This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors retain ownership of the copyright for their content.
THE SEMANTIC CATEGORY OF ANOMALY IN THE NOVEL “THE MAN WHO MISTOOK HIS WIFE FOR A HAT” BY OLIVER SACKS
Corresponding Author(s) : Alexander Ptashkin
Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews,
Vol. 8 No. 2 (2020): March
Purpose of the study: This research was conducted with the aim of considering the linguistic means of expressing the core of the semantic field (SF) of the mental component of the category of an anomaly in the literary work “The man who mistook his wife for a hat” by Oliver Sacks in the English language.
Methodology: The method of conceptual analysis of the means of expressing the core of the SF of the mental component of the category of the anomaly was used. Lexical units were also analyzed from the point of view of a method of analysis of vocabulary definitions and a contextual method.
Main Findings: The category of an anomaly in the novel under study includes mental and physiological components. This mental unit is a semantic field with a core, near and distant peripheries. The core of the SF of the mental component within the novel under study includes lexical units representing neutral bookish style and medical terms in accordance with the International Classification of Diseases.
Applications of this study: The results of this paper will be helpful for lecturers of cognitive linguistics, lexicology, lexicography, stylistics, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, country study. The information given in this article can be useful for the preparation and correction of the information about lexical units in the dictionaries or it can function as a basis for further analysis and creation of special corpora.
Novelty/Originality of this study: The linguistic means of expressing the SF of the mental component of the category of an anomaly in this novel were analyzed in terms of cognitive linguistics and lexicography. Lexemes and collocations in a special context reflecting different sides of the mental anomaly from the point of medicine in English were considered.
- Aarts, B. (2006). Conceptions of categorization in the history of linguistics. Language Sciences, 28, 361-385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2005.10.001
- Allwood, J. (1999). Cognitive Semantics. Meaning and Cognition. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.55
- Bartlett, S. J. (2011). Normality Does Not Equal Mental Health: The Need to Look Elsewhere for Standards of Good Psychological Health. Praeger.
- Bloh, M. Ja. (2011). The field of epistemic modality in the space of the text. Prometej.
- Bondarko, A. V. (2013). Theory of functional grammar: introduction, a spectuality, time localization, taxis. Knizhnyj dom «LIBROKOM».
- Cohen, H. (2005). Handbook of Categorization in Cognitive Science. Elsevier.
- Collins (2014).Collins English Dictionary. HarperCollins Publishers.
- Corrigan, R. (1989). Linguistic Categorization. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.61
- Coulson, S., Oakley, T. (2000). Blending basics. Cognitive Linguistics, 11, 175-196. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2001.014
- Crawford, L. E., Regier, T., Huttenlocher, J. (2000). Linguistic and non-linguistic spatial categorization. Cognition, 75(3), 209-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00064-0
- Cruse, D. A. (1995). Polysemy and related phenomena from a cognitive linguistic viewpoint. Computational Lexical Semantics, 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527227.004
- Cruse, D. A. (1992). Cognitive Linguistics and Word Meaning: Taylor on Linguistic Categorization. Journal of Linguistics,28, 165-183. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700015048
- Damon, W. (2006). Handbook of Child Psychology: Cognition, Perception, and Language. John Wiley & Sons.
- Enfield, N. J., Majid, A., & van Staden, M. (2006). Cross-linguistic categorization of the body: Introduction. Language Sciences,28(2-3), 137-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2005.11.001
- Evans, V. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh University Press.
- Geeraerts, D. (1993). Vagueness's puzzles, polysemy's vagaries. Cognitive linguistics, 3(4), 223–272. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.19188.8.131.52
- Hayward, W. G. & Tarr, M. J. (1995). Spatial language and spatial representation. Cognition,55, 39-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)00643-Y
- Holyoak, K. J., Thagard, P. (1997). The analogical mind. American Psychologist,52, 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.1.35
- World Health Organization. (2020). International Code of Diseases 10.
- Kövecses, Z. (2006). Language, Mind, and Culture. A Practical Introduction. Oxford University Press.
- Kuznecov, V. (2015).Dictionary of philosophy terms. INFRA-M.
- Lakoff, G. (1990). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. What Categories Reveal about the Mind. The University of Chicago Press.
- Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain's concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22, 455-479. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290442000310
- Matveeva, T. V. (2010). Polnyj slovar’ lingvisticheskih terminov. Feniks.
- Mayor, M. (2009). Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Pearson Education Limited.
- Merriam-Webster (2016).Merriam-Webster’s Medical Dictionary. Merriam-Webster Inc.
- Nikoshkova, E. V. (2006). English-Russian dictionary of psychology. Russo.
- Palmer, G., Woodman, C. (2000). Ontological classifiers as polycentric categories as seen in Shona class 3 nouns. In M. Pülz & M. Verspoor (Eds.), Explorations in linguistic relativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.199.13pal
- Pansky, A., Koriat, A. (2004). The basic-level convergence effect in memory distortions. Psychological Science,15, 52-59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.01501009.x
- Premack, D. (1985). “Gavagai!” or the future history of the animal language controversy. Cognition,19, 207-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(85)90036-8
- Ptashkin, A. (2015). Semantic Field of Biological Constituent of Deviation in English. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 206, 51-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.026
- Ptashkin, A. (2018). This means expressing the semantic field of a mental component within the deficiency category in Russian. Xlinguae: European Scientific Journal, 11(2), 60-67. https://doi.org/10.18355/XL.2018.11.02.06
- Radden, G. (2009). Cognitive English Grammar. John Benjamins.
- Rosch, E. (1975). Family Resemblances: Studies in the Internal Structure of the Categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 382-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9
- Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. Cognition and Categorization, 4, 13–32.
- Rosch, E. (2013). Principles of categorization.In A. Collins & E. Smith (Eds.), Readings in Cognitive Science: A Perspective from Psychology and Artificial Intelligence. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Pub.
- Rosch, E. (2015). Linguistic relativity. In A. Silverstein & L. Erlbaum (Eds.), Human Communication: Theoretical Explorations. London: Routledge.
- Sacks, O. (2011). The man who mistook his wife for a hat and other. Picador.
- Taylor, J. R. (2003). Linguistic Categorization. Oxford University Press.
- Taylor, J. R. (2008). Prototypes in cognitive linguistics. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. London: Routledge.
- Tversky, A. (2013). Features of Similarity. In A. Collins & E. Smith (Eds.), Readings in Cognitive Science: A Perspective from Psychology and Artificial Intelligence. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Pub.
- Tversky, A., Hemenway, K. (1984). Objects, parts, and categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology, General, 113, 169–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-34184.108.40.206
- Wierzbicka, A. (1984). Apples are not a “kind of fruit” – the semantics of human categorization. American Ethnologist, 11, 313-328. https://doi.org/10.1525/ae.1984.11.2.02a00060