The aim of the present paper is to figure out if and how the target words of this study, verbs derived from adjectives with the suffix –ify that were selected from the NOW Corpus, differ in use and show different meanings in context.
In order to analyse the target words to prettify and to vivify this paper will utilise of the technique promoted by Patrick Hanks. His theory of norms and exploitation (TNE) investigates meaning under the aspects of the mental lexicon and collocations. The target words will be analysed in the manner of Patrick Hanks Pattern Dictionary approach as well as the model of extended lexical units by John Sinclair in order to give an appropriate overview of the different aspects and nuances of their meaning.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Morphological Issues
2.1 Suffixation
2.1.1 The Suffix –ify
2.2 Adjectives
3. Approaches to Lexical Analysis
3.1 The Theory of Norms and Exploitation
3.1.1 Pattern Dictionary of English Verbs
3.2 Frame Semantics
3.3 Word Sense disambiguation
3.4 Valency
3.5 Polysemy
3.6 Collocation
3.7 Colligation
3.8 Semantic Preference
3.9 Semantic Prosody
4. Corpus Linguistics
4.1 The British National Corpus
4.2 The NOW Corpus
5. Etymology and meaning
5.1 Pretty
5.2 Vivid
6. Method and Analysis
6.1 Analysis of to prettify
6.2 Analysis of to vivify
7. Conclusion
8. Sources
8.1 Literary Sources
8.2 Electronical Sources
9. Appendix
9.1 The tokens of to prettify
9.2 The tokens of to vivify
9.3 the first pattern of to prettify
9.4 the second pattern of to prettify
9.5 the first pattern of to vivify
9.6 the second pattern of to vivify
9.7 the third pattern of to vivify
Objectives and Research Themes
This paper investigates whether and how English verbs derived from adjectives via the suffix -ify—specifically "to prettify" and "to vivify"—exhibit different usage patterns and semantic nuances within the NOW Corpus. The study aims to provide a structured overview of these differences by applying Patrick Hanks' theory of norms and exploitation alongside John Sinclair's model of extended lexical units.
- Morphological analysis of the suffix -ify and its derivative adjectives.
- Theoretical exploration of lexical analysis, including frame semantics, valency, and polysemy.
- Methodological application of Corpus Pattern Analysis (CPA) for word sense disambiguation.
- Comparative analysis of semantic nuances and phraseological patterns of "to prettify" and "to vivify."
Excerpt from the Book
3.1 The Theory of Norms and Exploitation
While different words participate more or less naturally in a vast number of different constructions, at the heart of any language lie a few very straightforward frameworks consisting of sets of simple, prototypical phraseological patterns that go to make up phrases and clauses and are used by people to make meaning (Hanks 2013: 93).
How do people use words to make meaning? There have been many different propositions to answer this question. Patrick Hanks created his own approach concerning the mental lexicon and the notion that meaning is significant.
Language users communicate with each other using word conventions which have one or more universal meanings. These shared beliefs are closely connected to phraseology and enable conversational communication, a principle set out by H.P. Grice (Hanks 2013: 105).
Although collocations and prototypes “form the very foundation of meaning in language”, they have not been sufficiently investigated by many linguists (Hanks 2009: 1). Attempts were made to create a perfect language and create a collection of precise definitions. This took place during the European Enlightenment. Some approaches even continued to use invented examples of language in order to avoid certain defects such as fuzziness, vagueness and variability, all of which are more than common in natural language (Hanks 2013: 345). According to Hanks, the “supposed imperfection of natural language is in fact a basic design feature, contributing power and flexibility within a robust framework” (2013: 346).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Presents the research aim of analyzing verbs derived with the suffix -ify using corpus-based methodologies.
2. Morphological Issues: Discusses suffixation, the characteristics of the -ify suffix, and the nature of adjectives.
3. Approaches to Lexical Analysis: Outlines theoretical frameworks including the theory of norms and exploitation, frame semantics, and word sense disambiguation.
4. Corpus Linguistics: Provides an overview of corpus-based research and details the British National Corpus and the NOW Corpus.
5. Etymology and meaning: Explores the historical development and current meanings of "pretty" and "vivid."
6. Method and Analysis: Details the methodology used to select data and presents the analysis of "to prettify" and "to vivify."
7. Conclusion: Synthesizes the findings, noting the distinct usage patterns of the target verbs and suggesting avenues for further research.
Keywords
Corpus Linguistics, Suffixation, Theory of Norms and Exploitation, Pattern Dictionary, Word Sense Disambiguation, Valency, Polysemy, Collocation, Colligation, Semantic Preference, Semantic Prosody, NOW Corpus, Lexical Analysis, Prettify, Vivify.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental subject of this research paper?
The paper examines the usage and contextual meaning of English verbs derived from adjectives using the suffix -ify, specifically focusing on "to prettify" and "to vivify" through data gathered from the NOW Corpus.
What are the primary theoretical themes covered in this study?
The study centers on lexical analysis, employing Patrick Hanks' theory of norms and exploitation and John Sinclair's model of extended lexical units, while also touching upon morphological issues and corpus linguistics.
What is the central research question?
The primary goal is to determine if and how these selected target words differ in usage and how they display distinct meanings when used in different contexts.
Which methodology is employed to analyze the target words?
The author uses a corpus-based approach modeled after the Pattern Dictionary of English Verbs, combining qualitative and quantitative analysis of patterns and semantic environments.
What topics are addressed in the main body of the work?
The main body moves from morphological and lexical theory to a practical analysis of the two target verbs, detailing their specific patterns, collocations, and the semantic prosody found in the corpus examples.
Which keywords best characterize this academic work?
Key terms include Corpus Linguistics, Theory of Norms and Exploitation, Pattern Dictionary, Word Sense Disambiguation, and Semantic Prosody.
How does the analysis of "to prettify" differ from "to vivify"?
The analysis shows that "to prettify" primarily relates to visual improvement and social reputation, while "to vivify" carries a stronger sense of intensifying experiences or bringing non-physical constructs to life.
What role does the NOW Corpus play in the research?
The NOW Corpus serves as the primary data source, providing contemporary newspaper and magazine usage of the target words, which allows for an analysis of current and evolving language patterns.
Why are company names included in the study of "to vivify"?
The study includes company names as a distinct category (13% of instances) because the term is used as a brand name to convey a sense of liveliness, health, and revitalization.
- Citation du texte
- Hannah Koch (Auteur), 2018, Corpus Pattern Analysis and Sense Disambiguation. A Case Study, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1027140
