Lexical Concept Adjustment in Mechanical Engineering Discourse

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22364/BJELLC.09.2019.01

Keywords:

pragmatic meaning, a lexical concept, polysemy, lexical broadening, lexical narrowing, mechanical engineering discourse

Abstract

The lexical concept adjustment represents a significant aspect of the pragmatic meaning and has been approached from several perspectives in literature. As the semantics-pragmatics interface is a matter that attracts numerous debates among pragmaticians, the boundary between cases of polysemy and the semantic meaning adjustment in the context is also blurred. There has been no agreement whether a lexical concept adjustment can be regarded as a primary (necessary) or a secondary (optional) pragmatic process. The present article discusses cases of meaning disambiguation and lexical narrowing. The aim of the article is to demonstrate how a lexical concept adjustment contributes to the pragmatic meaning construction in the discourse under analysis. The present paper deals with the data obtained from the chapters on woodworking and metal processing borrowed from the Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety. The findings indicate that there is no clear-cut boundary between the processes of the lexical meaning disambiguation and a lexical concept adjustment as they both elaborate on the linguistic (semantic) meaning of a word or an expression taking into consideration all aspects of the contextual information available. Further research can be conducted to approach the issue from the quantitative perspective.

Author Biography

Jekaterina Čerņevska, University of Latvia

Jekaterina Čerņevska (PhD Candidate, Lecturer) is currently working at the  Univ ersity of Latvia. Her research interests include pragmatics and the  use of English in professional discourse. The  PhD dissertation discusses the  pragmatic meaning construction in mechanical engineering discourse. Email: jekaterina.cernevska@gmail.com

References

Ariel, M. (2010) Defining Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Carston, R. (2002) Thoughts and Utterances. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Čerņevska, J. (2014) Linguistic politeness in English for engineering. In A. Veisbergs and M. Farneste (eds.) Language for International Communication: Linking Interdisciplinary Perspectives (pp. 39–45). Riga: University of Latvia Press.

Čerņevska, J. (2016) Scalarity in mechanical engineering discourse. In A. Veisbergs and M. Farneste (eds.) Language for International Communication: Linking Interdisciplinary Perspectives (pp. 31–40). Riga: University of Latvia Press.

Evans, V. (2009) How Words Mean. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Huang, Y. (2007) Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Huang, Y. (2012) The Oxford Dictionary of Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mey, J. L. (2001) Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Oxford Learner’s Dictionary (n.d.). Available from https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com [Accessed on 4 September 2018]

Recanati, F. (2004) Literal Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Saeed, J. I. (2003) Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (1986) Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. (2nd ed.1995)

TEXTS ANALYSED

Stellman, J. M. and Parish, J. (eds.), (2011) Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety, Chapter 86. Geneva: International Labour Organization. Available from: http://www.iloencyclopaedia.org/part-xiii-12343/woodworking [Accessed on 9 March 2018].

Downloads

Published

2019-06-19

How to Cite

Čerņevska, J. (2019). Lexical Concept Adjustment in Mechanical Engineering Discourse. Baltic Journal of English Language, Literature and Culture, 9, 4–15. https://doi.org/10.22364/BJELLC.09.2019.01