Luận văn thạc sĩ dạng bị động trong tiếng anh dưới góc độ ngữ nghĩa học tri nhận (có liên hệ tiếng việt) doctoral dissertation linguistics 62 22 15 01

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION Rationale Passive sentences are typical structures in Indo-European languages A lot of research about the passive phenomenon has been done, providing a wide variety of features of passive structures cross-linguistically (e.g Keenan, 1976; Freidin, 1975; Permutter, 1978; Zaenen, 1983; Langacker, 1990; Tomlin, 1995.) Each school of linguistics has displayed its own ways of analyzing the passive structures, thus posing trouble for learners and for novice researchers in settling a standpoint in grasping and understanding the fundamental semantic and syntactic structure of this phenomenon in languages The following example illustrates this point Sentences (a) and (b) below describe a state in which a male person carries a box from one place to another: (a) He moved the box into the room (b) The box was moved into the room (by him.) Both sentences, (a) and (b), refer to one event with the same actor Syntactically, sentence (a) differs from sentence (b) in that the subject/doer in (b) is optional or left out entirely, or optionally expressed obliquely via a by-phrase, and that the object in (a) serves as the subject/patient in (b.) Traditional grammar treats passive voice as the change of the morphology in verbs, with the inversion of the subject and object of the sentences Then, (b) can be seen as a new version of (a) with a change in the verb „move‟ and an exchange of location in the subject and object of the original sentence (a) It has been argued in transformational grammar that passive sentences derive from a D-structure form of so-called active sentences It is the NP-MOVEMENT (c.f Radford, 1988:420) that brings to life passive sentences Generative grammar z offers an analysis of the change from active to passive structures, attributing the shift through a „multilevel syntagmatic structure‟ in which the „deep structure (or initial stratum) is basically active in organization‟ (Langacker, 1990.) Passive structures are also argued to belong to a class of expression known as idioms chunks (c.f Radford, 1988:422.) And NPs in passive sentences not have the same syntactic freedom of distribution as other NPs Another argument is formulated in relation to thematic relations It is claimed that active Objects (i.e Objects of active sentences) play the same thematic role as the corresponding passive Subjects Another view on passive voice comes from Functionalism Functional grammar divides passive structure into three subcategories, depending on the functions that the speakers would like to convey It is called the pragmatic function of the sentence For example, when the Agent of the action is unknown to the writers or speakers, passive structures are preferred Or when the focus of the sentence is the action and the effects of the action, not the doer of the action, passive constructions are applied (c.f Halliday, 1994; Lock, 1996; Downing and Locke, 1992; Givon, 1995.) Semantically, a functional grammarian analyzes constituents in passive grammar based on the functions of the participants in the sentence, namely actor / agent, goal, beneficiary, recipient, etc Previously mentioned views of linguistics on passive voice have left drawbacks to language users and language teachers For instance, traditional grammar states that passive voice can be formed if the verb is a transitive one, i.e the verb having a direct object However, not all transitive verbs can be conjured up in passive structures Or as stated by generative grammar, passive structures derive from their active counterparts In reality, no speaker describes an event by forming an active sentence in his/her mind then „transforms‟ it into passives This will be further discussed later in the study z It is not until recently that cognitive semantics (or more generally cognitive linguistics) has postulated a different look at language structures The focus in the study of language shifts from external to internal, mentalist aspects of the human language Researchers in cognitive science argue that the linguistic structure is a direct reflex of cognition in the sense that a particular linguistic expression is associated with particular ways of conceptualizing a given situation (Lee, 2001: 1) They believe that there exists an interrelationship between thought and meaning It is from this point of view that passive sentences are seen from a different angle The root of the differences mentioned above originates from the theory of meaning Generative grammar claims that the structure of linguistic expressions is determined by a formal rule system that is largely independent of meaning Or rather, syntax is independent from meaning while cognitive linguistics claims that language is not an autonomous cognitive faculty (c.f Croft, 2004.) It is therefore absolutely necessary for researchers as well as language learners to take a standpoint in analyzing languages In particular, a thorough understanding and fully developed arguments for the explanation of the structure are crucial A note should be taken here regarding the title of the dissertation Since the word „perspective‟ in cognitive semantics embraces more than one meaning and has subnotions hanging with it, this word used in the title may result in misunderstanding However, the word „perspective‟ in the title is used in purpose The meaning of the word „perspective‟ the author wishes to express is that of „view point,‟ „standpoint,‟ „angle,‟ or the like With the title as it is, the author wishes to analyze the passive structures from the cognitive semantics point of view More than that, the author wishes to bring a metaphor of the word „perspective‟ to the title, hoping to create a profound and thoughtful meaning of the title of the dissertation z Aims of the study The study aims to provide a critical analysis of three major theoretical approaches of explaining language phenomena More particularly, different approaches of linguistics, e.g traditional grammar, transformational-generative grammar, on explaining passive voice will be critically explored, thus indicating their strengths and weaknesses, which will help determine more appropriate ways of looking at this language phenomenon The study aims at presenting another way of analyzing language structures, especially passive structures, based on cognitive linguistics, particularly cognitive semantics, i.e based on four major notions: Perspectives, Figure – Ground relationship, Encyclopedic knowledge, and Prototype An exploration of cognitive linguistics in general and cognitive semantics in particular will be displayed, thus providing a more interesting and convincing way of looking at the passive voice Major tenets of cognitive linguistics and features of cognitive semantics will be thoroughly presented, making it possible to come to a conclusion for the betterment of the new school of linguistics The study will also discuss the possibility of the existence of passive structures in Vietnamese A prototype view will be applied in analyzing the structures, hopefully contributing another view to the debate over the existence of the so-called passive structures in Vietnamese Through the analysis of passive structures, the researcher attempts to present another view of linguistic exploration, interpreting the use of language from the understanding of our cognition through a number of notions in cognitive linguistics, and in cognitive semantics in particular, thus illustrating evidence for the possibility of integrating notions in cognitive semantics in the task of language analysis z Scope of the study As stated previously, one of the aims of this research is to present our understandings of cognitive linguistics and cognitive semantics in particular; therefore, the focus is on displaying major notions of this school of linguistics In particular, the study confines itself to the notions of perspectives, figure and ground, encyclopedic knowledge, and prototype since these four are fundamental in cognitive linguistics Regarding passive voice and structures to be analyzed, the study restricts itself to structures with passive form in the main verb, i.e the passive form of the utterance is in the head verb, leaving behind structures consisting of passive forms in other parts of the sentence, e.g in the to infinitive, such as need to be repaired Also, most sentences used as illustrations come from everyday language, thus setting aside extensive complicated sentences found in academic texts or elsewhere It should be noted here that it is not possible to apply one notion of cognitive linguistics, such as Figure and Ground, in analyzing all kinds of passive structures This means that for each sentence, we have different ways of approaching and applying proper notions for explaining This is due to the fact that language phenomena are various, and as a result, the way to deal with them varies accordingly Consequently, it is impossible to apply one idea to the explanation of all features of language However, the study is not going to categorize or classify which kinds of sentences are applicable for which types of notions since it is not the goal of the study The last chapter in Part II is an attempt of assembling as many notions as possible in analyzing the phenomenon of passive structures, thus providing a broader view on this feature of language - passive structures In short, the study will focus on the facets that are applicable in analyzing passive structures, not an overall presentation of the theory of cognitive semantics z Research questions Passive voice in English, or in Indo-European languages in general, has been widely discussed from different points of view Different papers present different discussions on this language structure This study attempts to seek answers to the issues that have not been adequately discussed by many researchers from different schools of linguistics The questions that the study will investigate will be as follows: a How is the passive voice seen from the point of view of cognitive semantics? Different major notions of cognitive semantics are applied to discuss the phenomenon, i.e passive voice, resulting in subquestions as follows: Subquestion 1: Are passive sentences surface structures of their so-called active counterparts? How are passive and active sentences seen from the notion of „perspective‟ in cognitive semantics? Subquestion 2: How can the notion of Figure and Ground be applied to explain passive structures? Subquestion 3: How can the theory of Frame Semantics and Encyclopedic Semantics be used to examine the acceptability of passive sentences? Subquestion 4: How can the theory of prototype be used to formulate a passive prototype in Vietnamese? b Is it possible to integrate the four notions in analyzing passive voice, providing a thorough and profound interpretation of the phenomenon? z Methodology 5.1 This work is not an empirical study which requires experimental and/or experiential data, which is analyzed using quantitative or qualitative methods In contrast, the study applies the descriptive and analytical methods, presenting the theoretical foundation which is then illustrated by examples with explanations and discussions, thus hopefully reaching conclusions by deductive reasoning A theoretical framework, i.e based on the major notions of cognitive semantics, is established; then examples and illustrations are explored based on this framework In other words, major notions of the cognitive semantics theory are used as principles from which examples are analyzed, thus helping the researcher come to conclusions The examples and illustrations given in the discussion are utterances from different specific situations in daily life Sentences used as examples are cited from either reliable sources or real life situations All the examples from real life situations, though not recorded and not put in the appendices, were sent to English speaking people to test whether these sentences have a high acceptability in the English language More significantly, two native English speakers have been asked to the proof reading, providing high reliability and validity of the examples used in the work 5.2 The research design is presented as follows First, in order to establish a strong argument for the work to be done, all major points of views and the methods of analyzing passive structures are critically illustrated Then a framework is set up from the light of cognitive semantics, i.e a framework set up from four major notions of cognitive semantics Each of these four notions is presented with details and illustrations, with which active and passive structures are analyzed and explained After that, an integration of these four notions is founded, from which passive structures are analyzed from the overall examination of cognitive semantics z This dissertation is divided into three parts The first one is, as a rule of thumb, the Introduction, which provides the rationale, aims, scope and research questions of the study This rationale provides arguments for the necessity of carrying out the research; the aims presents the goals of the study and the scope restricts the study into a certain aspects and leaves behind others for other future research The second part of the dissertation, the Development, presents a thorough review of the literature about passive voice, in English and Vietnamese More importantly, a theoretical framework based on major notions of cognitive semantics is established, providing foundation for the discussion and analysis of the passive voice from the light of the cognitive semantics In part II, there are five chapters Chapter reviews major arguments and analysis of passive voice from different schools of linguistics other than cognitive linguistics Chapter presents the basic ideas about cognitive linguistics and especially cognitive semantics Chapter 3, 4, and are for applying individual notion of cognitive semantics to analyzing and discussing passive and active structures Regarding the necessity and vitality of the analysis of passive voice, Chapter presents different views of different schools of linguistics, and the drawback of these methods in analyzing language Chapter displays how language structures are seen from the perspective of cognitive semantics, providing a foundation for a particular phenomenon, i.e passive structures, to be analyzed Chapters 3, 4, and discuss the passive phenomenon based on the notions of cognitive semantics presented in the previous chapters The last part of the work, the Conclusion, summarizes what has been done, what has not been covered, accompanied by suggestions for future study This part also indicates possible implications for the job of language teaching and learning, hopefully providing an alternative method of analyzing other aspects of languages z Contribution of the study The study hopes to contribute to the development of cognitive linguistics, and cognitive semantics in particular, thus providing evidence for the claim that cognitive linguistics is a convincing and appropriate way to explain language The study confirms the fact that it is feasible to apply notions in cognitive semantics to analyzing and explaining problems in syntax, thus fostering the idea that syntax and semantics are two sides of a coin, and should not be considered divorced from one another The study provides a profound and convincing explanation, with illustrations and examples in English and Vietnamese, to the controversy of whether passive voice derives from active voice, which hopefully contributes to the aim of settling the arguments referring to the phenomenon of passive voice z PART TWO: DEVELOPMENT In this Part, a review of theoretical foundation is done in the first half, serving as a background for the study to be carried out in the rest of the part This part consists of five chapters The first chapter deals with the arguments about passive voice from three major linguistic theories, i.e traditional grammar, transformationalgenerative grammar, and functional grammar The first half of Chapter displays the author‟s understanding of cognitive linguistics in general and cognitive semantics in particular This chapter confines itself to the major points which will be applied to the analysis of passive voice in the following chapters The chapter starts with a definition of technical terms which will be applied in the discussion; and it is followed by a general view on cognitive linguistics Then the chapter continues with an illustration of my understanding of cognitive semantics, which serves as foundation for the study The rest of Chapter presents an intensive review of major tenets of cognitive semantics which have been applied in analyzing linguistics expressions The chapter displays four major notions of cognitive semantics, providing a theoretical framework in the discussion of the phenomenon of passive voice in the following chapters The notions include Perspectives, Figure and Ground relation, Frame Semantics and Encyclopedic Semantics, and Prototype Chapters 3, 4, and are the core of the study Chapter applies the four major notions of cognitive semantics, which have been displayed so far, into analyzing passive structures The discussion of passive structures are based on the major tenets of cognitive semantics Chapter deals with the passive structures in Vietnamese Two major arguments about whether or not there exist passive structures in Vietnamese are presented Then the chapter continues with the implementation of prototype theory in 10 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 1.3 More importantly, the study has presented a method of combining major notions in cognitive semantics It is transparent that most linguistic phenomena are „multiply motivated‟, that is, a large number of factors are involved in the process of producing language And we have seen in this study where evidence has been illustrated, that a certain linguistic expression is affected by a number of principles, e.g perception, experience, encyclopedic knowledge The study has presented an integrating method in the analysis of passive structures The interpretation of passive voice would be more profound and thorough when we apply this way of examining, i.e integrating major notions of cognitive semantics for the analysis Also, the study has confirmed the fact that language is part of our cognition; the process of using language or producing language is definitely a cognitive process which involves human‟s perception and conceptualization This has been illustrated with evidence from the discussion of human experience, encyclopedic knowledge, or perception, thus assuring convincing and feasible way of analysis of language, i.e cognitive semantics in particular and cognitive linguistics in general The dissertation has illustrated that cognitive semantics, and cognitive linguistics, has provided us with convincing theoretical framework from which we can base for the task of language analysis Implications 2.1 For language learning and teaching Though there have been no empirical studies of the percentage of language teachers who apply traditional grammar and generative grammar in language teaching, these schools of linguistics still seem to be dominant in classrooms in our country, Vietnam However, evidence has been found to indicate that these schools of linguistics not meet the demand of providing a profound and thorough 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 166 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 analysis and explanation for many language phenomena; and the passive voice, as indicated in this study, is an example Functional grammar is said to have a „strong alliance‟ with cognitive linguistics, but it does not necessarily mean that they have similar approaches and theory Functional grammar focuses on the language use and seems to ignore the underlying processes of how language relates to cognition, i.e the structures and processes involved in thinking and using language, and the relation between linguistic form and conceptual meaning, which is, on the other hand, considered as the major principle of cognitive linguistics Let us look at what Evans et al roughly summarizes as the jobs of major schools of linguistics: While formalists are particularly concerned with developing descriptively adequate accounts of linguistic phenomena and with modeling the representation of knowledge of language in the mind, functionalists have been primarily concerned with exploring the social and communicative functions of situated language use Cognitive linguistics, while functionalist in spirit, is concerned both with achieving descriptive adequacy and with modeling language as a cognitive phenomenon (2006.) Surely, cognitive linguistics has steadily become a more proper gateway for the task of understanding language and of examining the relation of language structure and things outside language It is a model that has expanded its descriptive scope to non-Indo-European languages has accomplished its mission of understanding and analyzing language phenomena (c.f Inglis, 2004.) More importantly, cognitive linguistics has gradually but firmly established itself as a complete and innovative discipline, but certainly not one which for these reasons has ceased to involve nor to expand (Kristiansen G., et al., 2006:2.) Therefore, if equipped with the disciplines of how language relates to cognition, and appropriate methods in analyzing language phenomena, teachers and learners are able to design their own methodology in the cause of teaching and learning respectively 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 167 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 A number of studies of applying insights from cognitive linguistics pedagogical grammar have been carried out (e.g Evans and Tyler, 2005; Tyler and Evans, 2004;) and positive outcomes have been achieved, confirming that the approaches can be employed in language learning and teaching Similarly, regarding the notions presented in this study, i.e perspectives, Figure Ground relationship, encyclopedic knowledge, and prototype, there is evidence that these notions are applicable to the analysis of the passive voice, making it a profound explanation for the understanding and using passive structures, which is vital in language learning and teaching In terms of translation, practical work or theory, cognitive analysis, as the one presented in this dissertation, provides a more unified and general approach This is because cognitive approach explores the relation between language and mind, thus enabling „translators‟ to discover and disclose all obstacles related to all issues, e.g culture, grammar, in translating 2.2 For language research Language has long been the object of study by linguists of many different schools Evolution and certainly revolution in every school of linguistics has been indispensable and inevitable, thus making studies of languages exciting and worth while Recently, cognitive linguistic theories have become sufficiently sophisticated and detailed to begin making predictions that are testable using the broad range of converging methods from the cognitive sciences (Evans, 2006) The key points in cognitive linguistics presented in this study, i.e embodiment in language, conceptualization, etc., have exerted their worthiness and convincing evidence on the field of analyzing and explaining phenomena in languages With a profound understanding of these principles in the relationship of language and the way we humans think, language researchers are able to find appropriate measures for their tasks of dealing with language, from explaining linguistics expressions to 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 168 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 building methods for certain areas related to language, e.g translation, etc Also, we may expand the task of language studies to apply the notions mentioned to analyze language in particular fields, e.g advertisement, tourism, to help achieve the goals/purpose of the dialogue It is worth noting that only by dealing with the relation between language, mind and socio-physical experience are people working with language able to figure out the most convincing and appropriate methods to best study language(s) What has not been dealt with? The scope of study has limited this research to certain areas, leaving behind not a few issues that need to be addressed One thing the researcher left unresolved in this study is a thorough investigation of other structures which relate to passive constructions, e.g in the phrase need to be done Also, the researcher left the phrase traditionally considered past participle phrase, e.g Given a chance to study in the US, + a clause, which is worth being examined in another study Also, a diversity of examples, i.e from different sources, should be taken into consideration in future research Langacker states that in the structures of a passive construction, there are three types of perfect participle, i.e PERF1 as in Jane is gone - designating a state characterized as the final state in a process; PERF2 as in The cathedral is totally destroyed - evoking a conception of a change of state or location; and PERF3 as in The town was destroyed (house by house) - designating the state within a process Regarding variants of perfect participle, this study owes itself a huge part of mentioning this aspect when referring to the semantics of the passive constructions Further research, especially in Vietnamese passive, should touch upon this issue to make sure full coverage of the passive is investigated Another issue that future research needs to examine is the meaning of to be and by from the principles of cognitive semantics (c.f Langaker, 1990: 127 ff.) Similarly, the meaning of and bị in Vietnamese passive constructions must be more thoroughly investigated 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 169 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 Cognitive grammar has recently been serving as popular framework in the field of language studies A combination of cognitive semantics and cognitive grammar for the analysis of passive voice would be interesting and worth carrying out in future research This ambitious plan could yield surprising outcomes – more food for thought 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 170 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: From perception to linguistic forms 51 Figure 2: Viewer’s two possible directions 53 Figure 3: Illustration of two major laws in Gestalt theory 61 Figure 4: Figure and Ground alternation 62 Figure 5: Hypotenuse and its profile and base organization 72 Figure 6: The shift in Figure and Ground 74 Figure 7: Tuesday and its cognitive domain 75 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 vii z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 ARTICLES RELATING TO THE THESIS Trong phịng khách ngồi phịng khách: vài điều thảo luận từ quan điểm ngôn ngữ học tri nhận, Tạp chí khoa học, Đại học quốc gia Hà Nội, số 3, 2007 Áp dụng lý thuyết tính thân việc phân tích số tượng ngơn ngữ, Tạp chí khoa học, Đại học quốc gia Hà Nội, số 4, 2007 Áp dụng lý thuyết khung nghĩa nghĩa học bách khoa để phân tích mức độ phù hợp số câu dạng bị động tiếng Anh, Tạp chí Ngơn Ngữ, số 1, năm 2008 Thị giác ngơn ngữ, Tạp chí Ngơn Ngữ, số 9, năm 2008 Lý thuyết điển mẫu nhóm động từ ngoại động Tạp chí Ngơn Ngữ, số 7, năm 2009 Passive In Vietnamese: A Prototype Point Of View Monash Linguistics Papers, Vol 6, No 2; Melbourne, Australia; 2009 Language and Embodiment Tạp chí khoa học, Đại học quốc gia Hà Nội, số 4, 2009 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 171 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 BIBLIOGRAPHY In Vietnamese (Tiếng Việt) Nguyễn Thị Ảnh, (2000) Tiếng Việt Có Thái Bị Động Khơng? (Is There Passive Voice in Vietnamese?) In Tạp chí Ngơn Ngữ (Language) No 5, pp: 36-47 Diệp Quang Ban & Nguyễn Thị Thuân, (2000) Lại Bàn Về Vấn Đề Câu Bị Động Trong Tiếng Việt (Passives in Vietnamese: Revisited) In Tạp chí Ngôn Ngữ (Language) No 7, pp: 14-21 Diệp Quang Ban, (2005) Ngữ Pháp Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese Grammar) Hanoi: Publisher of Education Nguyễn Hồng Cổn & Bùi Thị Diên (2004) Dạng Bị Động Vấn Đề Câu Bị Động Trong Tiếng Việt (Passive voice and passive structures inVietnamese) In Tạp chí Ngơn Ngữ (Language) No 7, pp: 1-12 & No Nguyễn Hòa (2004.) Understanding English Semantics Hanoi: VNU Publishing House Trần Hữu Mạnh (2007.) Ngôn Ngữ Học Đối Chiếu: Cú Pháp Tiếng Anh – Tiếng Việt NXB ĐHQG Hà Nội Võ Đại Quang (2005.) Một Số Vấn Đề Cú Pháp, Ngữ Nghĩa, Ngữ Dụng, Âm Vị Học NXB Văn Hóa Thơng Tin Lý Tồn Thắng (2005.) Ngơn Ngữ Học Tri Nhận – Từ lí thuyết đại cương đến thực tiễn tiếng Việt Hà Nội: Nxb Khoa Học Xã Hội Hoàng Văn Vân (2005.) Ngữ Pháp Kinh Nghiê ̣m Của Cú Tiế ng Viê ̣t - Mô tả theo quan điể m chức nă ng ̣ thố ng (2nd Edition.) Nhà Xuất Bản Khoa Học Xã Hội In English (Tiếng Anh) 10 Anderson, P K (1989) Remarks on the origin of the term „passive‟ In Lingua Vol 79 pp 1-16 ISSN: 0024 – 3841 Amsterdam 11 Antovié, M (2003) The Position of Semantics within Contemporary Cognitive Science In Linguistics and Literature Vol 2, No 10, pp 415-424 12 Barcelona, A (1997.) Cognitive Linguistics: A usable approach In A Barcelona (Ed.) Cuadernos de Filología Inglesa 6.2: 7-32 13 Bates, E and MacWhinney, B (1982.) Functionalist Approaches to Grammar In Language Acquisition: State of the Art E Wanner and L Gleitman (Eds.) New York: Cambridge University Press, pp 173-218 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 172 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 14 Bechtel, W & Graham, G (1998.) A Companion to Cognitive Science Oxford: Blackwell, page xiii 15 Boeree, C G (2000) Gestalt Psychology [Online] Available at: www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/gestalt.html 16 Bolinger, D (1977.) Meaning and Form New York: Longman 17 Carter, R and McCarthy, M (1997) Get – passive in a conversational corpus Paper presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics, Orlando, March 18 Chomsky, N (1957.) Syntactic Structures The Hague, the Netherlands: Mouton 19 Chomsky, N (1964.) Current issues in linguistics In The Structure of Language, Ed by J.A Fodor and J J Katz, 50-118 Englewood Clifffs, N.J: Prentice Hall 20 Chomsky, N (1981.) Lectures on Government and Binding Dordrecht: Foris 7th edition (1993), Berlin: Mouton 21 Clark, E V (1989.) Speaker Perspective in Acquisition Linguistics, 28, pp 1201-1220 22 Clausner, T and Croft, W (1999.) Domains and image schema Cognitive Linguistics, Vo 10, No 1, pp 1-31 23 Coleman, L and Kay, P (1981.) Prototype Semantics: The English word Lie Language 57 (1): 26-44 24 Croft, W (1988.) Linguistics evidence and metal representations In Cognitive Linguistics 9-2, pp 151-173 25 Croft, W & Cruse, D A (2004.) Cognitive Linguistics UK: Cambridge University Press 26 Cruse, D A (1992) Cognitive Linguistics and Word Meaning: Taylor on Linguistic Categorization In Journal of Linguistics, 28, 165 – 183 27 Cruse, A (2000.) Meaning in Language – An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics Oxford University Press 28 Cuenca, M J (2003.) Cognition, pragmatics and grammar In Noves SL Revista de Sociolingüística Universitat de València 29 DeLanceley, S (2001) Figure and Ground in Argument Structure LSA Summer Institute UC Santa Barbara 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 173 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 30 Downing, A and Locke, P (1992.) A University Course in English Grammar Great Britain: Prentice Hall 31 Evans, V, Green, M (2006) Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction Edinburgh University Press 32 Evans, V, and Tyler, A (2005.) Applying Cognitive Linguistics to Pedagogical Grammar: The English Prepositions of Verticality Revista Brasileira de Linguistica Aplicada, 5, 2, 11-42 33 Evans, V., Bergen, B K., & Zinken, J (2006.) The Cognitive Linguistics Enterprise: An Overview In The Cognitive Linguistics Reader Equinox Publishing Company 34 Fauconnier, G., & Turner (2002.) The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities New York, NY.: Basic Books 35 Fauconnier, G (2005) Cognitive linguistics In Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter 36 Fillmore, C J (1982.) Frame Semantics In Linguistics in the Morning Calm, ed by The Linguistic Society of Korea, Soeul: Hanshin Pp 111-137 37 Fillmore, C J (1985a) Frames and the semantics of understanding Quaderni di Semantica 6.2: Pp 222-254 38 Fox, B and Hopper, P J (Eds.) (1994.) Voice: Form and Function Amsterdam: Benjamins 39 Freidin, R (1975.) The Analysis of Passives In Language, Vol 51, No 2, pp 384-405 40 Gardenfors, P (1994.) Some Tenets of Cognitive Semantics In Cognitive Science Sweden: Lund University 41 Gardenfors, P (1997.) Meaning as Conceptual Structures In M Carrier and P Machamer (1997.) Mindscape: philosophy, science, and the mind Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press 42 Geeraerts, D (1988) Prototypicality as a Prototypical Notion In Communication and Cognition, 21 (1) pp 343 – 355 43 Givón, T (1995.) Functionalism and Grammar Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company 44 Givón and Talmy (Eds.) (1994.) Voice and Inversion Amsterdam: Benjamins 45 Goddard, C (1998.) Semantic Analysis – A Practical Introduction OUP 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 174 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 46 Gries, S T (2003.) Cognitive Linguistics: A Sketchy Overview Paper presented in Seminar, University of California: Santa Barbara 47 Grundy, P and Jiang, Y (2001) Ideological Ground and Relevant Interpretation in a Cognitive Semantics In Dirven, Hawkins and Sandikcioglu (Eds.) Language and Ideology: Theoretical Cognitive Approaches John Benjamins Publishing 48 Halliday, M A K (1994.) An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd Edition.) ISBN: 340 57491 Published by Edward Arnold, a member of the Hodder Headline Group 49 Hilfery, J (2000.) Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction Sketch Barcelona: Universiata de Barcelona Facultat de Filologia, Departament de Filologia Anglesa, Gran Via de les Corts Catalanes, 585 50 Hsiao, Y E (2003.) Semantics and Cognition: An Introduction In Language and Linguistics, Vol 4, No 2, pp 197-205 51 Hopper, P J and Thompson, S A (1980.) Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse Language 56, 251-299 52 Ibarretxe-Antunano, I (1999.) What’s cognitive Linguistics? A new framework for the study of Basque UCLA at Berkeley Paper presented at conference 53 Inglis, D (2004.) Cognitive Grammar and Lexicography Payap University 54 Jacobs, R A (1995) English Syntax: A Grammar for English Language Professionals New York: Longman 55 Jackendoff, Ray (1983.) Semantics and Cognition The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts; and London, England 56 Jackendoff, Ray (1989.) What is a Concept, that a Person May Grasp It? In Mind and Language Vol 4, No and (Spring/Summer,) pp 68-102 57 Janda, L (2000, revised 2006) Cognitive Linguistics University of Carolina 58 Jensen, K E (2004) Language and Cognition Odense: University of Southern Denmark 59 Johnson, M (1987.) The Body in the Mind The bodily basis of Meaning, Reason and Imagination Chicago: Chicago University Press 60 Keenan, E (1976) Some Universals of Passives in Universal Grammar Chicago Linguistics Society, 11 340 – 352 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 175 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 61 Keenen, E L (1985) Passive in the World‟s Languages In T Shopen (Ed.) Language typology and Syntactic Description Vol 1, 243 – 281 Cambridge University Press 62 Kempson, R M (1995.) Semantic Theory Cambridge University Press 63 Kortlandt, F (1989.) On the Meaning of the Japanese Passive Acta Linguistica 24, pp 97-108 64 Kristiansen, G et al (2006.) Cognitive Linguistics: Current Applications and Future Perspectives Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter 65 Lakoff G (1987.) Women, Fire and Dangerous Things What Categories Reveal about the Mind Chicago: Chicago University Press 66 Lakoff G (1991.) Cognitive versus Generative Linguistics: How commitments influence results In Language & Communication, Vol 11, No 1/2, pp 53-62 67 Langacker, R W (1982) Space Grammar, Analysability, and the English Passive Language, 58, 1, 22 – 80 68 Langacker, R W (1987.) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar Volume I California: Stanford University Press 69 Langacker, R W (1987.) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar Volume II California: Stanford University Press 70 Langacker, R W (1988.) A View of Linguistics Semantics In Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.) 1988 Topics in Cognitive Linguistics Amsterdam: NJ Benjamins ISBN: 9027235449 71 Langacker, R W (1990) The Passive In Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive basis of Grammar Pp 101 – 147 Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter 72 Langacker, R (1995) Cognitive grammar In J Verschueren, J-O, Ostman, & J Blommaert (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics Manual (pp 105-111) Amsterdam: John Benjamins 73 Lee, D (2001.) Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction Oxford: Oxford University Press 74 Li, Chao-lin (2005.) Frames of Spatial Reference in Paiwan USTWPL, Vol 1, pp 161-186 75 Lock, G (1996.) Functional English Grammar An Introduction for second language teachers United States of America: Cambridge University Press 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 176 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 76 Maratsos et al (1985.) Semantic restrictions on children‟s passives Cognition, Vol 19, pp 167-191 77 Marchman, V A et al (1991.) Functional constraints of the acquisition of the passive: toward a model of the competence to perform First Language, 11, pp 62-69 78 Martinovski, B (1995.) Three cognitive theories: major differences and similarities – Talmy, Langacker, Jackendoff Paper presented at Department of Linguistics Gothenburg University 79 Mercia, C (1999) The Grammar Book New York: McGraw Hill 80 Murphy, P M (2004) Passive Prototypes, Topicality and Conceptual Space Dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Linguistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 81 Nuyts, J and Pederson, E (1997.) Language and Conceptualization Cambridge University Press 82 Perlmutter, D M (1978) Impersonal Passives and the Unaccusative Hypothesis Berkeley Linguistics Society, 4, 157 – 189 83 Petruck, M R L (1996.) Frame Semantics California: University of California, Berkeley University Proceedings 84 Radford, A (1988) Transformational Grammar – A first Course Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics UK: Cambridge University Press 85 Rice, S (1987.) Towards a Transitivity Prototype: Evidence from Some Atypical English Passive In BLS, 13, pp 422-434 86 Rosh, E (1978) Principles of Categorization In Rosh, E and Lloyd, B B Cognition and Categorization New York: Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum 87 Rosh, E (1983) Prototype Classification and Logical Classification: The Two Systems In E Scholnik (Ed.) New Trends in Cognitive Representation: Challenges to Piaget’s Theory Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, pp 72 – 86 88 Shibatani, M (1985) Passives and Related Constructions: A Prototype Analysis In Language, 61, 821 – 848 89 Schroeder, H (2005.) The Meaning Of “Nature”: Insights From Cognitive Linguistics In Proceedings of the 2005 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium North Central Research Station IL, USA 90 Sinclair, J (Ed.) (1990.) Collins Cobuild English Grammar London: Rupa Co 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 177 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 91 Sinha, C (1999.) Grounding, mapping and acts of meanings In Cognitive Linguistics, foundations, scopes, and methodology Janssen, Redeker, and Gisela (Eds.) New York: M de Gruyter Vol 15, Pp.223-256 92 Sudo, Kami (2000.) Transitivity and Passivization: Object Affectedness as Cognitive Basic of English Passive Paper presented in conference at Tokyo University and Keio University 93 Talmy, L (2000) Toward a Cognitive Semantics The MIT press 94 Talmy, L (1988.) The Relation Of Grammar To Cognition In Topics in Cognitive Linguistics Rudzha-Ostyn (Ed.) Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp 165-205 95 Talmy, L (1996.) The windowing of Attention In Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning Shibatini, M and Thompson, S.A (Eds.) Oxford University Press, pp 235-287 96 Taylor, J R (1995) Linguistics Categorization – Prototypes in Linguistic Theory (2nd Edition.) Oxford: Clarendon Press 97 Taylor, J R (1998.) Syntactic Constructions as Prototype Categories In Michael Tomasello (Ed.) The New Psychology of Language, 177-202 Mahwah, N J., London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate Publishers 98 Taylor, J R (2002) Cognitive Grammar New York: Oxford University Press 99 Thompson, L C (1965) A Vietnamese Grammar Seattle: University of Washington Press 100 Tomasello, M (1995.) Language is not an instinct In Cognitive Development, Vol 10, pp 131-156 101 Tomasello, M (1998.) Introduction: A Cognitive-Functional Perspective on Language Structure In Tomasello, M (Ed.) The New Psychology of Language New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum 102 Torrans, C (1999) Gestalt and Instructional Design [Online] Available at: http://chd.gsc.gmu.edu/immersion.knowledgebase/strategies/cognitivsm/gesta lt/gestalt.htm 103 Thagard, P (1996.) Mind: Introduction to Cognitive Science Cambridge, Mass,: MIT Press, page ix 104 Thomson, A J., Martinet, A V (1960.) A Practical English Grammar London: Oxford University Press 105 Tomlin, Russell S (1995) Focal Attention, Voice, and Word Order: An Experimental Cross-linguistic Study In Downing, Pamela and Noonan, 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99 178 z 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.33.44.55.54.78.655.43.22.2.4.55.2237.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.66 37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.77.99.44.45.67.22.55.77.C.37.99.44.45.67.22.99