SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2004 / Sayı: 0

Bilişsel Bir Sözceleme Dilbilgisi Modeli: A. Culioli'nin Sözceleme İşlemleri Kuramı

Talat AKASLAN
Pages
123–138
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The theory effectuates this explication by means of subjacent conceptual operations that produce surface structures, which are the markers of these conceptual operations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Of the theories of enunciation that constitute one of the main arteries of modern linguistics, the most influential one is the theory of the enunciation processes.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The iiindamental concern of this theory is how human language operates, how language activity is realized; in other words, how an utterance is construed and which operations are capitalized on.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The theory effectuates this explication by means of subjacent conceptual operations that produce surface structures, which are the markers of these conceptual operations.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Of the theories of enunciation that constitute one of the main arteries of modern linguistics, the most influential one is the theory of the enunciation processes. The present article intends to present the general theoretical frame of this theory that occupies a central place in French linguistics. The iiindamental concern of this theory is how human language operates, how language activity is realized; in other words, how an utterance is construed and which operations are capitalized on. Culioli defines language activity as a cognitive activity of enunciation based on representation, referential processes and regulation, i.e. cognitive processes. This theory is an original model of the cognitive enunciation grammar which aims to explain the human language (or a specific language) defined as a system of the cognitive operations of enunciation. The theory effectuates this explication by means of subjacent conceptual operations that produce surface structures, which are the markers of these conceptual operations.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKASLAN, T. (2004). Bilişsel Bir Sözceleme Dilbilgisi Modeli: A. Culioli'nin Sözceleme İşlemleri Kuramı. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, Sayı: 0, 123–138. https://ajindex.com/articles/162555

References (2)

  1. Akaslan, T. (2002a). [1999]. Semio-Syntaxe de l'Enonciation en Langue Turque. Yayınlanmış Doktora Tezi. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Septentrion. (2002b). Durum-nitelik adlarının anlam-sözdizimi. Dilbilim Araştırmaları, 17-26.İstanbul:
  2. Boğaziçi Üniv. Yay. Bouscaren, J. & Deschamps, A., Dufaye, L. (ed.). (2001). Cahiers de Recherche. T. 8:Modalite et Operations Enonciatives. Paris: Ophrys. Culioli, A. (1968). La formalisation en linguistique. Cahiers pour l'Analyse, 9, 106-117.Paris: Seuil. (1971). A Propos d'operations intervenant dans le traitement formel des langues naturelles. Mathematiques et Sciences Humaines, 34, 7-15. Paris: EHESS. (1973). Sur quelques contradictions en linguistique. Communications, 20, 83-91.Paris: Seuil. (1975a). Note sur 'Determination' et "Quantification': Definition des operations d'extraction et de flechage. ERA 642,1-14. Üniversite Paris 7. (1975b). Comment tenter de construire un modele logique adequat â la description des langues naturelles. J. David & R. Martin (eds.), Modeles Logiques et N'iveaux d'Analyse Linguistique, Modeles Linguist iques, 11, 35-45. Paris:Klincksieck. (1978a). Valeurs modales et operations enonciatives. Le Français Moderne. T.45, Vol. 4, 300-317. Paris. (1978b). The concept of notional domain. S. Hansjakob (ed.), Language Universals. Tubingen: Narr. (197,9). Conditions d'utilisation des donnees issues de plusieurs langues naturelles. Modeles Linguistiques. Tome I, Fasc. 1, 89-103. Lille: PUL. _. (1980). Valeurs aspectuelles et operations enonciatives: Paoristique. J. David & R. Martin (eds.), La Notion d'Aspect. Modeles Linguistiques, V, 181-193. Paris:Klincksieck. (1981). Langage et langues: A propos de la relation entre linguistique et metalinguistique. Conference. Kore. (1982a). A propos de quelque. Contrastive Linguistics, 1-2. Sofia. 1982b. Role des representations metalinguistiques en syntaxe. XHIe Congres International des Linguistes. Tokyo. Collection ERA 642, Complement aıı Volume 2, 1-30. Univ. Paris 7. (1987). La Linguistique: de VEmpirique au Formel. Sens el Place des Connaissances dans la Societe. Paris; CNRS. (1989). Representation, referential processes and regulation. Language activitiy as form production and recognition. J. Montangero & Tryphon (eds.). Language and Cognition, Foundation Archives Jean Piaget. Cahier no. 10. Geneve. (1990). Pour line Linguistique de l'Enonciation: Operations et Representations.Tome 1. Paris-Gap; Ophrys. (1991-1992). St