SOCIOCULTURAL BACKGROUND AND THE SEMANTIC CHANGE OF THE CONCEPT CHOICE (a case study poetic texts by John Keats)
Abstrakt
The aim of the paper is to prove the hypothesis: the conceptual schema Choice verbally embodied into the text is formed on the basis of interpretation of conceptual structures represented by socio-cultural experience. The article deals with the concept of Choice in terms of its history, etymology and change. The author tries to analyse the concept of Choice and to compare it with original meaning and different opinions in order to clarify it. The relevance of the paper is due to the need to identify the common and specific features in poetry of John Keats. And also the interrelation of language and context, which will promote the better understanding of the rational worldview reflected in the linguistic pictorial version of the universe. The relevance of my topic is also confirmed by the fact that raised understanding as a cognitive choice that is hard for everyone to make, which carries with it many consequences, which disposes of the concepts of imposition of good and evil, dark and light, freedom and slavery, life and death. The concept Choice is a central category of philosophy. It expresses ideas about human existence. It is the level of all that is positive and all that is negative in human life. Through the prism of this concept, human actions are evaluated.
Wykaz bibliografii
2. Barsalou, L. W. (2005). Abstraction as Dynamic Interpretation in Perceptual Symbol Systems. In L. Gershkoff-Stowe & D. H. P. 309–311.
3. Beaugrande, R., Dressier, W. (1981). Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman.
4. Brown, P., Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Collected Poems and Two Plays of John Keats, (1966). Edited by M.L. Rosentbal. New York : Collier Books.
6. Copeland, J. E. (1984). New Directions in Linguistics and Semantics. Houston: Rice University Studies.
7. Deik, T.A. van, Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York : Academic Press.
8. Edwards, D. (1997). Discourse and cognition. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
9. Fodor, J. A. (1998). Concepts: Where Cognitive Science Went Wrong. New York : Oxford University Press.
10. Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and Conversation // In Cole, P., Morgan, J.L. Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3: Speech acts. London: Academic Press. P. 41–58.
11. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. English Language Series, London: Longman.
12. Keats, John: Selections, (2010). New York : Collier Books.
13. Keller, R. (1994). On Language Change. London: Routledge.
14. Lakoff, G., Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
15. McMahon, A. (2000). Change, Chance, and Optimality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Pinker, Steven. (1999). How the mind works. New York: W.W. Norton.
17. Wierzbicka, A. (2003). Cross-cultural Pragmatics: The Semantics of Human interaction. Berlin / NY: Walter de Gruyter.
Abstract views: 75 PDF Downloads: 33
