 |
 |
| ||
Creativity in Cognitive Taxonomic Modelling
(by the example of English verbs of non-caused motion)Maxim G. V Belau [BIO] and Albina V. Ivanova (Tambov, Russia) [BIO]
Email: Maximum3000@yandex.ru
ABSTRACT:
According to Wikipedia creativity is nothing else but a mental process involving the generation of new ideas or concepts and new associations [1]. From a scientific point of view, the results of creative thought usually have both originality and appropriateness. In other words creativity is a cognitive process or cognition.
In this case creativity plays perhaps a key role in cognitive taxonomic modelling that is regarded as a method of Cognitive Linguistics. This method leads to the construction of a linguistic structure (or model) based on conceptual hierarchy (or taxonomy) of its elements and includes the scale of ranks which are termed as superordinate level, basic level and subordinate level [2].
By use of cognitive taxonomic modelling it is possible to investigate various concepts and its means of representation in language. This paper particularly deals with conceptualization of such phenomenon as “non-caused motion” and the verbs that represent it in modern English (“move”, “go”, “rise”, “fall”, “rotate”, “oscillate”, “run” and others). They are divided into several groups and verbalize different characteristics and aspects of non-caused motion. By means of creativity and conceptualization we determine the criteria for classifying these verbs and distribute them among various ranks of cognitive taxonomic model [3].
In consideration it becomes clear that creativity as a cognitive ability allows to perceive and analyze outward things or different phenomena in full and then to investigate its lexical representation in language as a system.
LITERATURE
1. Wikipedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity
2. Taylor John R. Cognitive Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. – 621 p.
3. Belau Maxim G. Taxonomic Model “Non-caused Motion”: on Principles of its Constructing // Issues of Cognitive Linguistics. 2006, ? 3. P. 90 –99.
|
||
|
|