Lexical Concept Adjustment in Mechanical Engineering Discourse
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22364/BJELLC.09.2019.01Keywords:
pragmatic meaning, a lexical concept, polysemy, lexical broadening, lexical narrowing, mechanical engineering discourseAbstract
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.
References
Ariel, M. (2010) Defining Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511777912
Carston, R. (2002) Thoughts and Utterances. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470754603
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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199234660.001.0001
Huang, Y. (2007) Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Huang, Y. (2012) The Oxford Dictionary of Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199697960.001.0001
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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615382
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
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
