Re: Similar work to Andrason and Locatell - Perfect Wave
Posted: August 29th, 2018, 2:38 pm
I recognise that aspect is a gramaticalised feature, may not have come across properly in the post above
OK, that's fair. Porter does have a strong preference to monosemy over polysemy, which pervades his linguistic work. And the cognitive work is helpful for understanding the latter. Perhaps, not strictly necessary though, since polysemy has been accepted for quite a while, even before cognitive approaches have come to the fore.RandallButh wrote: ↑August 29th, 2018, 10:25 amI think that the poster may have been thinking that cognitive linguistics undermines the one and only supporting piece for "aspect only" people.and I'm not even [sure] what specific contribution the cognitive linguists make to aspect studies
Aspect-only practitioners argue that meaning must be consistent, not-contradicted.
Well, yeah. I just wish that there's a lot of more guidance for making exegetical decisions. Not just "context suggests," but which specific parts of the context call for one reading over another. Simply listing the interpretive options, like Wallace's grammar, leads to an approach where the different, listed senses are simply auditioned for the sentence (often using English glosses) even many of these senses have contextual constraints and would not be available even if the gloss seems fine.Matthew Longhorn wrote: ↑August 27th, 2018, 7:53 amI also agree that there is a difficulty with identifying what interpretation should be selected is going to be an issue, but I think that this is the case for all of natural language. I am happy to know that there are interpretive options available without holding much hope for a final answer on exegetical matters. Not suggesting you think otherwise