CONTENT
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL BASIS OF MNEMONIC VERBS
1.1 Definition and explanation of
mnemonic verbs
1.2 Overview of the semantic
properties of mnemonic verbs
1.3 Theoretical views on mnemonic verbs in cognitive linguistics
CHAPTER 2. ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF THE SEMANTIC
PROPERTIES OF THE VERBS "REMEMBER vs. FORGET" IN DICTIONARIES
2.1 Acquaintance with the selected
dictionaries
2.2 Comparison of semantic properties
of synonyms and antonyms
"REMEMBER
vs. FORGET"
2.3 Analysis of word combinations and
phrases related to "REMEMBER vs. FORGET"
2.4 Studying the connotation and
pragmatic meaning of "REMEMBER vs. FORGET"
2.5. Discussion of similarities and differences of semantic properties "REMEMBER vs. FORGET"
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
Relevance
of the Topic. Language is a fascinating system that allows us to
communicate and express our thoughts, ideas, and experiences. Within language,
verbs play a crucial role in conveying actions, states, and various cognitive
processes. Mnemonic verbs, in particular, hold a special significance as they
are essential for expressing the act of remembering or forgetting.
Understanding the nuances and
distinctions between mnemonic verbs is of great importance for language
learners, teachers, translators, and linguists. The usage of these verbs can
significantly impact the way we express our thoughts, emotions, and memories.
Exploring the peculiarities of «REMEMBER and FORGET» can contribute to a deeper understanding of their
semantic properties, collocations, and contextual usage, ultimately enhancing
language proficiency and communicative competence.
Moreover, the topic is relevant from a
cognitive perspective. The processes of remembering and forgetting are integral
to human cognition and memory. Investigating how these processes are
linguistically encoded through mnemonic verbs can shed light on the intricate
relationship between language and cognition. By examining the semantic
differences between «REMEMBER and FORGET», we can gain insights into the cognitive mechanisms
involved in memory retrieval and forgetting.
Furthermore, the topic holds practical
implications for language teaching and learning. Mnemonic verbs are frequently
encountered in various language contexts, and learners must grasp their
distinct usage patterns to effectively communicate their thoughts and
experiences. By examining these verbs through the lens of different
dictionaries, such as Thesaurus.com, Merriam-Webster Thesaurus, and Collins
Dictionary, we can explore the range of synonyms, antonyms, and collocations
associated with «REMEMBER and FORGET», providing language learners with valuable resources
for expanding their vocabulary and improving their language skills.
In addition,
the topic is of interest to translators and linguists who deal with
cross-linguistic and cross-cultural aspects of language. Translating mnemonic
verbs requires a nuanced understanding of their semantic implications and cultural
connotations. By analyzing how the image of «REMEMBER and FORGET» is represented in different languages and cultures,
we can gain insights into the variations and similarities in linguistic
expression and cultural conceptualization of memory processes.
Overall, the topic "The Peculiarities
of Mnemonic Verbs «REMEMBER vs. FORGET» is relevant and significant in the fields of language
learning, cognitive science, translation, and linguistics. Through the
examination of dictionaries such as Thesaurus.com, Merriam-Webster Thesaurus,
and Collins Dictionary, we can gain a comprehensive understanding of the
semantic properties, collocations, and usage patterns of «REMEMBER and FORGET». This knowledge can contribute to enhanced language
proficiency, cognitive understanding, and effective communication across
various linguistic and cultural contexts.
The
aim of the research is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the
peculiarities of mnemonic verbs, specifically «REMEMBER and FORGET» in usage across different
dictionaries, namely Thesaurus.com, Merriam-Webster Thesaurus, and Collins
Dictionary.
In accordance with the aim of the
course work, the following tasks were set:
1) to give definition and explanation
of mnemonic verbs;
2) to make an overview of the semantic
properties of mnemonic verbs;
3) to offer theoretical views on
mnemonic verbs in cognitive linguistics;
4) to familiarize yourself with the
selected dictionaries;
5) to compare the semantic properties
of synonyms and antonyms "REMEMBER vs. FORGET";
6) to analyze word combinations and
phrases related to "REMEMBER vs. FORGET";
7) to study the connotation and
pragmatic meaning of "REMEMBER vs. FORGET";
8) to discussion of similarities and
differences of semantic properties "REMEMBER vs. FORGET".
The
object of the research
is the peculiarities of mnemonic verbs, specifically focusing on the comparison
between the verbs «REMEMBER and FORGET».
The
subject of the research is the analysis of «REMEMBER and FORGET» as mnemonic verbs, the study
explores their semantic properties, synonyms, antonyms, collocations, and
variations.
Methods
Used in the Research.
The research employs a variety of methods to achieve its objectives. These
methods include:
- Corpus Analysis: The study analyzes
a corpus of written and spoken language to identify the contextual usage and
collocational patterns of REMEMBER and FORGET. The corpus consists of authentic
texts, literary works, and linguistic databases.
- Comparative Analysis: The research
compares the entries and information provided by Thesaurus.com, Merriam-Webster
Thesaurus, and Collins Dictionary for REMEMBER and FORGET. It examines the
synonyms, antonyms, and related words offered by each dictionary, as well as
the examples and usage notes provided.
- Qualitative Analysis: The study
employs qualitative analysis techniques to explore the semantic distinctions
and connotations of REMEMBER and FORGET. It examines the shades of meaning,
emotional associations, and cognitive implications associated with these verbs.
The
scientific novelty of this research lies in the comprehensive analysis of
the peculiarities of mnemonic verbs, with a specific focus on REMEMBER and
FORGET. The study takes into account the analysis of multiple dictionaries,
including Thesaurus.com, Merriam-Webster Thesaurus, and Collins Dictionary, to
provide a broad perspective on the synonyms, antonyms, and collocational
patterns associated with these verbs. The research contributes to the
understanding of mnemonic verbs and their usage in different linguistic
contexts, offering valuable insights for language learners, teachers,
translators, and linguists.
Structure of work. The coursework consists of an introduction, two sections, conclusions and references.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, the analysis of
mnemonic verbs "REMEMBER" and "FORGET" using three
dictionaries, namely Thesaurus.com, Merriam-Webster.com, and
Collinsdictionary.com, has shed light on their semantic properties, synonymy,
antonymy, connotations, pragmatic usage, and collocations. Through the
comparison of definitions, synonyms, and usage examples, several key findings
have emerged.
Firstly, "REMEMBER" and
"FORGET" are distinct in their semantic properties.
"REMEMBER" signifies the act of intentionally recalling or retaining
information in one's memory, while "FORGET" indicates the failure to
remember or the absence of memory retrieval. The verbs differ in terms of
volition, intentionality, and cognitive processes.
Secondly, the comparison of synonyms
and antonyms reveals nuanced distinctions. Synonyms of "REMEMBER"
include terms such as "recall," "retain," and
"recollect," which highlight the active engagement of memory.
Conversely, synonyms of "FORGET" encompass words like
"overlook," "neglect," and "misplace,"
emphasizing the absence or failure of memory retrieval.
Thirdly, the connotations associated
with "REMEMBER" and "FORGET" contribute to their pragmatic
usage. "REMEMBER" generally carries positive connotations, suggesting
attentiveness, control over memory, and the ability to recall important
information or cherished memories. In contrast, "FORGET" often
carries negative connotations, implying carelessness, negligence, or the
inability to retrieve necessary information.
Furthermore, the three dictionaries
offer slightly different perspectives and nuances in their definitions,
synonyms, and usage examples. Consulting multiple dictionaries provides a
comprehensive understanding of the semantic properties and pragmatic usage of
mnemonic verbs, allowing for more accurate and contextually appropriate
language use.
The implications of this study are
significant for language learners, translators, and researchers. A thorough
understanding of the semantic properties and pragmatic nuances of mnemonic
verbs is crucial for effective communication and accurate expression of
thoughts and experiences. By considering multiple linguistic resources,
individuals can enhance their language proficiency and choose the most
appropriate verb based on the intended meaning and context.
In conclusion, the study of mnemonic verbs "REMEMBER" and "FORGET" using Thesaurus.com, Merriam-Webster.com, and Collinsdictionary.com has provided valuable insights into their semantic properties, synonyms, antonyms, connotations, and pragmatic usage. This research underscores the importance of considering various dictionaries to obtain a comprehensive understanding of word meanings and usage in different contexts. It contributes to the field of lexical semantics and provides a foundation for further research on mnemonic verbs and related cognitive processes.
REFERENCES
1. Collins English Dictionary. (n.d.). In
CollinsDictionary.com. Retrieved from https://www.collinsdictionary.com
2. Crystal, D. (2003). The Cambridge encyclopedia of the
English language. Cambridge University Press.
3. Fillmore, C. J. (1977). Topics in lexical semantics.
In R. A. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics: Vol. 8. Grammatical relations (pp.
181-275). Academic Press.
5. Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second
language acquisition: An introductory course. Routledge.
6. Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of language: Brain,
meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford University Press.
7. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a
cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Harvard University
Press.
8. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we
live by. University of Chicago Press.
9. Leech, G. N., & Short, M. H. (2007). Style in
fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose. Routledge.
10. Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic
environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia
(Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). Academic Press.
11. MacWhinney, B. (2005). The emergence of linguistic
form in time. Connection Science, 17(3-4), 191-211.
12. Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster.com.
Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com
13. Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct: How the mind
creates language. William Morrow and Company.
14. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik,
J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Longman.
15. Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman
dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Routledge.
16. Roediger III, H. L., & DeSoto, K. A. (2014).
Experimental psychology: Understanding psychological research. Cengage
Learning.
17. Roediger III, H. L., Dudai, Y., & Fitzpatrick, S.
M. (2007). Science of memory: Concepts. Oxford University Press.
18. Thesaurus.com. (n.d.). In Thesaurus.com. Retrieved
from https://www.thesaurus.com
19. Swan, M. (2005). Practical English usage. Oxford
University Press.
20. Taylor, J. R. (2003). Linguistic categorization:
Prototypes in linguistic theory. Oxford University Press.
21. Ullman, M. T. (2001). The neural basis of lexicon and
grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model.
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4(2), 105-122.
22. Urban, W. (1996). The metaphoric structure of the
human conceptual system. Peter Lang Publishing.
23. VanPatten, B., & Williams, J. (2015). Theories in
second language acquisition: An introduction. Routledge.
24. Velmezova, E. P. (2014). Mnemonic verbs in cognitive
aspect: Russian and English parallels. RUDN Journal of Language Studies,
Semiotics and Semantics, 5(4), 14-23.
25. Wierzbicka, A. (1985). Different cultures, different
languages, different speech acts: Polish vs. English. Journal of Pragmatics,
9(2-3), 145-178.
26. Wilks, Y. (1978). Frame semantics and the nature of
language. In A. Lehrer & E. F. Kittay (Eds.), Frames, fields, and
contrasts: New essays in semantic and lexical organization (pp. 95-103).
Lawrence Erlbaum.
27. Williams, L. (2011). Remembering to forget: Memory,
history, national identity. Public History Review, 18, 85-102.
28. Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (1992). On verbal irony.
Lingua, 87(1-2), 53-76.
29. Ziemer, R. W. (2009). The role of metaphor and
metonymy in language and thought. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(10), 1904-1921.
30. Zlatev, J. (2007). Situated embodiment: Studies in the
emergence of spatial meaning. John Benjamins Publishing.
31. Zoltán, K. (2012). Mnemonic verbs in Hungarian and
English: A cognitive semantic approach. Lingua, 122(14), 1656-1672.
32. Zorzi, D. (2009). Remembering to forget: Irony,
sarcasm, and violence in the study of literature and history. Journal of
Literary Theory, 3(1), 85-106.
33. Żygis, M. (2019). Interactional competence and
mnemonic verbs: A case study in Swedish. Pragmatics and Society, 10(3),
331-354.
34. Žegarac, V. (2005). Metonymy and metaphor: Different
mental strategies of conceptualization. Metaphor and Symbol, 20(4), 249-276.
35. Žegarac, V., Jaszczolt, K. M., & Koutny, M.
(Eds.). (2007). Universal language and its possible implications: Reflections
on the universal language concept. Springer.
36. Žegarac, V., & Kecskes, I. (2019). Lexical and
conceptual blending in metonymic constructions. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona,
& F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds.), Defining metonymy in cognitive
linguistics: Towards a consensus view (pp. 207-228). John Benjamins Publishing.
37. Žegarac, V., & Marković, D. (2008). The role of
metonymy in the construction of fictional worlds. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor
and metonymy revisited beyond the contemporary theory of metaphor: Recent
developments and applications (pp. 309-332). John Benjamins Publishing.
38. Žegarac, V., & Marković, D. (2017). Metaphor and metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Historical background, theoretical foundations, and recent developments. In E. Semino & Z. Demjén (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language (pp. 80-97). Routledge.
Немає коментарів:
Дописати коментар