Container Scheme-Image and Its Types: English Phrasal Verbs of Cognitive Activity
https://doi.org/10.21603/sibscript-2023-25-4-433-440
Abstract
The article features the compositional semantics of phrasal verbs that denote a cognitive activity, as well as the interaction between their conceptual structure and the particle. The conceptual structures of these components can be described as mental schemes, e.g., a container with a certain vector of cognitive projection, and a number of subtypes. The compositional semantics of phrasal verbs of cognitive activity revealed that the interaction between the conceptual structure of the verb and the particle is a cognitive mechanism that develops its semantics. The container metaphor is based on the semantic potential of the verbal component and such particles as in, out, and through. These particles are usually combined with verbs of movement, physical activity, and perception. As part of phrasal verbs of mental activity, they realize the following prototypical concepts: the subject / object of the action gets into / penetrates into the container, is out / outside of the container, or crosses the border of the container, respectively. The role of the container belongs not to real objects, but to abstract entities, e.g., memory, consciousness, attention, feelings, thoughts, etc., as well as various physical and mental states or situations in which objects are immersed.
About the Authors
Victoria G. Egorova
Rybnitsa Branch of Transdniestrian Shevchenko State University
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Republic of Moldova, Transdniestria, Rybnitsa
Competing Interests:
The authors declared no potential conflict of interests regarding the research, authorship, and / or publication of this article.
Oxana F. Zadobrivscaia
Rybnitsa Branch of Transdniestrian Shevchenko State University
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Republic of Moldova, Transdniestria, Rybnitsa
Competing Interests:
The authors declared no potential conflict of interests regarding the research, authorship, and / or publication of this article.
References
1. Avdevich N. V. Anthropocentrism as the factor of the metaphorical potential of English phrasal verbs. Vestnik of Moscow State Linguistic University. Humanities, 2021, (13): 11–26. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.52070/2542-2197_2021_13_855_11
2. Avdevich N. V. Teaching students to use English phrasal verbs for professional communication. Vestnik of Moscow State Linguistic University. Education and Teaching, 2020, (1): 23–35. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/lliqba
3. Babushkin A. P., Sternin I. A. Cognitive linguistics and semasiology. Voronezh: Ritm, 2018, 229. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/vjsjys
4. Bazarova B. B. Particles with spatial meaning in modern English. English vocabulary: knowledge and culture, ed. Dementieva I. A. Moscow: MSLU, 1997, iss. 438, 25–32. (In Russ.)
5. Bogdanova S. Y. Spatial conceptualization of the world in the mirror of English phrasal verbs. Irkutsk: ISLU, 2006, 180. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/rufwpz
6. Golubkova E. E. Linguistic corpora in solving semantic problems. Methods of cognitive analysis of word semantics: computer-corpus approach, ed. Zabotkina V. I. 2nd ed. Moscow: IaSK, 2019, 39–81. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/dplllu
7. Golubkova E. E. Some principles of conceptual description of units of spatial vocabulary: English prepositions in and through. Horizons of modern linguistics. Tradition and innovation, eds. Riabtseva N. K., Vinogradov V. A. Moscow: IaSK, 2009, 553–559. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/zojvdr
8. Egorova V. G. On the cognitive mechanisms of the formation of the composite semantics of phrasal verbs of mental activity. Michael-Arkhangelsk Readings: Proc. VII Intern. Sci.-Prac. Conf., Rybnitsa, 16 Nov 2012. Rybnitsa: Rybnitskaia tipografiia, 2012, 329–332. (In Russ.)
9. Egorova V. G. Cognitive features of the semantics of complex linguistic units with the meaning of understanding. Filologicheskii aspekt, 2021, (1): 59–68. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/doumir
10. Egorova V. G. Cognitive aspect of the translation of complex linguistic signs. Actual problems of teaching foreign citizens in the system of pre-university education, ed. Khalpukova E. L. Minsk: BSU, 2020. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/dkwjgm
11. Zadobrivscaia O. F. Realization of the container through the emonym sympathy and its Russian equivalents in the English and Russian-speaking worlds. Linguistic picture of the world in the mirror of translation: Proc. Intern. Sci.-Prac. Conf., Voronezh, 12–15 Dec 2018. Voronezh: ID VSU, 2019, 110–119. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/llgrki
12. Zadobrivscaia O. F. English cryptotype "Container": on the problem of its identification. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, 2017, (4): 56–60. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/ypqghz
13. Zadobrivscaia O. F. Mental images idea and thought as a container. World Science: Problems and Innovations: Proc. XVII Intern. Sci.-Prac. Conf., Penza, 30 Jan 2018. Penza: Nauka i prosveshchenie, 2018, pt. 3, 34–38. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/yrjflv
14. Kubryakova E. S. Compositional semantics and its features in the field of word formation. Problems of semantic analysis of vocabulary: The 5th Shmelev Readings: Proc. Intern. Conf., Moscow, 23–25 Feb 2002. Moscow: Rus. slovari, 2002, 52–54. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/tdcxen
15. Kubryakova E. S. Language and knowledge: towards the acquisition of knowledge about the language: parts of speech from a cognitive point of view. The role of language in the knowledge of the world. Moscow: IaSK, 2004, 560. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/suqhip
16. Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors We Live by. Moscow: Editotial URSS, 2004, 256. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/qraadx
17. Paducheva E. V. Dynamic models in the semantics of vocabulary. Moscow: IaSK, 2004, 607. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/paxmhj
18. Petrovich Yu. V. Cognitive mechanisms of formation of new phrasal verbs in modern English. Vestnik of Moscow State Linguistic University, 2009, (571-2): 115–128. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/ksnogl
19. Rakhilina E. V. Cognitive analysis of subject names: semantics and compatibility. Moscow: Rus. slovari, 2008, 416. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/pvxtnn
20. Rakhilina E. V. Linguistics of constructions. Moscow: Azbukovnik, 2010, 584. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/pxwfvd
21. Dirven R. The Metaphoric in recent cognitive approaches to English phrasal verbs. Metaphorik.de, 2001, (1): 39–54.
22. Golubkova E., Trubochkin A. A corpus-based model of the English phrasal verb construction: Attraction. Computational linguistics and intellectual technologies, Dialogue 2021: Proc. Annual Intern. Conf., Virtual, Online, 16–19 Jun 2021. Moscow: RSUH, 2021, 277–288. https://doi.org/10.28995/2075-7182-2021-20-278-288
23. Lindner S. J. A lexico-semantic analysis of English verb-particle constructions with Out and Up. Trier: LAUT, 1983, 234.
24. Morgan P. S. Figuring out 'figure out': Metaphor and the semantics of the English verb-particle construction. Cognitive linguistics, 1997, 8(4): 95–119.
25. Rudzka-Ostyn B. Word power: Phrasal verbs a. compounds: A cognitive approach. Berlin-NY: Mouton de Gruyter, 2003, 206. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197235
26. Talmy L. How language structures space. Spatial Orientation. Theory, Research, and Application, eds. Pick H. L. Jr., Acredolo L. P. NY-L.: Plenum Press, 1983, 225–282.
Review
For citations:
Egorova V.G., Zadobrivscaia O.F. Container Scheme-Image and Its Types: English Phrasal Verbs of Cognitive Activity. SibScript. 2023;25(4):433-440. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/sibscript-2023-25-4-433-440
Views:
244
Email this article 