<> "The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license."^^ . <> . . "Lexical pragmatics and types of linguistic encoding: evidence from\npre- and postpositions in Behdini-Kurdish"^^ . "Lexical pragmatics starts from the assumption that the meaning communicated\nby a word is underdetermined by its semantics, and lexical pragmatists\nusually study the processes involved in bridging the gap between the\nencoded and the communicated meaning of words. This paper studies\na different but related question: wether different types of linguistic\nencoding can play empirically distinguishable roles in lexical pragmatics.\nCarston (2002) suggests that some words may encode templates for concept\nformation whereas others encode fully-fledged concepts that provide\ninputs to pragmatic processes. Blakemore (1987) argued that some words\nencode constraints on inferential processes rather than concepts.\nBut if some words might encode nothing more than concept-formation\ntemplates, and others procedural constraints, then both types of words\nappear to be highly context dependent and their linguistic semantics\nrather abstract in nature. Is it possible to distinguish these different\ntypes of encoding empirically? In this paper I want to argue that\nthe answer to this question is positive. In Behdini-Kurdish, there\nis a class of four fundamental prepositions *di* 'in', *li*\n'at', *ji* 'from', *bi* 'with'. Furthermore, there is a\nlarger class of simple prepositions such as *ser* 'on', *nav*\n'within', *ber* 'in front'. These simple prepositions can be\nadded to one of the fundamental prepositions to form compound ones:\n*diser* 'on top of', *dinav* 'inside', *diber* 'in\nfront of, in sight of'. Any fundamental, simple or compound preposition\ncan be used together with one of three postpositions *da*, *ra*\nand *ve*. Postpositions are morphologically and syntactically\nsimple, in contrast to prepositions. Though overlapping in meaning\nwith prepositions, they are not redundant. Fundamental prepositions\nhave a wider range of meaning than simple prepositions and compound\nprepositions. Finally, there are grammaticalisation paths from nouns\nthrough compound preposition to simple prepositions, but none involving\nthe postpositions. My thesis is that these properties of the Behdini-Kurdish\nsystem of pre-and postpositions can be explained on the assumptions\nthat the class of fundamental prepositions encodes templates for ad-hoc\nconcept construction, the class of simple prepositions encodes concepts\nthat allow the construction of ad-hoc concepts, and that the class\nof postpositions encode procedures constraining ad-hoc concept construction.\nThis thesis gets additional support from German prepositional phrases.\nI conclude that the different types of linguistic encoding discussed\ndo indeed lead to distinct effects in lexical pragmatics and are therefore\nempirically distinguishable. Thus, while there is reason to think\nthat a unified account of the pragmatic processes involved in lexical\npragmatics is possible (Wilson, to appear), the different\ntypes of inputs to these processes need to be recognised. "^^ . "2005" . . . . . . . . "Christoph"^^ . "Unger"^^ . "Christoph Unger"^^ . . . . . . "Lexical pragmatics and types of linguistic encoding: evidence from\npre- and postpositions in Behdini-Kurdish (PDF)"^^ . . . . . . . . . "lexprag_pre_post_04a.pdf"^^ . . . "Lexical pragmatics and types of linguistic encoding: evidence from\npre- and postpositions in Behdini-Kurdish (Image (PNG))"^^ . . . . . . "preview.png"^^ . . . "Lexical pragmatics and types of linguistic encoding: evidence from\npre- and postpositions in Behdini-Kurdish (Indexer Terms)"^^ . . . . . . "indexcodes.txt"^^ . . "HTML Summary of #5465 \n\nLexical pragmatics and types of linguistic encoding: evidence from\npre- and postpositions in Behdini-Kurdish\n\n" . "text/html" . . . "Semantics" . . . "Pragmatics" . .