KJCKorea
Journal Central

@article{ART002790270},
author={김채리},
title={An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology},
journal={Journal of Chinese Language and Literature},
issn={1225-083X},
year={2021},
number={88},
pages={223-248},
doi={10.15792/clsyn..88.202112.223}

TY - JOUR
AU - 김채리
TI - An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology
JO - Journal of Chinese Language and Literature
PY - 2021
VL - null
IS - 88
PB - Chinese Literary Society Of Yeong Nam
SP - 223
EP - 248
SN - 1225-083X
AB - Drawing on the theoretical framework and methodology of the Moscow Lexical Typology Group (MLexT), this paper examines the usage of the basic meanings of the spatial dimensional adjectives “LONG/SHORT” in thirteen languages. Among the thirteen languages investigated, the basic meanings of “LONG/SHORT” in all Asian and European languages can indicate the distance between any two points in space, including “one-dimensional linear objects”, “two-dimensional flat objects” and “three-dimensional objects with outstanding features”. This reflects the cognitive commonality of different countries from different regions and cultures. The basic meanings are the same in the thirteen languages, reflecting the stability of core vocabulary. However, when “LONG/SHORT” is used to describe a “three-dimensional object with an outstanding height”, there are differences among the thirteen languages. In Asian languages, “LONG/ SHORT” cannot describe “stature” except for Mongolian and Indonesian. In Indonesian, only “SHORT” can be used to describe “stature”, while in Mongolian, both “LONG/SHORT” can be used to describe it. Except for English, almost all European languages can use “LONG/SHORT” to describe “stature”. In English, only “SHORT” can be used to describe “stature”. We have thereby demonstrated cross-linguistic semantic commonalities and verified the feasibility and applicability of the MLexT theory in lexical typology. Meanwhile, the differences between different languages in different regions and the same region also reveal the differences in the socio-cultural context of human cognition.
KW - Lexical typology;Spatial dimension adjectives;LONG/SHORT;semanticmap
DO - 10.15792/clsyn..88.202112.223
ER -

김채리. (2021). An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology. Journal of Chinese Language and Literature, 88, 223-248.

김채리. 2021, "An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology", Journal of Chinese Language and Literature, no.88, pp.223-248. Available from: doi:10.15792/clsyn..88.202112.223

김채리 "An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology" Journal of Chinese Language and Literature 88 pp.223-248 (2021) : 223.

김채리. An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology. 2021; 88 : 223-248. Available from: doi:10.15792/clsyn..88.202112.223

김채리. "An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology" Journal of Chinese Language and Literature no.88(2021) : 223-248.doi: 10.15792/clsyn..88.202112.223

김채리. An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology. Journal of Chinese Language and Literature, 88, 223-248. doi: 10.15792/clsyn..88.202112.223

김채리. An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology. Journal of Chinese Language and Literature. 2021; 88 223-248. doi: 10.15792/clsyn..88.202112.223

김채리. An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology. 2021; 88 : 223-248. Available from: doi:10.15792/clsyn..88.202112.223

김채리. "An Analysis of ‘LONG/SHORT’ from the Perspective of Lexical Semantic Typology" Journal of Chinese Language and Literature no.88(2021) : 223-248.doi: 10.15792/clsyn..88.202112.223