Attitudes towards varieties of English in Hong Kong (original) (raw)
Related papers
Hong Kong words: variation and context
World Englishes, 2000
The ideal description of a variety of English is one that is constructed within the terms of the variety itself. This paper discusses a number of issues involved in such a description in relation to the distinctive vocabulary of Hong Kong English. Attention to semantic and pragmatic relationships internal to the variety and the sociocultural context in which it operates is urged. These are illustrated with examples related to underlying definition, taxonomies, semantic opposition and the productivity of localised words.
Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics
The dictionary is based on: Hadumod Bussmann Lexikon der Sprachwissenschaft 2nd, completely revised edition in co-operation with and with contributions by colleagues Kröner All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Meaning In Speech and In Thought
The Philosophical Quarterly, 2012
If we think in a lingua mentis, questions about relations between linguistic meaning and propositional-attitude content become questions about relations between meaning in a public language (pmeaning) and meaning in a language of thought (t-meaning). Whether or not the neo-Gricean is correct that p-meaning can be defined in terms of t-meaning and then t-meaning defined in terms of the causal-functional roles of mentalese expressions, it's apt to seem obvious that separate accounts are needed of p-meaning and tmeaning, since p-meaning, unlike t-meaning, must be understood at least partly in terms of communication. Paul Horwich, however, claims that his "use theory of meaning" provides a uniform account of all meaning in terms of "acceptance properties" that, surprisingly, implicate nothing about use in communication. But it turns out that the details of his theory belie his claim about it.
The meaning of a sentence is not always derived from the meanings of the words it is composed of. It may mean much more or much less than it says. This article focuses on some cases in which the exact meaning of words which a sentence consists of is misleading, incomplete or ambiguous for proper understanding of what is going on.
Bilingual dictionaries provide direct equivalents of words in the target language and very rarely give any additional information concerning, for example, connotations. The paper discusses components of word meaning and shows why it is difficult to establish the word meaning, contrary to what bilingual dictionaries may suggest.
Mechanisms of semantic change: the case of Cantonese slang (2020)
Asian Languages and Linguistics, 2020
This paper examines the mechanisms of semantic change in the creation of ten Cantonese slang words. It demonstrates with synchronic evidence that metaphorisation, metonymisation and (inter)subjectification are three principal driving forces behind the shift in meaning. It is argued that Traugott and Dasher's (2002) Invited Inferencing Theory of Semantic Change (IITSC), initially proposed for and widely used in the context of grammati-calisation, is equally useful for the study of neologisms-in this case, the relatively recent slang expressions in Cantonese. These monosyllabic lexemes are shown to have followed the same unidirectional pathway of semantic change-that is, the shift from non-subjective meaning to encoded (inter)subjective meaning-outlined in their model of semantic change.
The dictionary is based on: Hadumod Bussmann Lexikon der Sprachwissenschaft 2nd, completely revised edition in co-operation with and with contributions by colleagues Kröner All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.