tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7428523453680685137.post3775279569882233260..comments2023-04-20T19:10:20.931+02:00Comments on Poe: FAVOURITE SUBJECTS (1)Juan F.http://www.blogger.com/profile/13843377279089478929noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7428523453680685137.post-77665944381663507502008-07-18T22:35:00.000+02:002008-07-18T22:35:00.000+02:00Well, I’m not that sure that all linguistic studie...Well, I’m not that sure that all linguistic studies are merely descriptive. If I mentioned ‘prototype theory’ as something I found interesting, it is because it opened my mind to a new way of looking at categories, linguistic of course because we deal with words but, above all, conceptual. To think about how concepts, and consequently language, are influenced by cultural or geographical conditions allows us to be more critical towards ‘absolutes’ and therefore more understanding towards others’ choice of words or points of view. But I also believe that this theory is just one approach as valid as other approaches such as the logical categorisations based on semantic features. Summarising, I’d say that description, analysis, attempts to explain mental and language phenomena… help understand a bit better (just a bit, it is true) the world around us in general and human behaviour in particular.Maite P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/05177768315978171980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7428523453680685137.post-13265890522420902372008-07-17T20:50:00.000+02:002008-07-17T20:50:00.000+02:00I´m sorry very much, believe me. I would like not ...I´m sorry very much, believe me. I would like not to think this way but I can´t help it. With many aspects of Linguistics my attitude is a little skeptical. I mean, all right: "natural conceptual categories are structured around the 'best' examples or prototypes of the categories, and that other items are assimilated to a category according to whether they sufficiently resemble the prototype or not" That´s true, so what? In which way this unquestionable axiom affects life, or my use of language or whatever? <BR/>It seems to me that what linguistics does is, often, just ‘describe the landscape’. For example, you are with your mate, your best friend or your favourite pet, watching the landscape at dusk, by the sea. And she/he/it says:<BR/>“Nice sunset, uh?”<BR/>And you: <BR/>“Yeeah, really nice!” <BR/>And then, you both watch how the sun sets, slowly, peacefully… But, what does such clever comment add to the reality of the world that you were already seeing? I´m afraid that it happens the same with many linguistic statements.<BR/>The Reluctant GrammarianAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7428523453680685137.post-66446481083998017622008-07-17T12:31:00.000+02:002008-07-17T12:31:00.000+02:00I had the idea that SEMANTICS did not captivate me...I had the idea that SEMANTICS did not captivate me but now that I revise concepts like prototype theory I think what I did not like about it had more to do with the way it was presented, at least in my year, than with the contents of it, lots of pages to photocopy from the Cruse and Saeed books if you did not buy them and also the two parts of the exam, one being a multiple choice test, rather than the contents.<BR/><BR/>I also remember enjoying paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations, Speech Acts and so on. The fact that I took PRAGMATICS the following year makes me think so. <BR/><BR/>Beatriz.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com