Lexical Meaning As a Testable Hypothesis The Case of English Look, See, Seem and Appear

Abstract

Intro -- Lexical meaning as a testable hypothesis -- Editorial page -- Title page -- LCC data -- Table of contents -- Acknowledgements -- List of tables -- List of figures -- 1. The problem, methodology and theoretical background -- 1. Introduction -- 2. The problem of the identification of linguistic units -- 2.1 The problem of identifying linguistic units based on syntactic categories -- 2.2 The problem of identifying linguistic units based on cognitive status -- 2.2.1 The problem of stored sequences -- 2.2.2 The problem of polysemy -- 3. Methodology -- 3.1 Qualitative support -- 3.2 Quantitative support -- 4. Preview of upcoming chapters -- 2. attention, visual as the explanation for the choice of look -- 1. Introduction -- 2. The fit with messages involving acts of visual attention -- 3. The fit with messages where a visual stimulus is absent -- 4. The fit with messages involving the communication of one's thoughts or feelings -- 5. The fit with messages involving attention-grabbing visual features -- 6. The fit with messages involving attribution based on visual attention -- 7. The fit with messages involving either visual or intellectual attention -- 8. The fit with messages of searching -- 9. Look in combination with directional terms: up, down, forward, back and after -- 10. Conclusion -- 3. Using big data to support the hypothesized meaning attention, visual -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Methodology -- 2.1 Quantitative predictions test the generality of communicative strategies -- 2.2 Justification of the inductive approach -- 3. Supporting attention in the meaning of look -- 3.1 Using carefully to support attention -- 3.2 Using this to support attention -- 3.3 Using but to support attention -- 3.4 Using at to support attention -- 3.5 Using deliberately to support attention -- 3.6 Using think to support attention4. Supporting visual in the meaning of look -- 4.1 Using eye to support visual -- 4.2 Using painting to support visual -- 4.3 Using see to support visual -- 5. Conclusion -- 4. attention, visual in competition with the meanings of see, seem, and appear -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Look and see - attention, visual versus experiencing visually -- 2.1 The hypothesis for see as a monosemic sign -- 2.2 attention as the explanation for the choice of look over see -- 2.2.1 Using turn to to support attention -- 2.2.2 Using notice to support attention -- 2.3 experiencing as the explanation for the choice of see over look -- 2.3.1 Using believe to support experiencing -- 2.3.2 Using understand to support experiencing -- 2.3.3 Using less control to support experiencing -- 3. Look and seem - attention, visual versus perspective dependency -- 3.1 The hypothesis for seem as a monosemic sign -- 3.2 visual as the explanation for the choice of look over seem -- 3.2.1 Using green to support visual -- 3.3 perspective dependency as the explanation for the choice of seem over look -- 3.3.1 Using logical to support perspective -- 3.3.2 Using to me to support perspective -- 3.3.3 Using at the time to support perspective -- 4. Look and appear - attention, visual versus initiation of perception -- 4.1 The hypothesis for appear as a monosemic sign -- 4.2 initiation as the explanation for the choice of appear over look -- 4.2.1 Using introduce to support initiation -- 4.2.2 Using first to support initiation -- 4.2.3 Using comparative adjectives to support initiation -- 4.2.4 Using but to support initiation -- 4.3 Messages involving visual features: look versus appearance -- 5. Conclusion -- 5. Competing analyses of the meaning of look -- 1. Introduction -- 2. A componential analysis -- 3. A construction analysis -- 4. A markedness analysis -- 6. Theoretical excursus1. Introduction -- 2. The linguistic status of the categories of grammar and lexicon -- 2.1 The a priori assumption of a grammar-lexicon continuum -- 2.2 The a priori assumption of polysemy in the lexicon -- 2.3 The a priori assumption that only grammatical forms constrain one another -- 2.4 The a priori assumption that lexical meanings are based on real-world categorizations -- 2.5 Conclusion -- 3. Recapitulations -- References -- IndexDescription based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, YYYY. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries