rss_2.0Linguistic Frontiers FeedSciendo RSS Feed for Linguistic Frontiershttps://sciendo.com/journal/LFhttps://www.sciendo.comLinguistic Frontiers 's Coverhttps://sciendo-parsed-data-feed.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/6169e423da622b0495d3c517/cover-image.jpg?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Date=20211021T174107Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=604800&X-Amz-Credential=AKIA6AP2G7AKDOZOEZ7H%2F20211021%2Feu-central-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Signature=9e3ea180ff2ca79489fb2aa4a6bd990c87142ceedf426f45c865d31baa4d68f9200300Migrant images: aesthetic imagination in experiences of displacementhttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0011<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>This paper addresses the migration theme as an embodied experience performed by myself in two installation pieces, which serve as examples to explore the notions of displacement and territory in phenomenology and semiotic of culture points of view. A mode of performed narrative within moving images attempts to imagine other existences, through cognition and body studies. Presence and politics in ageless aesthetic forms amplify a performativity experience in body and image, related to Greek Hellenic sites and Brazilian countryside landscapes. How do the visual arts act as both a reenactment of a continuous present through affected sites and a dramaturgy of the moving image, through a migrant body in continuous creation of belonging in unknown lands and seas?</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-10-14T00:00:00.000+00:00Explain the law: When the evidence is not enoughhttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0016<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>The article responds to the current variability of research into linguistic laws and the explanation of these laws. We show basic features to approach linguistic laws in the field of quantitative linguistics and research on linguistic laws outside the field of language and text. Language laws are usually explained in terms of the language system—especially as economizing—or of the information structure of the text (Piantadosi 2014). One of the hallmarks of the transmission of linguistic laws outside the realm of language and text is that they provide other kinds of explanations (Torre et al. 2019). We want to show that the problem of linguistics in the explanation of linguistic laws lies primarily in its inability to clarify the internal structure of language material, and the influence of the theory or method used for sample processing on the result of law analysis—which was formulated by Peter Grzybek (2006). We would like to show that this is the reason why linguistics avoids explanations of linguistic laws.</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-10-14T00:00:00.000+00:00On certain consequences of the objectification of languages: a substantivist approachhttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0013ARTICLE2021-10-14T00:00:00.000+00:00Commentary: The status of theoretical divisions in current semioticshttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0012<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>We initiate a new section of the journal, an invited commentary on issues pertaining to the fields of semiotics and linguistics and personal views on what is happening in the field. In this introduction, we assess the current status of the divisions of semiotics into multiple branches and the historical overview of the semiotics/semiology debate.</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-10-14T00:00:00.000+00:00Machine Learning in Terminology Extraction from Czech and English Textshttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0014<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>The method of automatic term recognition based on machine learning is focused primarily on the most important quantitative term attributes. It is able to successfully identify terms and non-terms (with success rate of more than 95 %) and find characteristic features of a term as a terminological unit. A single-word term can be characterized as a word with a low frequency that occurs considerably more often in specialized texts than in non-academic texts, occurs in a small number of disciplines, its distribution in the corpus is uneven as is the distance between its two instances. A multi-word term is a collocation consisting of words with low frequency and contains at least one single-word term. The method is based on quantitative features and it makes it possible to utilize the algorithms in multiple disciplines as well as to create cross-lingual applications (verified on Czech and English).</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-10-14T00:00:00.000+00:00Grammatical Tenses and Communicative Intentions: A case study of the German Perfekt and Präteritumhttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0015<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>Recent research in syntax and corpus linguistics has shown how the German <italic>Perfekt</italic> (present perfect) and <italic>Präteritum</italic> (simple past) are widely used in written language—even though these tenses are commonly described in DAF (German as a foreign language) materials as used respectively in the spoken and written forms. While these analyses only focus on written corpora, an extensive study on the use of tenses in spoken interaction is still missing. In this paper, I try to fill this gap in the literature by exploring the use of <italic>Perfekt</italic> and <italic>Präteritum</italic> in the recordings of the Frankfurt Auschwitz trials, held in Frankfurt am Main, from December 20, 1963, to August 19, 1965, and available on the web page of the Fritz Bauer Institute. Textual analyses of the depositions of five former German prisoners of the Polish concentration camp show that German native speakers use both tenses in their spoken interactions. These results widely contradict their depiction in DAF materials, textbooks, and grammars. Furthermore, the types of <italic>Präteritum</italic> found are far more diverse than is traditionally held by scholars, who claimed that the use of this tense in spoken language is limited to verbs such as <italic>sein</italic> (to be), <italic>haben</italic> (to have) and modals, such as <italic>können</italic> (can), <italic>müssen</italic> (must), <italic>sollen</italic> (should), etc. The outcome of this study shows how the difference between <italic>Perfekt</italic> and <italic>Präteritum</italic> is determined by the subjective attitude of the speakers in relation to the information they want to convey.</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-10-14T00:00:00.000+00:00Second-Generation Semiology and Detotalizationhttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0010<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>The fashionable disavowal of structural semiology as logocentric is easily countered by a review of the important innovations of second-generation semiology, spearheaded by Jacques Derrida, Roland Barthes, and Jacques Lacan. The scope of Saussurean semiology is hampered only by its reliance upon alphabetic language and presence grounded in the voice; the assertion that semiology is a part of linguistics, rather than the reverse, does not reject the existence of nonlinguistic meaning; wordplay and textual experimentation are no mere stylistic ornamentation, but are on the contrary the key strategy of second-generation semiology for exposing the limitations of language. All three of these writers rely upon the glossematics of Louis Hjelmslev for the articulation of the concrete, non-logocentric object of general linguistics — his stratification of the Saussurean sign provides the centerpiece for the synthetic theoretical model introduced here.</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-10-14T00:00:00.000+00:00Russian Formalism vs Germanic Formalism: exploring the concept of European Formalismhttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0009<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title><p>This comparative reading of two conceptual corpora, Russian formalism and Germano-Austrian or Germanic formalism, begins with the idea that the European formalism presents a coherent unit. The continuity of this program authorizes such a comparative reading. The comparative analysis of formalisms in Europe could be a research program aimed at an epistemological reading of the phenomenon of European formalism at the turn of the 20<sup>th</sup> century. This program deals with a rereading of two conceptual fields–Russian formalism and Germanic (Germano-Austrian) formalism. This study seeks to contextualise the formalist project within the knowledge of its time by showing its genetic links with the disciplines of this period and by introducing it as an epistemological fact. At the turn of the 19<sup>th</sup> and 20<sup>th</sup> centuries, the growth of psychologism in aesthetic theories, constitutes a reaction against the dominant scientific positivism in the “humanities” of this period. Stemming from the tensions between “aesthetics from below” and “aesthetics from above,” European formalism expresses and achieves a heterogeneous aesthetic program, halfway between “experimental science” and the “science of lived experience.”</p></abstract>ARTICLE2021-10-11T00:00:00.000+00:00Imitation as Mechanism for Mimicryhttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0005<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>The neo-Darwinian paradigm is unable to account for the resilient, complex forms that evolve in nature and persist across time. Random mutations do not explain the occurrence of organisms that mimic complex forms in often astonishing detail. In the absence of God as creator, or random mutations as the basis for adaptive traits, there is something else going on. The case that I present in this article is that the only possible mechanism for mimicry in nature is imitation.</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-06-30T00:00:00.000+00:00Animalia: the kingdom of signshttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0008ARTICLE2021-06-30T00:00:00.000+00:00Chemiosemiosis and Complex Patterned Signals: A Chemosemiotic Hypothesis of Language Evolutionhttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0003<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>Olfaction, as a semiotic modality, receives relatively less attention than other sensory modalities. However, chemiosemiosis and semiochemicals are fundamental components of zoosemiosis, occurring across animal taxonomic groups. Indeed, olfaction is thought to be one of the most ancient sensory modalities from an evolutionary perspective and significantly, even unicellular organisms, such as the bacterium <italic>Escherichia coli</italic>, utilize a form of chemiosemiosis when foraging for nutrients, as part of a process known as ‘chemotaxis’. Further, many taxonomic groups have evolved to produce dedicated ‘semiochemicals’ (often known as pheromones or allomones) which have the sole purpose of being diffused into the environment as a social signal. In this paper, I highlight the importance of Umwelt theory when studying animal communication, by reviewing the less conspicuous and intuitive chemiosemiotic modality, across animal taxa. I then go on to discuss chemiosemiosis within a linguistic framework and argue that complex pattern recognition underpins linguistic theory. Thus, I explore the concept that chemiosemiosis has features in common with language, when the factor of time, in the transmission and decoding of a signal, is taken into account. Moreover, I provide discursive evidence in support of a unified theory of sensory perception, based on structural and functional aspects of signal transmission and cognitive complex pattern recognition. I conclude by proposing a chemosemiotic hypothesis of language evolution.</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-06-30T00:00:00.000+00:00Semiotic Threshold: Animals and Peoplehttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0006<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>The author discusses the question of whether animals have a language. The article examines the similarities and differences in the linguistic capabilities of animals and humans. The similarity lies in the fact that animals can use symbolic signs to receive and send messages. Among other things, they can receive and interpret signs on a delayed basis without the direct presence of their sender, although to a fundamentally lesser extent than people. The comparison is carried out both for signs perceived by the organism (afferent signs) and for signs created by the organism (efferent signs), both related to communication and the perception of the environment outside the community.</p> <p>The main difference is the possibility of telling about events outside the “here and now” in which the narrator could or may not take part. This is the narrative. No signs of animals using the narrative were found. The resulting differences in storytelling use are hypothesized to be related to additional language functions that have increased in humans compared to animals. People have psychological characteristics caused by the presence of the stage of individuation and separation in development. This allows them to move away from the situation and see it from the outside, which is necessary for retelling. On the other hand, people need to communicate with the help of a narrative, since their society includes a sacred part, whose members receive descriptions of events, requests, questions, and their answers in the form of various signs and the results fortune-telling need a detailed interpretation.</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-06-30T00:00:00.000+00:00: Mimicry as Biometaphors, Embodiment of Sign and Cognitive Tools (not only) in Animals?https://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0007<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>Can Cognitive Metaphor Theory (CMT) be applied productively to the study of mimicry in zoosemiotics and ethology? In this theoretical comparison of selected case studies, I would like to propose that biological mimicry is a type of biosemiotic metaphor. At least two major parallels between cognitive metaphors in human cognition and mimicry among animals justify viewing the two phenomena as isomorphic. First—from the semiotic point of view—the argument is that both metaphor and mimicry are cases of semiotic transfer (etymologically: <italic>metaphor</italic>) of the identity / sign of the source onto the perceived identity / sign of the target. This identity transfer, in turn, triggers appropriate changes in the response (behavior) of the surrounding (human or animal) interpreters (e.g. predators). Semiotically, the mimicry turns the body of its bearer into a sign of something else, resulting in the interpreters’ (e.g. predators’) perception of species X as species Y—hence, a type of embodied sign and cognitive metaphor. Second, <italic>ecologically</italic>, a species occupying one niche (e.g. a moth: non-venomous, herbivorous primary consumer) is perceived and identified as an occupant of a different niche (e.g. a hornet: venomous, omnivorous predator). Thus, a potential predator’s <italic>Umwelt</italic> is affected by its perceiving a hornet moth as “a hornet” where there is, in fact, a moth, and its response to this stimulus will not be predation but avoidance. In terms of CMT, we could call this a biosemiotic metaphor (bio-metaphor), e.g. “A MOTH IS A HORNET” or “PREY IS A PREDATOR”. Further correspondences between mimicry and metaphor include the fact that this bio-metaphorical identification by mimicry does not typically require a “perfect” resemblance between the source and the target sign (or species); this seems to correspond to the prototype categorization in CMT where categories are “open-ended” and only a partial similarity is sufficient for metaphorical identification (compare Lakoff, Johnson 1980; Rosch 1983). Such an identification of mimicry as metaphor could be based on Prodi’s argument that “hermeneutics is not a late product of culture, but the same elementary movement of life that is born because something obscurely interprets something else” (Eco 2018: 350; Kull 2018, 352—364). Inasmuch as animal <italic>Umwelten</italic> are interconnected inter alia by this natural hermeneutics, the trans-disciplinary approach to the study eco-zoosemiotic interpretants on the basis of metaphor-mimicry isomorphism could open new opportunities in comparative studies of semiosis in human and animal cognition and interactions.</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-06-30T00:00:00.000+00:00Rats, Mice and Humanshttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0004<abstract> <title style='display:none'>Abstract</title> <p>This paper will introduce the results of a study conducted in 2019 about how humans perceive species they have to live with, despite not wanting to do so—liminal species—, specifically rats and mice. The results presented here are part of a wider study about rats and mice in cities, their relationship with humans, the nuisances they generate as well as the various and important roles they play in the urban ecosystem, introduced at the Gatherings in BIosemiotics 2020.</p> <p>The study originally focused solely on rats, which are in a difficult societal context in France, especially in Paris: due to heat waves, planned works and floods, rats are becoming more and more present on the surface, instead of being invisible underground as they used to be. However, some of the results suggest that a significant number of participants are not completely positive about being able to distinguish between a rat and a mouse. In order to present a more precise and detailed overview, it was decided to study the difference not only between the cohabitation issues humans may have with actual rats and/or mice, but also between the semiotic relationships that humans have with the symbolic rat and symbolic mouse. As such, this paper will present the results for both species, with their similarities and divergences.</p> <p>It shows that a significant part of nuisances and cohabitation issues are more “believed” than factual. The paper focuses on how the cultural and emotional backgrounds of participants influence their semiotic relationship with these species, and how the perceived nuisances, threats or issues can vary according to these parameters.</p> <p>This study aims to develop a better understanding of the different elements that play a part in issues of cohabitation between humans—especially urban humans—and liminal species—especially rodents. It will show how some of the nuisances can be addressed, not by coercive methods on the actual animals, such as extermination, repellents or removal, but through semiotic work and education on the symbolic animal, its related myths, superstitions, fears and phobias.</p> </abstract>ARTICLE2021-06-30T00:00:00.000+00:00Machine Learning in Terminology Extraction from Czech and English Textshttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0001<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title><p>The method of automatic term recognition based on machine learning is focused primarily on the most important quantitative term attributes. It is able to successfully identify terms and non-terms (with success rate of more than 95 %) and find characteristic features of a term as a terminological unit. A single-word term can be characterized as a word with a low frequency that occurs considerably more often in specialized texts than in non-academic texts, occurs in a small number of disciplines, its distribution in the corpus is uneven as is the distance between its two instances. A multi-word term is a collocation consisting of words with low frequency and contains at least one single-word term. The method is based on quantitative features and it makes it possible to utilize the algorithms in multiple disciplines as well as to create cross-lingual applications (verified on Czech and English).</p></abstract>ARTICLE2021-05-29T00:00:00.000+00:00Grammatical Tenses and Communicative Intentions: A case study of the German Perfekt and Präteritumhttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2021-0002<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title><p>Recent research in syntax and corpus linguistics has shown how the German <italic>Perfekt</italic> (present perfect) and <italic>Präteritum</italic> (simple past) are widely used in written language—even though these tenses are commonly described in DAF (German as a foreign language) materials as used respectively in the spoken and written forms. While these analyses only focus on written corpora, an extensive study on the use of tenses in spoken interaction is still missing. In this paper, I try to fill this gap in the literature by exploring the use of <italic>Perfekt</italic> and <italic>Präteritum</italic> in the recordings of the Frankfurt Auschwitz trials, held in Frankfurt am Main, from December 20, 1963, to August 19, 1965, and available on the web page of the Fritz Bauer Institute. Textual analyses of the depositions of five former German prisoners of the Polish concentration camp show that German native speakers use both tenses in their spoken interactions. These results widely contradict their depiction in DAF materials, textbooks, and grammars. Furthermore, the types of <italic>Präteritum</italic> found are far more diverse than is traditionally held by scholars, who claimed that the use of this tense in spoken language is limited to verbs such as <italic>sein</italic> (to be), <italic>haben</italic> (to have) and modals, such as <italic>können</italic> (can), <italic>müssen</italic> (must), <italic>sollen</italic> (should), etc. The outcome of this study shows how the difference between <italic>Perfekt</italic> and <italic>Präteritum</italic> is determined by the subjective attitude of the speakers in relation to the information they want to convey.</p></abstract>ARTICLE2021-05-29T00:00:00.000+00:00Sociosemiotics and Metalanguage: The Case of Translanguaginghttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2020-0015<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title><p>The age of transdiscipinarity has brought along the fading of boundaries between disciplines. This has engaged both the fusion of metalanguages that are used for the description of cultures and sign-processes, and the launch of novel proposals for metalinguistic vocabularies. In the case of the study of culture, communication and sign-processes, it is natural that all such developments are connected with the paradigm of semiotics. At times the relevant metalinguistic and methodological proposals challenge traditional semiotic vocabulary, methods and methodological truths. This has brought along the need to recall the semiotic roots of the study of semiosis and communication, and to review transdisciplinary metalanguage in order to avoid possible misinterpretations or unnecessary repetitions of the established agreements in the paradigm of semiotics as a possible ground for transdisciplinary study of human interaction and cultural processes. However, besides occasional theoretical confusion, the spread of the semiotic methodology and vocabulary across applied scholarship has enriched semiotics in its faculties of field studies.</p></abstract>ARTICLE2020-12-31T00:00:00.000+00:00Knowledge, complexity, power: social semiotics as metadisciplinehttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2020-0011<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title><p>This article contributes to this special journal issue by developing concepts and methods from social semiotics to analyse, interpret and comment on text and ideas from the issue plus an RFS-project on interdisciplinarity, knowledge transfer and methodology convergence within and across STEM and HASS disciplines. It follows and extends this project’s focus on three disciplines, politics, biology and linguistics, and connects them with emerging features of contemporary knowledge production, especially complex, problematic relations between scientific and non-scientific knowledges, and new forms of operations of power on knowledge.</p><p>The article develops a modified Kuhnian framework to argue that this project can be understood as a significant intervention into a currently unfolding crisis and opportunity in knowledge. It diagnoses crises of knowledge that stem from inadequacies in traditional disciplinary organisations when confronted by challenges and “wicked problems” arising from the scale and complexity of a hyper-connected world. It sees new opportunities arising from new forms of disciplinary organization, constituted by metadisciplinary structures and functions, within a Kuhnian framework of paradigms and metaparadigms. It uses social semiotics as tool and case study, to show how disciplines can evolve into metadisciplines, and demonstrate the productivity of metadisciplines within meta- paradigm processes.</p></abstract>ARTICLE2020-12-31T00:00:00.000+00:00From Matter to Form: the Evolution of the Genetic Code as Semio-Poiesishttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2020-0014<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title><p>The code is meaningless unless translated. (Monod 1971, 143)</p><p>We address issues of a description of the origin and evolution of the genetic code from the semiotics standpoint. Developing the concept of codepoiesis introduced by M. Barbieri, a new idea of semio-poiesis is proposed. Semio-poiesis, a recursive auto-referential processing of a semiotic system, becomes a form of organization of the bio-world when and while notions of meaning and aiming are introduced into it. The description of the genetic code as a semiotic system (grammar and vocabulary) allows us to apply the method of internal reconstruction to it: on the basis of heterogeneity and irregularity of the current state, to explicate possible previous states and various ways of forming coding and textualization mechanisms. The revealed patterns and irregularities are consistent with hypotheses about the origin and evolution of the genetic code.</p></abstract>ARTICLE2020-12-31T00:00:00.000+00:00Advancements in the Evolution of Human Capacities to Knowhttps://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/lf-2020-0016<abstract><title style='display:none'>Abstract</title><p>The premise of this paper is that there are three distinct and hierarchical ‘categories of knowledge’ (Pharoah 2018). The first of these is physiological knowledge which is acquired over generations through the interaction between replicating lineages and the environment. This interaction facilitates the evolution of meaningful physiological structures, forms, functions, and qualitative ascriptions. Second, there is phenomenal knowledge which is qualified by the utilisation of real-time experience to effect an individuated spatiotemporal subjective perspective. This capability requires sophisticated cognitive capabilities. Conceptual knowledge is the third category and constitutes a network of abstracted principles about the spatiotemporal and phenomenal world of experience. From this starting premise, I argue that human knowledge can still be viewed as impoverished because of the absence of the next category which has not yet emerged. I suggest that this category will be apparent when a fuller understanding is acquired concerning the dynamic nature of concept construction and structuring. This will demand a transdisciplinary and multimodal approach.</p></abstract>ARTICLE2020-12-31T00:00:00.000+00:00en-us-1