INTRODUCTION TO
COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS 1
TRUONG VAN ANH
SAI GON UNIVERSITY
Unit 1: What does it mean to know a language?
Cognitive linguists attempt to describe and account for language systematicity, its structure, the functions it serves. An important reason behind why cognitive linguists study language stems from the assumption that language reflects patterns of thought.
Therefore, to study language from this perspective is to study patterns of conceptualization.


1.1: What is language for?
We rely upon language throughout our lives in order to perform a range of functions. Language allows quick and effective expression, and provides a well developed means of encoding and transmitting complex and subtle ideas. In fact, these notions of encoding and
transmitting turn out to be important, as they relate to two key functions associated with language, the symbolic function and the interactive function.





1.1.1 The symbolic function of language
One crucial function of language is to express thoughts and ideas. That is, language encodes and externalizes our thoughts. The way language does this is by using symbols. Symbols are ‘bits of language’. These might be meaningful subparts of words (for example, dis- as in distaste), whole words (for example,
cat, run, tomorrow), or ‘strings’ of words (for example, He couldn’t write a pop
jingle let alone a whole musical).
Morpheme> word> phrase> clause> sentence…

These symbols consist of forms, which may be
spoken, written or signed, and meanings with which the forms are conventionally paired. In fact, a symbol is better referred to as a symbolic assembly, as it consists of two parts that are conventionally associated (Langacker 1987). In other words, this symbolic assembly is a form-meaning pairing.
A form can be a sound, as in [kæt]. A form might be the orthographic representation that we see on the written page: cat, or a signed gesture in a sign language.
A meaning is the conventional ideational or semantic content associated with the symbol. A symbolic assembly of form and meaning is represented in Figure 1.1.











Figure 1.1 A symbolic assembly of form and meaning

Our cognitive abilities integrate raw perceptual information into a coherent and well defined mental image. The meanings encoded by linguistic symbols then, refer to our projected reality (Jackendoff 1983): a mental representation of reality, as construed by the human mind, mediated by our unique
perceptual and conceptual systems.
The symbolic function of language serves to encode and externalize our thoughts (put an idea into words).



The following illustration is adapted from Tyler and Evans (2003):
(1) The cat jumped over the wall.
This sentence describes a jump undertaken by a cat. Before reading on, select the diagram in Figure 1.3 that best captures, in your view, the trajectory of
the jump.










Figure 1.3 Possible trajectories for The cat jumped over the wall


So far, then, we have established that one of the functions of language is to
represent or symbolize concepts. Linguistic symbols, or more precisely symbolic assemblies, enable this by serving as prompts for the construction of much richer conceptualizations. Now let’s turn to the second function of language.

1.1.2 The interactive function of language
In our everyday social encounters, language serves an interactive function. It is not sufficient that language merely pairs forms and meanings. These form-meaning pairings must be recognized by, and be accessible to, others in our community. After all, we use language in order to ‘get our ideas across’, in other words to communicate. This involves a process of transmission by the speaker, and decoding and interpretation by the hearer, processes that involve the construction of rich conceptualizations (see Figure 1.4).













Figure 1.4 The interactive function

The messages we choose to communicate can perform various interactive and social functions. For example, we can use language to change the way the world is, or to make things happen:
(2) a. I now pronounce you man and wife.
b. Shut the door on your way out!
In (a) language itself can serve as
a speech act that forever alters an aspect of our reality. (Declarative)
In (b) the utterance represents a command, which is also a type of speech act. (Directive)
Another way in which language fulfills the interactive function relates to the notion of expressivity. Language is ‘loaded’, allowing us to express our thoughts and feelings about the world.
(3) a. the eminent linguist
b. the blonde bombshell
Language also plays a role in how we affect other people in the world, and how we make others feel by our choice of words. That is, language can provide information about affect (emotional response):
(4) a. Shut up!
b. I’m terribly sorry to interrupt you, but . . .
Language can be used to create scenes or frames of experience, indexing and even constructing a particular context (Fillmore 1982). In other words, language use can invoke frames that summon rich knowledge structures, which serve to call up and fill in background knowledge.
(5) a. How do you do?
b. Once upon a time . . .
In summary, we’ve seen that not only does language encode particular meanings, but also that, by virtue of these meanings and the forms employed to symbolize these meanings which constitute part of shared knowledge in a particular speech community, language can serve an interactive function, facilitating and
enriching communication in a number of ways.



1.2 The systematic structure of language
Language is a system for the expression of meaning and for carrying out its symbolic and interactive functions. So, what evidence is there for the systematicity of language?
1.2.1 Evidence for a system
Language consists of symbolic assemblies that are combined in various ways to perform the functions we described in section 1.1. A symbolic assembly is a
conventional linguistic unit.
One of the prominent concerns in cognitive approaches to grammar is how to model the inventory of linguistic units that make up a language.

A conventional unit can be a meaningful subpart of a word, which linguists call a morpheme (anti-dis-establish . . .), a whole word, a string of words that ‘belong’ together (a phrase) or a whole sentence.
(6) He kicked the bucket
This sentence has an idiomatic meaning. It means “He died”, which we can’t predict.
Another term for symbolic assembly that is employed
by some cognitive linguists is construction (e.g. Goldberg 1995).



When we change certain aspects of the sentence in (6), the meaning is affected. For example, if we change the object (the thing being kicked), as in (7),
we lose the idiomatic meaning and are left with a literal utterance:
(7) He kicked the mop.
For many cognitive linguists, what makes example (7) ‘literal’ is that this sentence ‘as a whole’ does not represent a construction. Instead, the meaning of (7) is interpreted by unifying the smaller units, the words.
In contrast, example (6) is interpreted as a whole single unit: a construction.



If we change the structure of example (6) in the following way, we also lose the idiomatic meaning:
(8) The bucket was kicked by him.
This example shows that, in addition to meaning, constructions (form-meaning pairings) have particular formal grammatical patterns associated with
them. In other words, the properties of the construction relate not only to the individual words that make it up, as in (6), but also to the grammatical form, or
word order.



This point is also illustrated by an ungrammatical sentence, a sentence that does not correspond to any of the formal patterns associated with the constructions of English, as in (9), and consequently does not have a conventional meaning associated with it. Ungrammaticality is indicated by an asterisk:
(9) *Bucket kicked he the


However, we have suggested that constructions can also give rise to ‘literal’ meanings. To illustrate this, we will examine another sentence that has both idiomatic and literal meanings. For instance, consider the following linguistic joke:
(10) A: Waiter, what is this fly doing in my soup?
B: I think that’s the breaststroke, sir!
The humorous effect of the waiter’s reply rests on the fact that he has chosen
to respond to the ‘wrong’ interpretation. While the diner is employing the
‘what’s X doing Y’ construction (affirmative), the waiter prefers to respond to the interrogative construction.


1.2.2 The systematic structure of thought
The systematic structure found in language reflect a systematic structure within our conceptual system. Cognitive linguists explore the hypothesis that certain kinds of linguistic expressions provide evidence that the structure of our conceptual systems is reflected in the patterns of language. Moreover, as we will see throughout this book, the way the mind is structured can be seen as a reflection, in part, of the way the world (including our sociocultural experience) is structured and organized. Consider the examples in (11)
(11) a. Christmas is fast approaching.
b. The number of shares we own has gone up.
c. Those two have a very close friendship.


These examples relate to the abstract conceptual domains of TIME (11a), QUANTITY (11b) and AFFECTION (11c). A conceptual domain is a body of knowledge within our conceptual system that contains and organizes related ideas and experiences. For example, the conceptual domain of TIME might relate a range of temporal concepts including Christmas, which is a temporal event. Notice that in each sentence in (11) the more abstract concepts Christmas, number (of shares) and friendship are understood in terms of conceptual domains relating to concrete physical experience. For instance, Christmas is conceptualized in terms of the domain of physical MOTION, which is evident in the use of the word approaching in (11a). Clearly Christmas (and other temporal concepts) cannot literally be said to undergo motion.
Similarly, the notion of number of shares is conceptualized in terms of VERTICAL ELEVATION, which is clear from the use of the phrase gone up in (11b). Finally, friendship is conceptualized in terms of PHYSICAL PROXIMITY in (11c), which is shown by the use of the word close.

One of the major findings to have emerged from studies into the human conceptual system is that abstract concepts are systematically structured in terms of conceptual domains deriving from our experience of the behaviour of physical objects, involving properties like motion, vertical elevation and physical proximity (Lakoff and Johnson 1980, 1999).

1.3 What do linguists do?
Cognitive linguists form hypotheses about the nature of language, and about the conceptual system that it is thought to reflect. These hypotheses are based on observing patterns in the way language is structured and organized.
This foundation for theorizing is termed descriptive adequacy (Chomsky 1965; Langacker 1987, 1999a).
1.3.1 What?
Linguists try to uncover the systems behind language, to describe these systems and to model them. Linguistic models consist of theories about language.
For cognitive linguists, the emphasis is upon relating the systematicity exhibited by language directly to the way the mind is patterned and structured, and in particular to conceptual structure and organization.
Applied linguistics also informs and is informed by the cognitive linguistics research agenda in various ways.
1.3.2 Why?
Linguists are motivated to explore the issues we outlined above by the drive to understand human cognition, or how the human mind works. Language is a uniquely human capacity. Linguistics is therefore one of the cognitive sciences, alongside philosophy, psychology, neuroscience and artificial intelligence.

1.3.3 How?
As linguists, we rely upon what language tells us about itself. In other words, it is ordinary language, spoken every day by ordinary people, that makes up the ‘raw data’ that linguists use to build their theories. Linguists describe language, and on the basis of its properties, formulate hypotheses about how language is represented in the mind. These hypotheses can be tested in a number of ways.


1.3.4 Speaker intuitions
Native speakers of any given human language will have strong intuitions about what combinations of sounds or words are possible in their language, and which interpretations can be paired with which combinations. For example, native speakers of English will agree that example (6), repeated here, is a well-formed sentence, and that it may have two possible meanings:
(6) He kicked the bucket.
They will also agree that (7) and (8), repeated here, are both well-formed sentences, but that each has only one possible meaning:
(7) He kicked the mop.
(8) The bucket was kicked by him.

Finally, and perhaps most strikingly, speakers will agree that all of the following examples are impossible in English:
(12) a. *bucket kicked he the
b. *kicked bucket the he
c. *bucket the kicked he
d. *kicked he bucket the

1.3.5 Converging evidence
How do cognitive linguists evaluate the adequacy of their models? One way is to consider converging evidence (Langacker 1999a). This means that a
model must not only explain linguistic knowledge, but must also be consistent with what cognitive scientists know about other areas of cognition.


How might we use language to describe a scene like this? Most English speakers will agree that (13a) is an appropriate description but that (13b) is ‘odd’:
(13) a. The cat is on the chair.
b. ?The chair is under the cat.











Figure 1.5 The cat is on the chair
In Figure 1.5 we focus on the cat rather than the chair, because our knowledge of the world tells us that the cat is more likely than the chair to move, to make a noise or to perform some other act. We call this prominent entity the figure and the remainder of the scene the ground, which is another way of saying ‘background’.
1.4 What it means to know a language
The linguist’s task is to uncover the systematicity behind and within language. What kinds of systems might there be within language? A pioneering cognitive linguist Leonard Talmy suggests that the cognitive representation provided by language can be divided into lexical and grammatical subsystems.
(14) The hunter tracked the tigers.
Notice that certain parts of the sentence in (14) – either whole words (free morphemes), or meaningful subparts of words (bound morphemes) – have been
marked in boldtype. What happens when we alter those parts of the sentence?
(15) a. Which hunter tracked the tigers?
b. The hunter tracks the tigers.
c. Those hunters track a tiger.
All the sentences in (15) are still about some kind of tracking event involving one or more hunter(s) and one or more tiger(s).

These linguistic elements and morphemes are known as closed-class elements and relate to the grammatical subsystem.
The non-boldtype ‘lexical’ words which are referred to as open-class. These relate to the lexical subsystem. The term open-class refers to the fact that languages typically find it much easier to add new elements to this subsystem and do so on a regular basis.
In terms of the meaning contributed by each of these two subsystems, while ‘lexical’ words provide ‘rich’ meaning and thus have a content function, ‘grammatical’ elements perform a structuring function in the sentence.
Table 1.1 Properties of the lexical and grammatical subsystems
Lexical subsystem Grammatical subsystem
Open-class words/morphemes Closed-class words/morphemes
Content function Structuring function
Larger set; constantly changing Smaller set; more resistant to change
Prompts for ‘rich’ concepts, e.g. people, Prompts for schematic concepts, e.g. number,
things, places, properties, etc. time reference, old vs. new, statement vs.
question, etc.

(16) a. The movie star kissed the directors.
b. The sunbeam illuminated the rooftops.
c. The textbook delighted the students.
What all the sentences in (16) have in common with (14) is the ‘grammatical’ elements. In other words, the grammatical structure of all the sentences in (16) is identical to that of (15). We know that both participants in the event can
easily be identified by the hearer. We know that the event took place before now. We know that there’s only one movie star/sunbeam/textbook, but more than one director/rooftop/student.

Summary
We use language for life.
+ Language has two functions:
Symbolic: Form + meaning
Interactive: speaker >< hearer: understand each other
+ The systematic structure of language
how to model the inventory of linguistic units
Morpheme > sentence: figurative = construction: a whole single unit
literal = not construction: unifying the smaller units
The properties of the construction relate not only to the individual words that make it up, as in (6), but also to the grammatical form, or word order.
An ungrammatical sentence
A construction may have both literal and figurative meanings.
+ The systematic structure of thought
Domains: time, quantity, affection, etc. (motion, elevation, proximity)
+ What do linguists do?
Descriptive adequacy:
What: to model
Why: to understand human cognition, or how the human mind works
How: Linguists describe language, and on the basis of its properties, formulate hypotheses about how language is represented in the mind.
Speaker intuitions: strong intuitions about what combinations of sounds or words are possible in their language
Converging evidence: explain linguistic knowledge + consistent with what cognitive scientists know about other areas of cognition
Figure: object >< ground: background
+ What it means to know a language
Cognitive representation = lexical and grammatical subsystems
Lexical> open
Grammatical > close


Exercises
1.1 Linguistic encoding
Consider the following examples in the light of our discussion of example (1).
Using the diagrams in Figure 1.3 as a starting point, try to draw similar diagrams that capture the path of motion involved in each example. In each case, how much of this information is explicitly encoded within the meanings of the words themselves? How much seems to depend on what you know about the world?
(a) The baby threw the rattle out of the buggy.
(b) I threw the cat out of the back door.
(c) I tore up the letter and threw it out of the window.
(d) I threw the tennis ball out of the house.
(e) I threw the flowers out of the vase.
1.2 Constructions
The examples below contain idiomatic constructions. If you are a non-native speaker of English, you may need to consult a native speaker or a dictionary of idioms to find out the idiomatic meaning. In the light of our discussion of example (6), try changing certain aspects of each sentence to see whether these examples pattern in the same way. For instance, what happens if you change the subject of the sentence (for example, the presidential candidate in the first sentence)? What happens if you change the object (for example, the towel)? It’s not always possible to make a sentence passive, but what happens to the meaning here if you can?
(a) The presidential candidate threw in the towel.
(b) Before the exam, Mary got cold feet.
(c) She’s been giving me the cold shoulder lately.
(d) You are the apple of my eye.
(e) She’s banging her head against a brick wall.
What do your findings suggest about an individual’s knowledge of such constructions as opposed to sentences containing literal leaning? Do any of these examples also have a literal meaning?

1.3 Word order
Take example (b) from exercise 1.2 above. Believe it or not, a sentence like this with seven words has 5,040 mathematically possible word order permutations!
Try to work out how many of these permutations result in a grammatical sentence. What do your findings suggest?

1.4 Concepts and conceptual domains
The examples below contain linguistic expressions that express abstract concepts. In the light of our discussion of the examples in (11), identify the relevant conceptual domain that the concept might relate to. Do these abstract concepts appear to be understood in terms of concrete physical experiences? What is the
evidence for your conclusions?
(a) You’ve just given me a really good idea.
(b) How much time did you spend on this essay?
(c) He fell into a deep depression.
(d) The Stock Market crashed on Black Wednesday.
(e) Unfortunately, your argument lacks a solid foundation.


Now come up with other sentences which illustrate similar patterns for the following conceptual domains:
(f) THEORIES
(g) LOVE
(h) ARGUMENT
(i) ANGER
(j) KNOWING/UNDERSTANDING
1.5 Figure and ground
Consider the scenes in Figure 1.6. For each one, state the sentence that springs first to mind as the most natural way of describing the scene. For example, for
the scene in (a), you might come up with The goldfish is in the bowl. What happens if you change the sentence around as we did for example (15)? What do your findings suggest about the figure/ground distinction?

1.6 Open-class or closed-class?
Consider the example below in the light of our discussion of examples (15)–(16).
First, try to identify the open-class words/morphemes and the closed-class words/morphemes by referring to the properties described in Table 1.1. Next, come up with a set of examples in which only the closed-class words/morphemes have been altered. What kinds of differences do these changes make to the sentence? Finally, try changing the open-class words/morphemes. What kinds of differences do these changes make to the sentence?
The supermodel was putting on her lipstick.

Good luck!