSemanticMetalanguage: Exploringlanguage, thoughtandcultureusingsimple, translatablewords. Leiden: Brill.

5. Goddard, Cliff (Ed.) (2008). Cross-linguistic Semantics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

6. Goddard, Cliff (2018). MinimalEnglishfor a GlobalWorld: ImprovedCommunicationUsingFewerWords. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

7. Goddard, Cliff, and Anna Wierzbicka (2002).Semantic Primes and Universal Grammar. In Goddard, C., and A. Wierzbicka (eds). Meaning and Universal Grammar: Theory and empirical findings. Vol. I. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 41--85.

8. Goddard, Cliff, and Anna Wierzbicka (2014a).Words and Meanings: Lexical Semantics Across Domains, Languages, and Cultures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

9. Goddard, Cliff, and Anna Wierzbicka (2014b).Semantic fieldwork and lexical universals.Studies in Language.38 (1), 80--127.

10. Goddard, Cliff, and Anna Wierzbicka (2016). It's mine! Re-thinking the conceptual semantics of possession through NSM.Language Sciences, 56, 93--104.

11. Goddard, Cliff, Wierzbicka, Anna and Wong, Jock (2016). “Walking” and “running” in English and German: The cross-linguistic semantics of human locomotion. Review of Cognitive Linguistics. 14(2):303--336. DOI: 10.1075/rcl.14.2.03god.

12. Goddard, Cliff, and Anna Wierzbicka (Eds.) (1994).Semantic and lexical universals: Theory and empirical findings. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

13. Goddard, Cliff, and Anna Wierzbicka (Eds.) (2002).Meaning and Universal Grammar: Theory and empirical findings.Vols.I, II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

14. Habib, Sandy (2011). Contrastivelexical-conceptualanalysisoffolkreligiousconceptsinEnglish, ArabicandHebrew.PhD Thesis.Armidale, Australia: University of New England.

15. Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1956). Preface to an Edition of Nizolius. In Leibniz, G.W. Philosophical Papers and Letters: A selection. Translated and edited, with Introduction by Loemker, L.E. Vol. 1. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 186--202.

16. Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. (1987[1678]).The Analysis of languages. In Dascal, M. Leibniz, language, signs and thought: A collection of essays. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 161--165.

17. Mel'cuk, Igor (1988). Semantic description of lexical units in an explanatory combinatorial dictionary: Basic principles and heuristic criteria. International Journal of Lexicography, 1, 165--188.

18. Mel'cuk, Igor (1989). Semantic primitives from the viewpoint of of the Meaning-Text linguistic theory.Quaderni di Semantica 10, 65--102.

19. Mel'cuk, Igor (2012). Semantics: From Meaning to Text.Vol. 1. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

20. Mel'cuk, Igor (2013). Semantics: From Meaning to Text.Vol. 2. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

21. Mel'cuk, Igor (2015). Semantics: From Meaning to Text.Vol. 3. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

22. Mel'cuk, Igor (2016). Language: From Meaning to Text. Moscow / Boston: Academic Studies Press.

23. Peeters, Bert (Ed.) (2006). SemanticPrimesandUniversalGrammar: EmpiricalevidencefromtheRomancelanguages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

24. Stanwood, Ryo. (1997). The primitive syntax of mental predicates in Hawai'i Creole English: A text- based study. Language Sciences 19 (3): 209--217.

25. The Natural Semantic Metalanguage Homepagehttps://intranet.secure.griffith.edu.au/schools- departments/natural-semantic-metalanguage.

26. Wierzbicka, Anna (1972). Semantic Primitives. (Translated by Wierzbicka, A., and J. Besemeres) Frankfurt: Athenдum Verlag.

27. Wierzbicka, Anna (1985). Lexicography and Conceptual Analysis. Ann Arbor: Karoma.

28. Wierzbicka, Anna (1987). English speech act verbs: A semantic dictionary. Sydney: Academic Press.

29. Wierzbicka, Anna (1988). The Semantics of Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

30. Wierzbicka, Anna (1990). The meaning of colour terms: Semantics, culture, and cognition. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(1), 99--150.

31. Wierzbicka, Anna (1992). Semantics, culture, andcognition: Universalhumanconceptsinculture- specificconfigurations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

32. Wierzbicka, Anna (1996a). Semantics: Primes and universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

33. Wierzbicka, Anna (1997). Understandingculturesthroughtheirkeywords: English, Russian, Polish, German, andJapanese. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

34. Wierzbicka, Anna (1999a). Emotionsacrosslanguagesandcultures: Diversityanduniversals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

35. Wierzbicka, Anna (2002). Russian cultural scripts: The theory of cultural scripts and its applications. Ethos 30 (4): 401--432.

36. Wierzbicka, Anna (2003/1991). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. 2^nd ed. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

37. Wierzbicka, Anna (2005). There Are No “Colour Universals” but There Are Universals of Visual Semantics. Anthropological Linguistics, Vol. 47, No. 2 (Summer, 2005), 217--244.

38. Wierzbicka, Anna (2006). English: Meaning and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

39. Wierzbicka, Anna (2013). Polish zwierzqta `animals' and jablka `apples': an ethnosemantic inquiry. In Glaz, A., Danaher, D.S. &Lozowski, P. (eds.), The linguistic worldview: Ethnolinguistics, cognition, and culture. London: Versita, 137--159.

40. Wierzbicka, Anna (2009). Language and metalanguage: Key issues in emotion research. Emotion Review 1(1), 3--14.

41. Wierzbicka, Anna (2014). ImprisonedinEnglish: ThehazardsofEnglishas a defaultlanguage. New York: Oxford University Press.

42. Wierzbicka, Anna (2015). New perspectives on kinship: Overcoming the Eurocentrism and scientism of kinship studies through lexical universals. In Nancy Bonvillain (ed.), The Routledge handbook of linguistic anthropology. New York: Routledge. 62--79.

43. Vanhatalo, Ulla, HeliTissari, and Anna Idstrom (2014).Revisiting the universality of Natural Semantic Metalanguage: a view through Finnish.SKY Journal of linguistics 27, 67--94.

44. Апресян Ю.Д. О московской семантической школе. Вопросы языкознания, 1, 3--30, 2005. [Apresjan, J.D. 2005.O moskovskoisemanticheskoishkole (About the Moscow School of Semantics). Voprosyyazykoznaniya, 1, 3--30.]

45. Вежбицкая А. Язык. Культура. Познание. М., 1997. [Wierzbicka, Anna (1996b). Language.Culture.Cognition.Moscow. (In Russ.)]

46. Вежбицкая А. Семантические универсалии и описание языков / Пер. с англ. А.Д. Шмелева; под ред. Т.В. Булыгиной. М.: Языки русской культуры, 1999. [Wierzbicka, Anna (1999b). Semantic universals and description of languages.Translated from English by A. Shmelev.Moscow, Yazykirussskoikul'tury.(In Russ.)]

47. Вежбицкая А. Понимание культуры через посредство ключевых слов / Пер. с англ. А.Д. Шмелева. М.: Языки славянской культуры, 2001а. [Wierzbicka, Anna (2001a). Understanding culture through keywords.Translated from English by A. Shmelev. Moscow: Yazykislavyanskoikul'tury. (In Russ.)]

48. Вежбицкая А. Сопоставление культур через посредство лексики и прагматики. М.: Языки славянской культуры, 2001б. [Wierzbicka, Anna (2001 b).Comparison of cultures through vocabulary and pragmatics. Moscow: Yazykislavyanskoikul'tury. (In Russ.)]

49. Вежбицкая А. Семантические универсалии и базисные концепты. М.: Языки славянских культур, 2011. [Wierzbicka, Anna (2011). Semantic universals and basic concepts.Yazykislavyanskikhkul'tur.(In Russ.)]

50. Гладкова А.Н. Русская культурная семантика: Эмоции, ценности, жизненные установки. М.: Языки славянских культур. 2010. [Gladkova, Anna (2010). Russianculturalsemantics: Emotions, values, attitudes. Moscow: Yazykislavyanskoikul'tury. (In Russ.)]

51. Падучева Е.В. Феномен Анны Вежбицкой // Статьи разных лет. М.: Языки славянских культур. (Предисловие к книге Анны Вежбицкой «Язык, культура, познание» М.: Русские словари, 1996). 2009. [Paducheva E.V. (2009). The phenomenon of Anna Wierzbicka. In: Stat'iraznykh let.Moscow: Yazykislavyanskoikul'tury. (In Russ.)]

52. Шмелев А.Д. В поисках мира и лада // Логический анализ языка. Космос и хаос: концептуальные поля порядка и беспорядка. М.: Индрик, 2003. С. 54--72. [Shmelev, A.D. (2003). In search of peace and harmony. In: Arutyunova, N.D. (ed.) Logical analysis of language: conceptual fields of order and disorder. Moscow: Indrik, 54--72. (In Russ.)]

53. Шмелев А.Д. Историческая память слова в прозе Александра Солженицына: мир и воля // Солженицынские тетради.Вып. 2. М.: Русский путь, 2013. С. 115--135. [Shmelev, A.D. (2013). The historical memory of words in the prose of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The Russian words mir and volia. Studying Solzhenitsyn.Issue 2. Moscow: Russkii put', 115--135. (In Russ.)]

Размещено на Allbest.ru