Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Domain: In model theory a set of defined objects, for which a model is satisfiable. In logic a set of objects that can be related to statements._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Ronald W. Langacker on Domains - Dictionary of Arguments
Gärdenfors I 31 Domain/Langacker/Gärdenfors: (Langacker 1987)(1) Thesis: domains are necessarily cognitive entities: mental experiences, representational spaces, concepts, or conceptual complexes. (p.147). Definition domain/Langacker: a domain is a context for the characterization of a semantic unit. Gärdenfors: this is a good way to look at a domain as a background in terms of gestalt psychology. Definition abstract domain/Langacker: e.g. "ankle" presupposes fingers, this concept presupposes in turn hand, arm, body and ultimately space. This last term cannot be defined relative to other, more basic terms. Def basic domain/Langacker: e.g. room: cannot be defined by deeper terms. (Langacker 1987, pp. 147-148) I 32 Abstract domain/Langacker: is then a non-basal domain, i.e. a concept or conceptual complex that is used as an area for the definition of a higher-level concept (Langacker 1987, p. 150). 1. GärdenforsVsLangacker: this is too comprehensive: there is no criterion for what is not a domain. Solution/Gärdenfors: we need a distinction of meaning relations based on similarity judgments and other types of relations. 2. Domain/GärdenforsVsLangacker: domain should be defined on dimensionality (quality dimensions, conceptual dimensions, e.g. light/dark, large/small). 3. GärdenforsVsLangacker: Gärdenfors thesis: many aspects of meaning are based on the relation whole/part rather than on domains. Definition Locational area/Langacker: e.g. color can be localized in the color space The configurational domain/Langacker: e.g. circle: can be viewed as a configuration of points in the area of two-dimensional space. (Langacker, 1987, p. 149). I 33 Criteria/Langacker: what makes an area configurable is our ability to conceive a number of separate values as part of a single gestalt. (1987, p.153) ClausnerVsLangacker/CroftVsLangacker: this can equally well be seen locational (Clausner and Croft 1999(2), sec. 2.2): Space supports, locationally seen, "here", and configurational seen "circle". Tone pitch, seen locationally, supports "middle C", and as seen from a configurational point of view, "minor chord". Gärdenfors: (pro Clausner and Croft): they are right when they apply the distinction configurational/locational to concepts rather than to domains. I go on: Higher-level domains/Gärdenfors: if we accept them, we can assume concepts in one area as configurational, but in a different domain as described locational. Solution/Gärdenfors: a hierarchy of areas. >Domains/Gärdenfors, >Conceptual Space/Gärdenfors. 1. R. W. Langacker (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar (Vol I). Stanford, CA: Stanford Universtity Press. 2. Clausner, T. C. / Croft, W. (1999). Domains and image schemas. Cognitive Linguistics, 10, 1-31._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Langa I Ronald W. Langacker Foundations of Cognitive Grammar Stanford, CA 1999 Gä I P. Gärdenfors The Geometry of Meaning Cambridge 2014 |
||
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-27