Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton January 14, 2021

A diachronic analysis of the FIRE character

Danqing Huang, Dirk Geeraerts and Weiwei Zhang
From the journal Chinese Semiotic Studies

Abstract

Chinese radicals are the semantic components of Chinese characters that generally indicate major concepts and categories. Characters that share the same radical may be semantically linked in various ways to the broad semantic category that the radical represents, and radicals may thus be considered a categorization mechanism to distinguish lexical meanings. Given the fact that FIRE is an independent character that can also be used as a radical in composite characters, the question arises as to what extent the semantic developments of the FIRE character and the FIRE radical are similar, i.e. does the FIRE radical develop independently of the FIRE character? Against the background of this question, this paper studies the diachronic semantic structure of the FIRE character, which will be compared to the FIRE radical in composite characters in follow-up studies. The analysis shows that the overall diachronic development of the FIRE character exhibits prototypical characteristics and a radial network structure.


Corresponding author: Danqing Huang, Quantitative Lexicology and Variational Linguistics, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium, e-mail:

  1. Funding: This research was supported with a grant from the China Scholarship Council–CSC (File No. 201708330249).

References

Allan, Kathryn & Justyna A. Robinson (eds.). 2012. Current methods in historical semantics (Topics in English Linguistics 73). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Zelin. 1989. 阴阳五行 [Yin-yang and five elements]. In Jin Wentao (ed.), 家庭医学全书 [Family medicine], 997–1002. Shanghai: Shanghai Science and Technology Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Rong. 2012. Water networks, the Chinese radical, and beyond. In Thomas Fuyin Li (ed.), Compendium of cognitive linguistics research (Language and linguistics), vol. 1, 91–115. New York: Nova Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

Dirven, René & Ralf Pörings (eds.). 2002. Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (Cognitive linguistics research 20). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Gablasova, Dana, Vaclav Brezina & Tony McEnery. 2019. The Trinity Lancaster Corpus: Development, description and application. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 5(2). 126–158. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.19001.gab.Search in Google Scholar

Geeraerts, Dirk. 1989. Prospects and problems of prototype theory. Linguistics 27(4). 587–612.Search in Google Scholar

Geeraerts, Dirk. 1997. Diachronic prototype semantics. A contribution to historical lexicology (Oxford Studies in Lexicography and Lexicology). Oxford: The Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar

Geeraerts, Dirk. 2006. Words and other wonders: Papers on lexical and semantic topics (Cognitive Linguistics Research 33). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Geeraerts, Dirk. 2007. Family resemblances, radial networks, and multidimensional models of meaning. In Maria Losada Friend, Pilar Ron Vaz, Sonia Hernández Santano & Jorge Casanova (eds.), Proceedings of the XXX AEDEAN conference, 1–11. Huelva: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Huelva.Search in Google Scholar

Geeraerts, Dirk, Stefan Grondelaers & Peter Bakema. 1994. The structure of lexical variation. Meaning, naming, and context. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Gilquin, Gaëtanelle & Stefan T. Gries. 2009. Corpora and experimental methods: A state-of-the-art review. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 5(1). 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1515/CLLT.2009.001.Search in Google Scholar

Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics), 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hsieh, Shu-Kai. 2006. Hanzi, concept and computation: A preliminary survey of Chinese characters as a knowledge resource in NLP. Tübingen: Universität Tübingen Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Jiang, Shaoyu. 1989. 古汉语词汇纲要 [Essentials of ancient Chinese lexical semantics]. Beijing: Peking University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jiang, Yanping. 2014. 部首“艹”的古文构形来源及发展演变 [The origin and evolution of the GRASS radical (“艹”)]. 现代语文(语言研究版) [Modern Chinese] 01. 94–96.Search in Google Scholar

Labov, William. 1973. The boundaries of words and their meanings. In Charles-James N. Bailey & Roger W. Shuy (eds.), New ways of analyzing variation in English, 340–373. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 2003 [1980]. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Concept, image, and symbol. The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin/New York: Mouton De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Lu, Zongda & Ning Wang. 1994. 训诂与训诂学 [Exegesis and exegetical studies]. Taiyuan: Shanxi Education Press.Search in Google Scholar

Luo, Zhufeng (ed.). 1991. 汉语大词典 [The great dictionary of Chinese], vol. 7. Shanghai: Publishing House of The Great Dictionary of Chinese.Search in Google Scholar

McEnery, Tony, Richard Xiao & Yukio Tono. 2006. Corpus-based language studies: An advanced resource book (Routledge Applied Linguistics). New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Qiu, Xigui. 1988. 文字学概要 [Essentials of Chinese philology]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar

Rastier, François. 1999. Cognitive semantics and diachronic semantics: The values and evolution of classes. In Andreas Blank & Peter Koch (eds.), Historical semantics and cognition, 109–144. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Rosch, Eleanor & Carolyn B. Mervis. 1975. Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7(4). 573–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9.Search in Google Scholar

Uher, David. 2012. 《说文解字》学说、字源、文化 [The structure analysis of primary characters and meaning explanation of secondary characters: Theory, etymology and culture]. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Vanhove, Martine (ed.). 2008. From polysemy to semantic change: Towards a typology of lexical semantic associations (Studies in Language Companion Series 106). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Li. 1958. 汉语史稿 [The history of the Chinese language]. China: Science Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Ning. 1996. 训诂学原理 [Principles of exegesis]. Beijing: China Foreign Languages Publishing Administration.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Yunlu. 2010. 中古汉语词汇史 [History of ancient and middle Chinese lexical]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Ning. 2016. 汉字构形学导论 [Introduction of Chinese characters formation]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Weihui. 2018. 汉语核心词的历史与现状研究 [Research on the history and current situation of Chinese core words]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar

Watson, Burton (trans.). 2013. The complete works of Zhuangzi. Translations from the Asian classics. New York: Columbia University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Winters, Margaret E., Heli Tissari & Kathryn Allan (eds.). 2010. Historical cognitive linguistics (Cognitive Linguistics Research 47). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Search in Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1986 [1953]. Philosophical investigations. Translated by Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret Anscombe, 3rd edn. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Xu, Shen. 1963. 说文解字 [An analysis and explanation of characters]. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.Search in Google Scholar

Xu, Zhongshu (ed.). 1988. 汉语大字典 [The great dictionary of characters], vol. 3. Chengdu: Xinhua Winshare Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Yang, He. 2017. The semantic categorization of radical “辵” (chuò) in ShuoWenJieZi (《說文解字》). US–China Foreign Language 15(7). 429–436. https://doi.org/10.17265/1539-8080/2017.07.003.Search in Google Scholar

Yeh, Su-Ling, Wei-Lun Chou & Pokuan Ho. 2017. Lexical processing of Chinese sub-character components: Semantic activation of phonetic radicals as revealed by the Stroop effect. Scientific Reports 7(1). 15782. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-15536-w.Search in Google Scholar

Yin, John Jing-Hua. 2016. Chinese characters. In Chan Sin-Wai, James Minnett & Florence Li Wing Yee (eds.), The Routledge encyclopedia of the Chinese language, 53–63. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Yu, Ning. 2009. The Chinese HEART in a cognitive perspective: Culture, body, and language (Applications of Cognitive Linguistics 12). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2021-01-14
Published in Print: 2021-02-23

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston