SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Avrasya Terim Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 2

An Essay on Glossary of Cognitive Ethnolinguistics

Bilişsel Budun Dil Bilimi Üzerine Bir Sözlükçe Denemesi

Şahru PİLTEN UFUK
Pages
24–34
Publication Date
2018-10-03
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)

In this direction, an alphabetical glossary containing 86 terms of the basic concepts of cognitive ethnolinguistics has been prepared.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Cognitive ethnolinguistics is an interdisciplinary field that has developed since the second half of the twentieth century.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Although it is a research field that gains importance in the international scientific scene, there are almost no studies on cognitive ethnolinguistics in the Turkish literature.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this direction, an alphabetical glossary containing 86 terms of the basic concepts of cognitive ethnolinguistics has been prepared.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Cognitive ethnolinguistics is an interdisciplinary field that has developed since the second half of the twentieth century. Although it is a research field that gains importance in the international scientific scene, there are almost no studies on cognitive ethnolinguistics in the Turkish literature. With this study, it is aimed to introduce the basic concepts of cognitive ethnolinguistics and present the Turkish equivalents for these terms to the scientific world in a compact way. In this direction, an alphabetical glossary containing 86 terms of the basic concepts of cognitive ethnolinguistics has been prepared.

Özet

Bilişsel budun dil bilimi XX. yüzyılın ikinci yarısından itibaren gelişen disiplinler arası bir bilim dalıdır. Dünyada giderek önem kazanan bir alan olmasına karşın Türk literatüründe bilişsel budun dil bilimi üzerine yapılmış çalışmalar yok denecek kadar azdır. Bu çalışmayla, bilişsel budun dil bilimine ait temel kavramlarının tanıtılması ve bu terimler için tarafımızdan kullanılan Türkçe karşılıkların bilim âlemine sunulması amaçlanmaktadır. Bu doğrultuda bilişsel budun dil biliminin temel kavramlarını içeren 86 terimlik alfabetik bir sözlükçe hazırlanmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

UFUK, Ş. P. (2018). An Essay on Glossary of Cognitive Ethnolinguistics. Avrasya Terim Dergisi, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 2, 24–34. https://ajindex.com/articles/258794

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Aitchison, J., 1987. Words in the Mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon. Basil Blackwell, Oxford. Atran, S., 1998. Folk biology and the anthropology of science: cognitive universals and cultural particulars. Behav Brain Sci., 21, 547–569.
  2. Atran, S., 1999. Folkbiology. In: Wilson, R. ve Keil, F., (Ed.), The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences. MIT Press,
  3. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Londra, England, 316-317.
  4. Barsalou, L. W., 1985. Ideals, central tendency, and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 629– 654. Berlin, B., 1992. Ethnobiological classification. Principles of categorization of plants and animals in traditional societies. Princeton University Press,
  5. Princeton. Berlin, B., Breedlove, D. E. ve Raven, P. H., 1973. General Principles of Classification and Nomenclature in Folk Biology. Amer. Anthro. 75: 214-42.
  6. Berlin, B., Breedlove, D. E. ve Raven, P. H., 1968. Covert Categories and Folk Taxonomies. Amer. Anthro. 70: 290-99.
  7. Berlin, B., Breedlove, D. E. ve Raven, P. H., 1974. Principles of Tzeltal Plant Classification: An Introduction to the Botanical Ethnography of a Mayan Speaking Community in Highland Chiapas. Academic Press,
  8. New York. Berlin, B. ve Kay, P., 1969. Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution. University of California Press,
  9. Berkeley. Brown, C. H., 1984. Language and Living Things: Uniformities in Folk Classification and Naming. Rutgers University Press,
  10. New Brunswick, N.J. Brown, C. H., 2000. Folk Classification: An Introduction. Minnis, P.E., (Ed.), Ethnobotany: A reader. University of Oklahoma Press, 65-70.
  11. Conklin, H. C., 1962. Lexicographical treatment of folk taxonomies. International Journal of American Linguistics 28: 119-141.
  12. Ellen, F. R., 1993. The cultural relations of classification: an analysis of Nuaulu animal categories from central Seram. Cambridge University Press,
  13. Cambridge. Fillmore, C. J., 1982. Frame semantics. The Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm. Hanshin, Seoul, 111-37.
  14. Forth, G., 1995. Ethnozoological Classification and Classificatory Language among the Nage of Eastern Indonesia. Journal of Ethnobiology 15:45–69.
  15. Frake, C. O., 1961. The diagnosis of disease among the Subanum of Mindanao. American Anthropologist 63:113-32.
  16. Frake, C. O., 1962. Cultural ecology and ethnography. American Anthropologist, 64: 53-59. Güncel Türkçe Sözlük. http://www.tdk.g