John Bateman wrote to sysfling on 2 November 2017 at 19:10:
I guess I should say something since the word 'space' came up.... for variety, spice and funny symbols, see:
- Bateman, J. A. Language and Space: a two-level semantic approach based on principles of ontological engineering. International Journal of Speech Technology, Springer, 2010, 13, 29-48.
and for this as a further refinement of Michael and Christian's Construing Experience:
- Bateman, J. A.; Hois, J.; Ross, R. J. & Tenbrink, T. A linguistic ontology of space for natural language processing Artificial Intelligence, 2010, 174, 1027-1071
One of the main points of these papers (derived from our 12 year collaborative research center on space ...) is to open up the 'space' (ha ha) between a grammatically-induced semantics and any contextualised use of involved grammatical constructions so that the enormous flexibility of ranges of interpretation is both made visible and constrained sufficiently so that it can be worked with productively. In the simple cases, one *might*, along that path, get to descriptions of locations-in-space (measurable, movable-in, etc.); in most cases, however, the constructed context is more interesting. One is in any case dealing at least with places rather than locations (i.e., social constructions and not geometry).
Blogger Comments:
[1] See John Bateman Positively Judging Himself.
[2] For a grammatical analysis of this clause nexus, see The Transitivity Of Bamboozlement.
[3] To be clear, "a grammatically-induced semantics" is the SFL model in which semantic potential is construed by lexicogrammatical potential; and "contextualised use of involved grammatical constructions" refers to the grammatical structures that realise grammatical systems instantiated in texts that realise situations. The 'space' between the two is not a theoretical space; the two are related along three theoretical dimensions simultaneously:
- stratification (semantics realised by lexicogrammar),
- axis (system realised by structure),
- instantiation (text as instance of system).
[4] Here Bateman follows Martin (1992) in misconstruing ideational semantics (the meaning construed) as ideational context (the field of culture construed). For Martin's misunderstandings of context see here; for Martin's misunderstandings of stratification, see here. For Bateman's endorsements of Martin's theoretical misunderstandings, in general, see here.
[5] To be clear, on the SFL model, socially constructed "places" and geometrical "locations" are construals of experience as meanings of socio-semiotic systems. For more on Bateman's epistemological assumptions, see John Bateman Denying The Existence Of Text.
