Fontaine (2017: 12):
If we consider Hanks’ example of BANK (2013:68–71), we can see that an account of word meaning needs to consider lexical semantics and this needs to be reflected in the lexical representation of the model. In considering various uses of BANK such as those in examples (3) and (4), both taken from Hanks (2013:68-69), the question arises whether the senses are related and if so whether “we go along with Pustejovsky, who would say that they are all part of the same ‘lexical conceptual paradigm’ (Pustejovsky, 1995)” (Hanks, 2013:69).
(3) [He] assaulted them in a bank doorway
(4) using a technique of photographic superimposition and then later a system of addition using banks of condensers
Blogger Comments:
[1] To be clear, lexical semantics is an account of word meaning. However, the lexical semantics, in this case, is an approach which, inconsistent with SFL Theory, looks at the word 'from below' as a form to which meanings are assigned.
[2] As previously explained, the notion of lexical representation in a mental lexicon is inconsistent with SFL Theory and 'the known facts of human biology and brain science' (Edelman 1989: 228).
[3] To be clear, in SFL Theory, this question does not arise, because the lexical item is viewed 'from above'. From the perspective of the meaning being expressed, the word bank in (3) and the word banks in (4) express different meanings and, as such, constitute different lexical items.
[2] As previously explained, the notion of lexical representation in a mental lexicon is inconsistent with SFL Theory and 'the known facts of human biology and brain science' (Edelman 1989: 228).
[3] To be clear, in SFL Theory, this question does not arise, because the lexical item is viewed 'from above'. From the perspective of the meaning being expressed, the word bank in (3) and the word banks in (4) express different meanings and, as such, constitute different lexical items.