(54.84.236.168) 您好!臺灣時間:2018/12/16 08:03
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
本論文永久網址: 
line
研究生:謝富惠
研究生(外文):Fu-Hui Hsieh
論文名稱:噶瑪蘭語及賽夏語情緒及思想語言之研究
論文名稱(外文):Language of Emotion and Thinking in Kavalan and Saisiyat
指導教授:黃宣範黃宣範引用關係
指導教授(外文):Shuanfan Huang
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:語言學研究所
學門:人文學門
學類:語言學類
論文出版年:2007
畢業學年度:95
語文別:英文
論文頁數:473
中文關鍵詞:情緒語言思想語言語法模式情感系統人觀的民族文化理論
外文關鍵詞:language of emotiontalk of thinkinggrammatical modelaffective systemethnotheory of person
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:585
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:4
本文旨在探討人類兩項最為重要的內在活動及經驗:情緒及思想語言。過去文獻中有許多研究投入情緒語言的研究,可是思想語言的研究則相對的減少許多。然而將人類這兩項最重要的內在活動經驗放在一起探討的研究‚則更為稀少。 這或許應歸咎於西方將情緒與思想,或是情緒與理智,視為兩個絕不相容的範疇的偏執看法。然而, Damasio (1994)的神經生理學個案告訴我們這種將情緒與語言兩分的看法在本質上是不正確的。再者‚先前有關情緒語言的研究指出‚概念隱喻是所有人類語言都使用將抽象概念概念化的唯一途徑。然而Huang (2002a)有關鄒語的研究以及我們有關賽夏語的研究顯示‚概念隱喻並非是將抽象概念概念化的唯一途徑。而且‚諸如Barsalou (1999)等心理學家的實驗顯示‚我們所需要的是一個直接、且非隱喻式的概念表徵。我們因此提出‚語法模式或許是得到情緒事件是如何在語言中被闡釋陳述建構的一個比較好的方式。
我們有關情緒事件的闡釋研究探討了語言使用者如何透過格位指派的手段來闡釋陳述情緒事件參與者;我們的研究也揭露原因(Cause)在害怕事件(FEAR event)及生氣事件(ANGRY event)是相當與眾不同。在害怕事件(FEAR event)中的原因‚可以是泛指的(generic);可是在生氣事件(ANGRY event)中的原因總是定指 (specific)‚或至少是有所指(referential)。而且在不同的語法句式中原因的闡釋陳述也有所不同。在AF句中‚原因被闡釋陳述為中立原因(neutral Cause)‚在PF/LF句中‚則為標的原因(Target Cause)。在賽夏語的RF句中‚則是間接原因(indirect Cause)‚或稱為遠因(remote Cause)。在pa-使役句中‚則為主事原因(Agent-Cause)。再者‚噶瑪蘭語使用tu maqzi句式來闡釋陳述起源原因(Source Cause)‚用pasazui句式來陳述目標原因(Goal Cause)。並且不同的語法句式也用來側錄突顯某位事件參與者:在AF句中被側錄突顯的是經驗者(Experiencer); 在PF/LF句中則是原因(Cause);而在賽夏語的RF句中則是情感感受者(Affectee)。
接著本文也點出情緒語言的研究也不應將語言的情感系統(affective system)排除在外。情感語言涵蓋語言使用者為了表達傳遞他們自身的內在心理狀態或情緒感受或表達對某一事件的態度所使用的語言特色。賽夏及噶瑪蘭所使用的語言策略不同。噶瑪蘭運用較多的詞彙手段‚尤其是感嘆詞及語尾助詞、第一人稱複數代名詞的佈署、報導語言及詞彙框架等策略來表達語言使用者的情感感受狀態。
賽夏則用si-句構來表達他們的情感感受態度;這一si-句構中由兩個次事件組成:事件一是為si-子句譯載了感知事件(percept)‚其功能為感受促發者;而事件二則是感知者經由感知經驗而被促發的感受。此感知者可能會也可能不會因此而採取進一步的行動或因而進入某種心理狀態。每當si-句構被使用時‚總是會有情感感受經由感知經驗傳遞到感知者身上。
根據Goddard (2003)所提出的六個量表‚我們探討思想動詞及其構詞語法句型、詞彙多義、以及隱喻延伸。我們的研究顯示知道動詞(KNOWING verbs)在這兩個語言都是獨特的‚因為賽夏的三個知道動詞‚也就是 ra:am ‘知道;會’、sekla’ ‘確知’、haSa’ ‘不知道;不會’‚在構詞語法句型上自然而然形成一組;他們都接否定詞 ’okik‚而且在使役、名物化及RF型動詞形式‚都有靜態詞素-k-出現‚這些似乎說明這三個動詞比起其他思想動詞更像靜態動詞。而噶瑪蘭的知道動詞則是在ma-標記上與眾不同;其他思想動詞所接的ma-標記是論元價減少標記‚因而整個動詞在句型上像LF句。而知道動詞所接的ma-則是經驗標記‚整個動詞句型則是AF句。而且兩個語言在知道範疇中‚正反兩個語意層面佔有最多詞彙。兩個語言都沒有單一詞素詞彙來指稱記憶範疇中的正面層面‚只有單一詞素詞彙來指稱其反義層面‚也就是「忘記」‚而用反義的否定詞‚也就是「不忘記」來指稱正面層面的活動。
在本文的最後我們則是探討有關人觀的民族文化理論。噶瑪蘭的anem ‘心’指的不只是生物體的內臟‚而且同時也用來當作情緒與思想的場所。要了解噶瑪蘭的anem ‘心’ 必須要了解社會文化的因素‚例如口述傳統。噶瑪蘭用同一個地方‚也就是anem來從事所有的認知活動。雖然噶瑪蘭也有另一個思想動詞qasianem ‚可是在概念上‚噶瑪蘭人認為所有qasianem動詞所指稱的內在活動都在anem中進行;因此我們認為噶瑪蘭的anem ‘心’實際上被概念化為一容器‚所盛裝的內容物不是一分為二的情緒與思想‚而是一個叫做情知(emo-cognition)的綜合體。因為當人的anem全裝滿時‚他是情緒化的;當他的anem只裝滿一半時 ‚他是智能不足的。
賽夏所呈現的情形略有不同。‘心’的概念在賽夏顯得相當微不足道‚不管是在生理上或是概念上。生理上‚賽夏人不覺得a:oe’ ‘心臟’會痛‚他們說是 ka:ala’ ‘胸部’會痛。概念上‚不管是a:oe’ ‘心臟’或是ka:ala’ ‘胸部’都沒有被用來當作思考或感受情緒的場所。賽夏人用’inaz’azem來指稱涵蓋大範圍的思想及情緒內在活動。然而在隱喻的表達方面‚’inaz’azem則主要被用來指稱思想活動而不是情緒經驗。而且賽夏的’inaz’azem似乎不依藉任何身體部位或器官而存在‚儘管有些賽夏人認為’inaz’azem的活動跟頭或腦有關。相較於噶瑪蘭的anem被概念化為一綜合情知者(emo-cognizer)‚賽夏的’inaz’azem則被概念化為帶有情感的認知者;其主要功能是思想的活動‚可是其情緒卻會隨著思想活動的增加而出現。
賽夏與噶瑪蘭在表達肉體病痛上都有特殊的語法。在這種特殊的語法中‚賽夏的身體部位被當作是可切割的個體‚獨立於人存在‚因為在語法上‚它被當作是獨立於人的獨立核心論元‚而且有自己的格位標記。而噶瑪蘭則是將身體部位當作不可分割的擁有物‚因為他都被標記為身體的部位(Location);而且在語法上與人論元同時出現時‚身體部位永遠無法成為核心論元。
簡言之‚本文有關人類兩項最為重要的內在活動經驗‚也就是情緒與思想‚的研究所得到的結論是‚這兩項活動經驗不是一切為二、阡陌分明的範疇。也因此 雖然在人類存在的某種基本層面‚思想與情緒在表達上雖是可分割的‚可是我們的日常生活中他們卻是密不可分的。而且‚情緒語言的研究讓我更加清楚語言使用者如何闡釋陳述情緒事件;換言之‚我們可以經由他們選來譯載此一事件的語法句構來得知他們對此一事件的詮釋角度。有關用來突顯情感系統的語言特色方面的研究‚我們瞭解了言談互動中的互動線索。而探索思想語言‚則讓我們更為清楚我們形上認知的結構。最後‚將人觀的民族文化理論納入‚則有助我們在研究人類思想及情緒語言時避免偏頗或狹隘的觀點。
This study demonstrates an attempt to explore the language of emotion and thought, two of the most important mental activities of a person. Numerous studies are devoted to the study of emotion languages. By contrast, few studies are found to exploring the talks of the thinking. However, even fewer studies are aimed at putting together and investigating these two important mental activities and experiences of human beings. This might be attributed to a prejudiced western view which views emotion and thinking, or rationality, as two experiences that belong to two mutually exclusive domains. However, Damasio’s (1994) neurophysiological cases convince us that the bifurcated view of emotion and thought, or feeling and thinking, as two isolated aspects of a person’s mental experiences is in essence incorrect.
Moreover, contrary to what is claimed in previous studies on language of emotion and thought that conceptual metaphor appears to be a universally preferred strategy in conceptualizing abstract concepts, Huang’s (2002a) study on Tsou and our study on emotion language in Saisiyat reveals that metaphorical expression may not be a universally preferred strategy in doing so. Based on their experiments, psychologists, e.g. Barsalou (1999), urge on us the need of the direct, non-metaphorical representation of abstract concepts. We thus propose that grammatical model may be a better way to get a clearer picture of how emotion events are construed in the language.
Our study on the construal of emotion events investigates how event participants are construed in an emotion event via the case marking assignment. It reveals that the FEAR event appears to be distinctive in that its Cause can be generic. To the contrary, the ANGRY event shows its distinctiveness in that its Cause is always specific, or at least referential. The Causes construed in different syntactic constructions are different (Dirven 1995, 1997). AF-clauses code a neutral Cause in Saisiyat and Kavalan. PF/LF clauses take a Target-Cause in both languages. It is a remote Cause, an indirect Cause, that is coded in the RF clauses in Saisiyat. And the pa(k)- Causative clause encodes an Agent-Cause, who does something on purpose to provoke the Experiencer’s emotional state. Furthermore, Kavalan uses the tu maqzi ‘(starting) from here’ construction to encode a Source Cause, and makes use of the pasazui ‘toward there’ construction to encode a Goal Cause. Moreover, different syntactic constructions profile different event participants. AF-clauses profile the Experiencer. PF/LF-clauses profile the Cause. In the RF-construction, it is the Affectee that gets profiled.
A study of emotion language should not exclude the study of affective features in the language. Language of affect includes those linguistic features that the speaker uses to communicate attitudinal information, relating to the emotional or mental state of the speakers. The linguistic strategies selected by Kavalan and Saisiyat to convey affect are very different: Kavalan employs more lexical strategies, especially interjections and particles, deployment of first personal plural pronouns, reported speech, and lexicon-schema, to represent the language user’s affective state. Saisiyat has affect conveyed in one particular grammatical construction, i.e. the si-construction. In this construction, there are two sub-events: Event 1 is the si-clause, which encodes a percept functioning as an affect-trigger, and Event 2 is the affect triggered in the perceiver via perceptual experiences, who may take an action or enter into some certain state as a result. Whenever a si-construction is used, there is always an affect conveyed across on the perceiver via perceptual experiences.
Based on the six dimensions proposed by Goddard (2003), we explore the thinking verbs in both Kavalan and Saisiyat in relation to syntactic patterns, lexical polysemy, and metaphorical extensions. The KNOWING verbs in both languages appear to be distinctive in that the three Saisiyat KNOWING verbs, i.e. ra:am ‘know’, sekla’ ‘know for sure’ and haSa’ ‘not know’, fall naturally into a group in terms of the syntactic behaviors: they are negated by the stative negator ’okik, and there is a stative morpheme –k- in their causative, nominalization, and the si-(RF) form. This may imply that these three KNOWING verbs are treated more like stative verbs than the other thinking verbs in Saisiyat. The KNOWING verbs in Kavalan distinguish themselves from the other thinking verbs in the ma-forms. While the ma-forms of the other thinking verbs in Kavalan behave like LF verbs, those of the knowing verbs, i.e. supaR ‘know’ and Rayngu ‘not know’, behave like AF verbs and denote a past event or experience. Moreover, both languages have more words in both positive and negative aspects of the KNOWING domain than in the other thinking domains. Both languages have monomorphemic words to denote the mental activities in the negative aspect, i.e. forgetting, of REMEMBERING, and have negation of forgetting to denote the mental activities of remembering. Finally, the THINKING verbs in these two languages are extended from thinking to feeling.
Regarding the ethnotheory of the person, the Kavalan anem ‘heart’ refers to the visceral organ and at the same time the locus of emotion and thought. An understanding of the concept of the Kavalan heart requires an understanding of the socio-culture aspects. Kavalan uses the same place, i.e. anem, for the locus of all cognitive activities. Although Kavalan has a thinking verb qasianem ‘think’, they conceptually conceive that all the mental activities reside in anem ‘heart’. The Kavalan anem ‘heart’ is indeed the container of the content called emo-cognition; and anem ‘heart’ in Kavalan, conceptualized as an integrated emo-cognizer, is responsible for all the mental activities of thinking and feeling.
Saisiyat tells a different story. The concept of heart is of little significance in Saisiyat physiologically and conceptually. Physiologically, the Saisiyat people do not feel a:oe’ ‘heart’ hurt, but feel ka:ala’ ‘chest’ hurt, instead. Conceptually, neither the visceral organ a:oe’ ‘heart’ nor the body part ka:ala’ ‘chest’ provides a ground for emotion or thinking in Saisiyat. The Saisiyat people use ’inaz’azem ‘thought’ to denote a broad range of the mental activities of thinking and feeling. However, the use of ’inaz’azem ‘thought’ in the related metaphorical expressions denotes the way one thinks, rather than the way one feels. And the Saisiyat appears not to have their ’inaz’azem ‘thought’ reside in any body part, although it is believed to be related to ta’oeloeh ‘head’ or tono’ ‘brain’. Nonetheless, it shall not lead us to falsely conclude that it is not embodied. It is embodied, since it relies on bodily experiences to make sense the mental activities of ’inaz’azem ‘thought’ in Saisiyat. Compared with the Kavalan anem ‘heart’, which is conceptualized as an integrated emo-cognizer, the Saisiyat ’inaz’azem ‘thought’ is conceptualized more as a cognizer penetrated with feeling.
Both Saisiyat and Kavalan have special syntax regarding the expressions related to somatic illnesses. In these particular expressions, Saisiyat seems to treat the affected body parts as alienable parts, which are independent of the whole, i.e. the person. Kavalan, to the contrary, displays more like an inalienable possession on the affected body parts, as the affected body part is always coded as a location of the whole.
Overall, our investigation of how natural languages structure two of the most important mental activities and experiences of a person, i.e. emotion and thought, has shown that these two are not separate domains in a person’s mentality. As remarked by Damasio (1994), although thinking and feeling processes and states may be expressed as separable at some basic level of human existence, they indeed operate together to a very significant degree in our daily life. Moreover, by studying the language of emotion, we get a better picture on how language users construe emotion events; in other words, we know their perspectives and their interpretations toward the event in question via the grammatical construction they select in coding this event. By investigating linguistic features that characterize affective system in a language, we understand more about interactional cues in the discourse. By exploring the talks of thinking in languages, we know better the meta-cognitive structure. By taking into consideration the ethnotheory of the PERSON, we set an integrated view on the study of language of emotion and thinking, as it is the person that makes all the emotions and thinking possible and sensible.
Acknowledgement ……………………………………………………………………i
English Abstract …………………………………………………………………...iii
Chinese Abstract …………………………………………………………………..vii
Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………..…….xi
List of Figures ……………………………………………………………………....xvii
List of Tables ……………………………………………………………………..xviii
List of Maps ………………………………………………………………….…....xix

Chapter 1 Introduction …………………………………………………..……..1
1.0 Preamble ….…………………………………………………………..…….1
1.1 Objectives ……..………………………………………………….…….4
1.2 Brief Sketches of Kavalan and Saisiyat …………………………….……...9
1.2.1 Geographic Distributions and Populations ……….………………...9
1.2.2 Language Family …………………………………………………..10
1.2.3 Common Characteristics of Formosan Languages ……………..11
1.2.4 Kavalan ……………………………………………………………..12
1.2.5 Saisiyat ……………………………………………………………..16
1.3 Database …………………………………………………………………..20
1.4 Organization ……………………………………………………………..22

Chapter 2 Literature Review ………………………………………………….25
2.0 Preliminary …………………………………………………………….25
2.1 What is an Emotion? Universalism vs. Cultural Constructionism ……….25
2.2 Previous Studies on Emotion Language ………………………………….29
2.2.1 Words and Emotion …………………………………………….30
2.2.2 Natural Semantic Metalanguage ………………………………….33
2.2.3 Conceptual Metaphor and Metonymy …………………………….35
2.2.4 Emotion Verbs and Grammar ……………………………………….43
2.3 Previous Studies on Language of Thought …………………………….44
2.4 Previous Studies on Emotion Language in Formosan Languages ……….48
2.5 Theoretical Grounds ……………………………………………………….51
2.5.1 Two Theoretical Models of Emotion Concepts……………………..51
2.5.1.1 Traditional View of Emotion …………………………….51
2.5.1.2 Russell’s Model of Core Affect and Emotion …………….54
2.5.2 Grammatical Models …………………………………………….56
2.5.2.1 Theory of Causation ……………………………………….57
2.5.2.2 Force Dynamics ……………………………………………..61
2.5.2.3 Radical Construction Grammar ……………………………..65

Chapter 3 Construal of Emotion Events ……………………………………......69
3.0 Introduction ………………………………………………………….….69
3.1 Emotion Terms in Kavalan and Saisiyat ……………………………….….74
3.1.1 Emotion Terms in Kavalan …………………………………….….75
3.1.2 Emotion Terms in Saisiyat ………………………………………..76
3.2 Syntactic Patterns: Construal of the Semantic Roles of the Participants
………………………………………………………………………..79
3.2.1 AF-Clauses …………………………………………………….….83
3.2.2 PF-Clauses in Saisiyat and LF-Clauses in Kavalan ……………..93
3.2.3 RF-Construction in Saisiyat ………………………………………..98
3.2.4 The Causative pa(k)-Construction ………………………………....104
3.2.5 Interim Summary …………………………………………………105
3.3 ANGRY Event ……………………………………………………………106
3.3.1 Concept of ANGER: Being Angry is Being Brave ………….……...108
3.3.2 Emotion Nominals and Metaphorical Expressions ……………113
3.3.2.1 ANGER? Specific Emotion Nounin Kavalan? ……………113
3.3.2.2 ANGER? Specific Emotion Nounin Saisiyat? ……………117
3.3.2.3 Metaphorical Expressions Related to ANGRY Event ………128
3.3.2.4 Somatic Reactions ………………………………………137
3.3.3 Interim Summary …………………………………………………144
3.4 Other Grammatical Constructions ………………………………………145
3.4.1 Angry Cause Construed as Impersonal Entity …………………145
3.4.2 Reciprocal Constructions ………………………………………146
3.4.3 Other Grammatical Constructions in Kavalan …………………150
3.4.3.1 Double Negation: mai qa-mai ............................................150
3.4.3.2 Complex Directional Predicates: tu maqzi and pasazui
Constructions ............................................................................151
3.4.3.3 The wiya=ti Construction ....................................................154
3.4.4 Other Grammatical Constructions in Saisiyat …………………155
3.5 Excurses …………………………………………………………………157
3.6 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………162

Chapter 4 Language of Affect in Kavalan ………………………………………165
4.0 Introduction ……………………………………………………………165
4.1 Linguistic Features of Affect in Kavalan …………………………………167
4.2 Affect Schema ……………………………………………………………173
4.2.1 Contrastive Conjunctors ……………………………………………174
4.2.1.1 Conjunctor wanaika ‘unexpectedly’ ………………………175
4.2.1.2 Conjunctor timu/timangu ‘it turns out’ …………………176
4.2.2 Predicates teRaqan ‘reason that’, pelia ‘luckily not’, and
iwaliw/waliw ‘instead’ ……………………………………………179
4.2.2.1 Predicate teRaqan ‘reason that’ ……………………………179
4.2.2.2 Predicate pelia ‘luckily not’ ……………………………182
4.2.2.3 Predicate iwaliw/waliw ‘instead’ ………………………184
4.3 Interjections ……………………………………………………….…...186
4.3.1 Primary Interjections ……………………………………….…...186
4.3.2 Secondary Interjections ……………………………………………190
4.4 Particles …………………………………………………………………198
4.4.1 Particle ya/a ………………………………………………………200
(a) en ya ……………………………………………………………204
(b) kwa ya ………………………………………………………206
(c) zin-ku ya/zin-ta ya/zin-na ya ....................................................207
4.4.2 Particle haw ....................................................................................208
4.4.3 Particle yu ....................................................................................212
4.4.4 Particle kwa ...............................................................................….216
4.4.5 Interim Summary …………………………………………………217
4.5 Deployment of Pronouns …………………………………………………218
4.5.1 Non-Speech-Act-Participant (Non-SAP) Event …………………219
4.5.2 Hearer-Agent Event ……………………………………………220
4.5.3 Speaker-Agent Event ……………………………………………223
4.6 Reported Speech ………………………………………………………225
4.7 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………229

Chapter 5 The si-Construction in Saisiyat: The Affect Construction ………231
5.0 Introduction ……………………………………………………………231
5.1 Syntax and Semantics of the si-clause: A Preliminary Look ……………234
5.2 Affect Reading of the si-Construction …………………………………248
5.3 Construction Polysemy: From Perceptual to Conceptual …………………257
5.4 Emotion Events in the si-Construction …………………………………265
5.5. Conclusion ……………………………………………………………270

Chapter 6 Thinking Verbs in Kavalan ………………………………………273
6.0 Introduction ……………………………………………………………273
6.1 Thinking Verbs in Kavalan ……………………………………………276
6.1.1 KNOWING Domain ……………………………………………...….278
6.1.1.1 Verb supaR ‘know’ …..………………………………..…278
6.1.1.2 Verb Rayngu ‘not know’ …………………………………282
6.1.1.3 Verb m-zin ‘recognize’ ………………………………....286
6.1.2 REMEMBERING Domain ……………………………………………287
6.1.2.1 Verb qamet ‘have in mind’ …………………………….…...288
6.1.2.2 Verb kalingun ‘forget’ ………………………………………290
6.1.2.3 Phrase mai kalingun ‘not forget’ ……………………………292
6.1.3 THINKING Domain …………………………………………………292
6.1.3.1 Verb qasianem ‘think’ ………………………………………292
6.1.3.2 Verb sazmaqen ‘believe’ ………………………………....297
6.1.3.3 Verb anem-an ‘heart-LF’ …………………………….…...298
6.2 Syntax of the Thinking Verbs in Kavalan …………………………………300
6.2.1 Negation ……………………………………………………………300
6.2.2 The pa-Causative Form ……………………………………………302
6.2.3 The ma-form ………………………………………………………304
6.2.4 Complementation …………………………………………………305
6.2.5 Nominalization …………………………………………………307
6.3 Polysemy …………………………………………………………………309
6.3.1 Perception-Thinking Polysemy …………………………………310
6.3.2 Speaking-Thinking Polysemy: The zin-construction ……………311
6.4 Metaphors of Thinking …………………………………………………313
6.5 Semantic Map of the Thinking Verbs in Kavalan ………………………321
6.6 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………324

Chapter 7 Thinking Verbs in Saisiyat …………………………………………....327
7.0 Introduction ……………………………………………………………327
7.1 Thinking Verbs in Saisiyat ……………………………………………328
7.1.1 KNOWING Domain …………………………………………………330
7.1.1.1 Verb ra:am ‘know’ and Verb sekla’ ‘know for sure’
……………………………………………………………331
7.1.1.2 Verb haSa’ ‘not know’ …………………………………339
7.1.2 Remembering and Forgetting …………………………………341
7.1.2.1 Verb ngowip ‘forget’ ………………………………………341
7.1.2.2 Phrase ’okay ngowip ‘not forget’ ………………………343
7.1.2.3 Verb hoero: ‘suddenly come to mind’ …………………344
7.1.3 THINKING Domain …………………………………………………348
7.1.3.1 Verb paka:i’ believe’ ………………………………………348
7.1.3.2 Verb ma-’az’azem ‘think’ …………………………………348
7.2 Syntax of the Thinking Verbs in Saisiyat …………………………..……..350
7.2.1 Negation ……………………………………………………..……..351
7.2.2 The pa(k)-Causative Form ……………………………………..……..353
7.2.3 Nominalization …………………………………………..……..356
7.2.4 The si(k)-(RF) Clause ……………………………………..……..357
7.3 Lexical Polysemy ………………………………………………..……..359
7.3.1 Perception-Thinking Polysemy …………………………..……..359
7.3.2 Speaking-Thinking-Conditional Polysemy: komoSa ‘say’
………………………………………………………………....363
7.3.3 Interim Summary …………………………………………………368
7.4 Metaphors Related to Thinking …………………..…………………..369
7.5 Semantic Map of the Thinking Verbs in Saisiyat …..…………………..374
7.6 Conclusion ……………………………………..……………………..376

Chapter 8 Ethnotheory of the Person ……………………..……………………..379
8.0 Introduction ……………………………………..……………………..379
8.1 Ethnopsychological Constructs of the PERSON ……………………...…….381
8.2 PERSON in Kavalan ……………………………………………………....383
8.2.1 tazusa ‘soul’ in Kavalan …………………………………………....383
8.2.2 izip ‘body’ in Kavalan ……………………………………………385
8.2.3 anem ‘heart’ in Kavalan ……………………………………………388
8.2.4 Emotion and Thought: anem ‘heart’ and qasianem ‘think’ ……………394
8.2.5 Interim Summary …………………………………………………400
8.3 PERSON in Saisiyat ………………………………………………………400
8.3.1 baSang ‘body’ in Saisiyat ………………………………………401
8.3.2 ’azem ‘soul’ in Saisiyat ……………………………………………402
8.3.3 HEART in Saisiyat ? ……………………………………………405
8.3.4 Interim Summary …………………………………………………412
8.4 Expressions Related to Somatic illnesses …………………………………412
8.5 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………427

Chapter 9 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………431
9.0 Recapitulation ……………………………………………………………431
9.1 Implications and Contributions ……………………………………………439
9.2 Problems for Further Studies ……………………………………………440

References ………………………………………………………………………445

Appendix 1 Abbreviations and Transcription Convention ……………………….469
Appendix 2 Body Parts and Organs in Kavalan and Saisiyat ………………………473


































List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Langacker’s Cyclic Model ………………………………………….…..5
Figure 1.2 Language Branching of the Austronesian Languages ………………..…11
Figure 2.1 Traditional Taxonomy with Levels of Emotion Terms in a Vertical Hierarchy ……………………………………………………………..31
Figure 2.2 A Psychologist’s Traditional View on EMOTION ……………………..…52
Figure 2.3 The EVENT STRUCTURE Metaphor, Emotion Metaphors, and the Subcategorization of Emotion ………………………………….….…53
Figure 2.4 Russell’s Model of AFFECT and EMOTION ……………………..………55
Figure 2.5 An Instance of Intransitive Constructions ………………………..……66
Figure 3.1 Force Dynamics in Two types of AF-clauses ………………………..93
Figure 3.2 Force Dynamics in PF/LF-clauses ………………………………………..98
Figure 3.3 Emotion Events Conceptualized in the si-Construction …………....103
Figure 3.4 Force Dynamics of a Prototypical pa(k)-Causative …………………105
Figure 4.1 Spectrogram of Excerpt (1) Illustrated on praat ………………………170
Figure 5.1 Huang’s Proposal of Semantic Space for O Arguments …………....236
Figure 5.2 Semantic Extension of the si-clauses Proposed by Yeh …………....237
Figure 5.3 Construction Polysemy of the si-Construction ………………………262




















List of Tables

Table 1.1 Consonants in Kavalan …………………………………………………..13
Table 1.2 Vowels in Kavalan ………………………………………………………..13
Table 1.3. Personal Pronominal System in Kavalan ………………………..……13
Table 1.4 Case Marking System in Kavalan …………………………………..……14
Table 1.5 Focus System in Kavalan ……..……………………………….…….15
Table 1.6 Consonants in Saisiyat …………………………………………………..17
Table 1.7 Vowels in Saisiyat ……………………………………………………..…17
Table 1.8 Case Marking System in Saisiyat …………………………………….….17
Table 1.9 Personal Pronominal System in Saisiyat ………………………….….18
Table 1.10 Focus System in Saisiyat ………………………………………….….18
Table 1.11 Background Information of Major Kavalan Informants ……………..20
Table 1.12 Background Information of Major Saisiyat Informants ……………..21
Table 2.1 Talmy’s Four Basic Causation Types …………………………………..58
Table 3.1 Morphological Forms of the Kavalan verb lizaq ‘be happy’ ……………..75
Table 3.2 Emotion Terms in Kavalan ……………………………………………..76
Table 3.3 Morphological Forms of the Saisiyat Verb siya’ ‘be happy’ ……………..77
Table 3.4 Emotion Terms in Saisiyat ……………………………………………..79
Table 3.5 Case Marking on the Thematic Roles in Emotion Events ……………..82
Table 3.6 Emotion Verbs and Their Derived Nominal Forms in Kavalan ………114
Table 3.7 Emotion Verbs and Their Derived Nominal Forms in Saisiyat ………118
Table 3.8 Conceptualization of ANGRY Event in Kavalan and Saisiyat ……………135
Table 3.9 Emotion Nouns and Metaphoric Expressions in the Four Languages …135
Table 4.1 Final Particles in Taiwanese ……………………………………………198
Table 4.2 Distribution of Particles in Kavalan Texts ……………………………199
Table 4.3 Discourse Functions of Particles in Kavalan ……………………………217
Table 4.4 Distribution and Function of the Kavalan 1IPL Pronoun ……………219
Table 6.1 Thinking Verbs in Kavalan ……………………………………………276
Table 6.2 Negators and the Thinking Verbs in Kavalan ……………………………300
Table 6.3 Nominalized Forms of the Thinking Verbs in Kavalan …………………308
Table 7.1 Thinking Verbs in Saisiyat ……………………………………………328
Table 7.2 Negators in Saisiyat …………………………………………………351
Table 7.3 Thinking Verbs in Negation in Saisiyat …………………………………352
Table 7.4 The pa(k)-Causatives of the Thinking Verbs in Saisiyat …………………353
Table 7.5 Nominalized Forms of the Thinking Verbs in Saisiyat …………………356
Table 8.1 Key Ethnopsychological Constructs in Several Languages ……………382

List of Maps

Map 1.1 Geographic Distribution of the Two Formosan Languages in this Study…..10
Map 6.1 Semantic Map of the Thinking Verbs in Kavalan ………………………323
Map 7.1 Semantic Map of the Thinking Verbs in Saisiyat ………………………375
References

AMEKA, FELIX. 1987. A comparative analysis of linguistic routines in two languages—Ewe and English. Journal of Pragmatics 11(3).299-326.
AMEKA, FELIX. 1990. How discourse particles mean: The case of the Ewe “terminal” particles. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 12(2).143-70.
AMEKA, FELIX. 1992a. Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech. Journal of Pragmatics 18.101-18.
AMEKA, FELIX. 1992b. The meaning of phatic and conative interjections. Journal of Pragmatics 18.245-71.
AMEKA, FELIX. 1996. Body parts in Ewe grammar. In Hilary Chappell and William McGregor, 783-840.
AMEKA, FELIX K. 2002. Cultural scripting of body parts for emotions: On ‘jealousy’ and related emotions in Ewe. Pragmatics and Cognition 10(1).27-55.
ANDERSEN, PAUL KENt. 1983. Word order typology and comparative constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
AUSTIN, JOHN L. 1979. Philosophical papers. 3rd edn. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
AVERILL, J. R. 1982. Anger and aggression: An essay on emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.
BARCELONA, ANTONIO (ed.) 2000. Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
BARRETT, KAREN CAPLOVITZ. 1993. The development of nonverbal communication of emotion: A functionalist perspective. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 17.145-69.
BARRETT, LISA FELDMAN, and THYRA FOSSUM. 2001. Mental representations of affect knowledge. Cognition and Emotion 15(3).333-63.
BARSALOU, LAWRENCE. W. 1993. Structure, flexibility, and linguistic vagary in concepts: Manifestations of a compositional system of perceptual symbols. Theories of memory, ed. by A. C. Collins, S. E. Gathercole and M. A. Conway, 29-101. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
BARSALOU, LAWRENCE. W. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22(4).577-609.
BARSALOU, LAWRENCE W. 2003. Situated simulation in the human conceptual system. Language and Cognitive Process 18(5/6).513-62.
BARSALOU, L. W., and KATJA WIEMER-HASTINGS. 2005. Situating abstract concepts. Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking, ed. by Diane Pecher and Rolf A. Zwaan, 129-63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BESNIER, NIKO. 1995. The politics of Emotion in Nukulaelae gossip. Everyday conceptions of emotion, ed. by J. A. Russell, J. M. Fernández-Dols, A. S. R. Manstead and J. C. Wellenkamp, 221-40. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
BLAKE, BARRY. 2001. Case. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BLUST, ROBERT. 1999. Subgrouping, circularity and extinction: Some issues in Austronesian comparative linguistics. Selected Papers From the 8th International conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Li, 31-94. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
BLUST, ROBERT. 2002. Notes on the history of ‘focus’ in Austronesian languages. The history and typology of western Austronesian voice systems, ed. by Fay Wouk and Malcolm Ross, 63-78.Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
BOERSMA, PAUL, and DAVID WEENINK. 2005. Praat (version 4.3.31). Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam. Online: http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat
BOLINGER, DWIGHT. 1968. Entailment and the meaning of structures. Glossa 2(2).119-27.
BOLINGER, DWIGHT. 1974. Concept and percept: Two infinitive constructions and their vicissitudes. World papers in phonetics: Festschrift for Dr. Onishi’s Kizyu, ed. by Phonetic Society of Japan, 65-91. Tokyo: Phonetic Society of Japan.
BOLINGER, DWIGHT. 1989. Intonation and its uses: Melody in grammar and discourse. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
BOROD, J. C.; L. H. PICK; SUSAN HALL; MARTIN SLIWINSKI; NANCY MADIGAN; LORAINE K. OBLER; JOAN WELKOWITZ; JOAN WELKOWITZ; ELIZABETH CANINO; HULYA M. ERHAN; MIRA GORAL; CHRIS MORRISON; and MATTHIAS TABERT. 2000. Relationships among facial, prosodic, and lexical channels of emotional perceptual processing. Cognition and Emotion 14(2).193-211.
BOTHA, RUDOLF P. 1988. Form and meaning in word formation: A study of Afrikaans reduplication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BRIGGS, J. L. 1970. Never in anger: Portrait of an Eskimo family. Cambridge: Mass.: Harvard University Press.
BROWN, PENELOPE, and STEPHEN LEVINSON. 1978. Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction, ed. by E. Goody, 55-311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BROWN, PENELOPE, and STEPHEN LEVINSON. 1987. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BYBEE, JOAN. 1995. Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10(5).425-55.
BYBEE, JOAN. 1998. The emergent lexicon. Chicago Linguistic Society 34.421-35.
BYBEE, JOAN. 2001. Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BYBEE, JOAN. 2003. Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency. Handbook of historical linguistics, ed. by B. Joseph and R. Janda, 602-23. Oxford: Blackwell.
BYBEE, JOAN, and J. SCHEIBMAN. 1999. The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: The reduction of don’t in English. Linguistics 37.575-96.
BYBEE, JOAN, and PAUL HOPPER. (eds.) 2001. Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
CHAFE, WALLACE L. 1980. The deployment of consciousness in the production of a narrative. The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural, and linguistic aspects of narrative production, ed. by Wallace Chafe, 9-50. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp.
CHAFE, WALLACE, and JOHANNA NICHOLS (eds.) 1986. Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
CHANG, YUNG-LI. 1997. Voice, case and agreement in Seediq and Kavalan. Ph.D. Dissertation, National Tsing-hua University.
CHANG, YUNG-LI. 2000. A reference grammar of Kavalan. Formosan Language Series 12. Taipei: Yuan-liu. (In Chinese)
CHANG, YUNG-LI, and AMY PEI-JUNG LEE. 2002. Nominalization in Kavalan. Language and Linguistics 3(2).349-68.
CHAPPELL, HILARY, and WILLIAM MCGREGOR. 1989. Alienability, inalienability and nominal classification. Proceeding of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 15.24-36.
CHAPPELL, HILARY, and WILLIAM MCGREGOR (eds.) 1996. The grammar of inalienability: A typological perspective on body part terms and the part-whole relation. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
CHAPPELL, HILARY, and WILLIAM MCGREGOR. 1996. Introduction: Prolegomena to a theory of inalienability. In Hilary Chappell and William McGregor, 3-30.
CHAPPELL, HILARY, and SANDRA A. THOMPSON. 1992. Semantics and pragmatics of associative de in Mandarin discourse. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 21(2).199-229.
CHENG, SUSIE S. 1981. A study of Taiwanese adjectives. Taipei: Student Book Co.
CHURCH, TIMOTHY; MARCIA S. KATIGBAK; JOSE A. S. REYES; and STACIA M. JENSEN. 1998. Language and organisation of Filipino emotion concepts: Comparing emotion concepts and dimensions across cultures. Cognition and Emotion 12(1).63-92.
CLARK, HERBERT H., and RICHARD J. GERRIG. 1990. Quotations as demonstrations. Language 66.764-805.
CLAUSNER, TIMOTHY, and WILLIAM CROFT. 1999. Domains and image schemas. Cognitive Linguistics 10(1).1-31.
CROFT, WILLIAM. 1990. Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CROFT, WILLIAM. 1991. Syntactic categories and grammatical relations. Chicago/ London: The University of Chicago Press.
CROFT, WILLIAM. 2001. Radical construction grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.
CROFT, WILLIAM. 2002. The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast, ed. by René Dirven and Ralf Pörings, 161-205. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
CROWLEY, TERRY. 1996. Inalienable possession in Paamese grammar. In Hilary Chappell and William McGregor, 383-432.
DAMASIO, ANTONIO R. 1994. Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
DAMASIO, ANTONIO R. 1999. The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. New York: Harcourt Brace.
D’ANDRADE, ROY. 1981. The cultural part of cognition. Cognitive Science 5.179-95.
D’ANDRADE, ROY. 1987. A folk model of the mind. Cultural models in language and
thought, ed. by D. Holland and N. Quinn, 112-48. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
D’ANDRADE, ROY. 1995. The development of cognitive anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DARWIN, CHARLES. 1965. The expression of the emotions in man and animals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Originally published 1872)
DIAMOND, JARED M. 2000. Linguistics: Taiwan’s gift to the world. Nature 403.709-10.
DIRVEN, RENÉ. 1995. The construal of cause: The case of cause prepositions. Language and the cognitive construal of the world, ed. by John R. Taylor and Robert E. MacLaury, 95-135. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
DIRVEN, RENÉ. 1997. Emotions as cause and the cause of emotions. The language of emotions: Conceptualization, expression, and theoretical foundation, ed. by Susanne Niemeier and René Dirven, 55-83. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
DIRVEN, RENÉ. 2002. Metonymy and metaphor: Different mental strategies of conceptualisation. In René Dirven and Ralf Pörings, 75-111.
DIRVEN, RENÉ, and RALF PÖRINGS (eds.) 2002. Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast. Berlin/N.Y.: Mouton de Gruyter.
DIXON, ROBERT M. W. 1977. A grammar of Yidiny. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DONOHUE, MARK. 2001. Coding choices in argument structure. Studies in Language 25(2).217-54.
DREVETS, WAYNE C., and MARCUS E. RAICHLE. 1998. Reciprocal suppression of regional cerebral blood flow during emotional versus higher cognitive processes: Implications for interactions between emotion and cognition. Cognition and Emotion 12.353-85.
DURANTI, A. 1984. The social meaning of subject pronouns in Italian conversation. Text 6.277-311.
DYEN, ISIDORE. 1990. Homomeric lexical classification. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. by Philip Baldi, 211-30. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
EKMAN, PAUL. 1980. The face of man: Expressions of universal emotions in a New Guinea Village. New York: Garland STPM Press.
EKMAN, PAUL. 1984. Expression and the nature of emotion. Approaches to motion, ed. by K. Scherer and P. Ekman, 319-44. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
ENFIELD, N. J. 2002. Semantic analysis of body parts in emotion terminology: Avoiding the exoticisms of “obstinate monosemy” and “online extension”. Pragmatics and Cognition 10(1).85-106.
ENFIELD, N. J., and ANAN WIERZBICKA. 2002. Introduction: The body in description of emotion. Pragmatics and Cognition 10(1).1-25.
EVANS, BETHWYN, and MALCOLM ROSS. 2001. The history of Proto-Oceanic *ma-. Oceanic Linguistics 40(2).269-90.
EVANS, NICHOLAS, and DAVID WILKINS. 2000. In the mind’s ear: The semantic extensions of perception verbs in Australian languages. Language 76(3).546-92.
FEHR, B., and J. A. RUSSELL. 1984. Concept of emotion viewed from a prototype perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113.464-86.
FILLMORE, CHARLES J.; PAUL KAY; and MARY CATHERINE O’CONNOR. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 64.510-28.
FISCHER, KERSTIN, and MARTINA DRESCHER. 1996. Methods for the description of discourse particles: Contrastive analysis. Language Sciences 18(3-4).853-61.
FISCHER, KURT W., and JUNE PRICE TANGNEY. 1995. Introduction: Self-conscious emotions and the affect revolution: Framework and overview. Self-conscious emotions: The psychology of shame, guilt, embarrassment, and pride, ed. by June Prince Tangney and Kurt W. Fischer, 3-24. New York: The Guilford Press.
FONTAINE, JOHNNY R. J.; YPE H. POORTINGA; BERNADETTE SETIADI; and SUPRAPTI S. MARKAM. 2002. Cognitive structure of emotion terms in Indonesia and The Netherlands. Cognition and Emotion 16(1).61-86.
FORTESCUE, MICHAEL. 2001. Thoughts about thought. Cognitive Linguistics 12(1).15-45.
FRIDLUND, ALAN J. 1992. The behavioral ecology and sociality of faces. Review of personality and social psychology, 13 Emotion, ed. by Margaret S. Clark, 90-121. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
FRIJDA, NICO H. 2000. The psychologists’ point of view. Handbook of Emotions, ed. by Michael Lewis and Jeannette M. Haviland-Jones, 59-74. New York: The Guilford Press.
FRIJDA, NICO H., SUPRAPTI MARKAM, KAORI SATO, AND REINOUT WIERS. 1995. Emotions and emotion words. Everyday conceptions of emotion, ed. by J. A. Russell, J. M. Fernández-Dols, A. S. R. Manstead and J. C. Wellenkamp, 3-16. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 121-43. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
GEERTZ, CLIFFORD. 1973. The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
GEERTZ, CLIFFORD. 1976. From the native’s point of view: On the nature of Anthropological understanding. Meaning in Anthropology, ed. by K. Basso and H. Selby, 221-37. Albuquerque, N. M.: University of New Mexico Press.
GEERTZ, CLIFFORD. 1980. Negara: The theatre State in Nineteenth-Century Bali. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
GEERTZ, HILDRED. 1959. The vocabulary of emotion: A study of Javanese socialization process. Psychiatry: Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Process 22.225-37.
GIBBS, RAYMOND W. 1983. Do people always process the literal meanings of indirect requests? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Meaning, and Cognition 9.524-33.
GIBBS, RAYMOND W. 1990. Comprehending figurative referential descriptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 16.56-66.
GIBBS, RAYMOND W. 1992. When is Metaphor? The idea of understanding in theories of metaphor. Poetics Today 13(4).575-606.
GIBBS, RAYMOND W. 1994. The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.
GIBBS, RAYMOND W. 1999. Speaking and thinking with metonymy. Metonymy in language and thought, ed. by Klaus-Uwe Panther and Günter Radden, 61-76. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
GIBBS, RAYMOND W., and NICOLE L. WILSON. 2002. Bodily action and metaphorical meaning. Style 36(3).524-40.
GIVÓN, TALMY. 1976. Topic, pronoun, and grammatical agreement. Subject and topic, ed. by Charles Li, 149-88. New York: Academic Press.
GLYNN, DYLAN. 2002. Love and anger: The grammatical structure of conceptual metaphors. Style 36(3).541-59.
GODDARD, CLIFF. 1986. The natural semantics of too. Journal of Pragmatics 10.635-44.
GODDARD, CLIFF. 1990. The lexical semantics of good feelings in Yankunytjatjara. Australian Journal of Linguistics 10(2).257-92.
GODDARD, CLIFF. 1991a. Anger in the western desert—A case study in the cross-cultural semantics and emotion. Man 26(2).265-79.
GODDARD, CLIFF. 1991b. Review of unnatural emotions: Everyday sentiments on a Micronesian atoll and their challenge to western theory. Australian Journal of Linguistics 11(1).120-27.
GODDARD, CLIFF. 1996. The ‘social emotions’ of Malay (Bahasa Melayu). Ethos 24(3).426-64.
GODDARD, CLIFF. 2003. Thinking across languages and cultures: Six dimensions of variation. Cognitive Linguistics 14(2/3).109-40.
GODDARD, CLIFF, and ANNA WIERZBICKA (eds.) 1994. Semantic and Lexical Universals—Theory and Empirical Findings. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
GOFFMAN, ERVING. 1974. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. N.Y.: Harper and Row.
GOFFMAN, ERVING. 1979. Footing. Semiotica. 25(1/2).1-29. [rpt. in Forms of talks.]
GOFFMAN, ERVING. 1981. Forms of talks. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
GOLDBERG, ADELE E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
GOLDBERG, ADELE E. 1996. Making one’s way through the data. Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani and Sandra A. Thompson, 29-53. New York: Oxford University Press.
GOLDBERG, ADELE E. 1998. Patterns of experience in patterns of language. The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to languages structure, ed. by M. Tomasello, 203-20. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
GOLDBERG, ADELE E. 2002. Surface generalizations: An alternative to alternations. Cognitive Linguistics 13(4).327-56.
GOLDSTONE, ROBERT L., and LAWRENCE W. BARSALOU. 1998. Reuniting perception and conception. Cognition 65.231-62.
GRIMA, BENEDICTE. 1992. The performance of emotion among Paxtun women. Austin, Tex.: University of Texas Press.
HAENGGI, D.; M. A. GERNSBACHER; and C. M. BOLLIGER. 1994. Individual differences in situation-based inferencing during narrative text comprehension. Naturalistic text comprehension: Vol. LIII. Advanced in discourse processing, ed. by H. van Oostendrorp and R. A. Zwaan, 79-96. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
HAIMAN, JOHN. 1980. The iconicity of grammar: Isomorphism and motivation. Language 56.515-40.
HAIMAN, JOHN. (ed.) 1985. Iconicity in syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
HALLOWELL, A. I. 1955. Culture and Experience. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
HARKINS, JEAN. 1986. Semantics and the language learner: Warlpiri Particles. Journal of Pragmatics 10.559-73.
HARRÉ, ROM (ed.) 1986. The social construction of emotions. Oxford:Blackwell.
HARRÉ, ROM, and GILLETT, G. 1994. The discoursive mind. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
HARRÉ, ROM, & PARROTT, W. GERROD (eds.) 1996. The emotions: Social, cultural and biological dimensions. London: SAGE Publications.
HARRIS, G. G. 1978. Casting out anger: Religion among the Taita of Kenya. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
HAVILAND, JOHN B. 1989. ‘Sure, sure’: Evidence and affect. Text 9(1).27-68.
HEIDER, KARL G. 1991. Landscapes of emotion: Mapping three cultures of emotion in Indonesia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
HEINE, BERND; ULRIKE CLAUDI; and FRIEDERIKE HUMMEMEYER. 1991. Grammaticalization: A conceptual framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
HIATT, L. R. 1978. Classification of the emotions. Australian aboriginal concepts, ed. by L. R. Hiatt, 182-7. Princeton, NJ: Humanities Press.
HIMMELMANN, NIKOLAUS P. 2002. Voice in western Austronesian: An update. The history and typology of western Austronesian voice systems, ed. by Fay Wouk and Malcolm Ross, 7-16.Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
HIROSE, Y. 2000. Publish and private self as two aspects of the speaker: A contrastive study of Japanese and English. Journal of Pragmatics 32.1623-56.
HO, DAH-AN, and SHIU-FANG YANG. 2000. Introduction. A Saisiyat reference grammar. Series on Formosan Languages, 2. Taipei: Yuan-liu Publishing Co. (In Chinese).
HOPPER, PAUL. 1987. Emergent grammar. BLS 13 (Papers of the 13th Annual Meeting of Berkeley Linguistic Society), 139-57. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistic Society.
HOPPER, PAUL. 1988. Emergent grammar and the a priori grammar postulate. Linguistics in Context, ed. by D. Tannen, 117-34. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
HOPPER, PAUL. 1998. Emergent grammar. The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Languages Structure, ed. by M. Tomasello, 155-75. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
HOPPER, PAUL, and SANDRA A. THOMPSON. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56.251-99.
HORIE, KAORU. 2000. Complementation in Japanese and Korean. Complementation, ed. by Kaoru Horie, 11-32. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
HOSOKAWA, KOMEI. 1996. “My face am burning!”: Quasi-passive, body parts, and related issues in Yawuru grammar and cultural concepts. In Hilary Chappell and William McGregor, 155-92.
HUITT, W. 1996. The mind. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved May 1999, from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/context/infoage.html.
HUITT, W. 1999. Conation as an important factor of mind. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved January 2007, from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/regsys/conation.html.
HSIEH, FUHUI, and CHEN CHIHSIN. 2006. Nominalization and relativization in Kavalan revisited. Paper presented at the Tenth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics (10-ICAL). 17-20 January 2006. Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, Philippines.
HSIEH, FUHUI, and HUANG SHUANFAN. 2006. The pragmatics of case marking in Saisiyat. Oceanic Linguistics 45(1).91-109.
HSIEH, HSINYUN. 2001. The discourse-pragmatic functions of final particles in Taiwanese. M.A. thesis, National Taiwan University.
HUANG, SHUANFAN. 1982. Chinese concept of a person—an essay on language and metaphysics. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 10.86-106.
HUANG, SHUANFAN. 1994. Chinese as a metonymic language. In honor of William Wang: Interdisciplinary studies on language change, ed. by M. Chen and O. Tzeng, 223-52. Taipei: Pyramid Press.
HUANG, SHUANFAN. 2000. The story of heads and tails—on a sequentially sensitive lexicon. Language and Linguistics 1(2).79-107.
HUANG, SHUANFAN. 2002a. Tsou is Different: a Cognitive Perspective on Language, Emotion, and Body. Cognitive Linguistics 13(2).167-186.
HUANG, SHUANFAN. 2002b. A Third Way to Travel. Paper presented at the Ninth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, January 7-10, Canberra.
HUANG, SHUANFAN. 2005. Split O in Formosan Languages—A Localist Interpretation. Language and Linguistics 6(4).783-806.
HUANG, SHUANFAN. 2006. Transitivity as an emergent category in Formosan languages. Paper presented at IsCLL 10 and ICAL 14, May 25-28. Academia Sinica.
HUANG, SHUANFAN; LILY I-WEN SU; and LI MAY SUNG. 2004. A Functional reference grammar of Saisiyat. Graduate Institute of Linguistics, National Taiwan University.
HUANG, SHUANFAN; LI MAY SUNG; and WEN-YU CHIANG. 2005. A Functional reference grammar of Kavalan. Graduate Institute of Linguistics, National Taiwan University.
HUTTAR, G. L. 1968. Relations between prosodic variables and emotions in normal American English utterances. J. S. Hear 11.481-7.
IZARD, C. E., and S. BUECHLER. 1980. Aspects of consciousness and personality in terms of differential emotions theory. Emotion: Theory, research, and experience, Vol.1, ed. by R. Plutchik and H. Kellerman, 105-87. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
JÄKEL, OLAF. 1995. The metaphorical concept of mind: “Mental activity is manipulation”. Language and the cognitive construal of the world, ed. by John Taylor and Robert E. MacLauray, 197-229. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
JAMES, WILLIAM. 1884. What is an emotion? Mind 19.188-205.
JANSSEN, THEO A. J. M., and WIM VAN DER WURFF (eds.) 1996. Reported speech. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Company.
JIANG, HAOWEN. 2006. Spatial conceptualizations in Kavalan. M.A. thesis, National Taiwan University.
JOHNSON, MARK. 1987. The body in the mind: the bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. London: University of Chicago Press.
JOHNSON, MARK. 2005. The meaning of the body. (manuscript)
JOHNSON-LAIRD, P. N., and KEITH OATLEY. 1989. The language of emotions: An analysis of a semantic field. Cognition and Emotion 3(2).81-123.
JOHNSON-LAIRD, P. N., and KEITH OATLEY. 1992. Basic emotions, rationality, and folk theory. Cognition and Emotion 6(3/4).201-23.
KAY, PAUL, and CHARLES J. FILLMORE. 1999. Grammatical construction and linguistic generalizations: The What’s X doing Y construction. Language 75.1-33.
KELTNER, DACHER, and PAUL EKMAN. 2000. Facial expression of emotion. Handbook of Emotions, ed. by Michael Lewis and Jeannette M. Haviland-Jones, 236-249. New York: The Guilford Press.
KIMMENDAAL, GERRITJ. 2002. Colourful psi’s sleep furiously: Depicting emotional states in some African languages. Pragmatics and Cognition 10(1/2).57-83.
KING, BRIAN. 1989. The conceptual structure of emotional experience in Chinese. Ph.D. Dissertation, The Ohio state University.
KINTSCH, W., and E. GREENE. 1978. The role of cultural-specific schemata in the comprehension and recall of stories. Discourse Processes 1.1-13.
KOBAYASHI, FUTOSHI; DIANE L. SCHALLERT; and HOLLY OGREN. Japanese and American folk vocabularies for emotions. Journal of Social Psychology 143(4).451-78.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN. 1986. Metaphors of anger, pride, and love: A lexical approach to the structure of concepts. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN. 1990. Emotion concepts. New York: Springer.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN. 1995a. Metaphor and the folk understanding of anger. Everyday conceptions of emotion, ed. by J. A. Russell, J. M. Fernández-Dols, A. S. R. Manstead and J. C. Wellenkamp, 49-71. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN. 1995b. Anger: Its language, conceptualization, and physiology in the light of cross-cultural evidence. Language and the cognitive construal of the world, ed. by J. Taylor and R. E. MacLaury, 181-96. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN. 1995c. Introduction: Language and emotion concepts. Everyday Conceptions of Emotion, ed. by J. A. Russell, J. M. Fernández-Dols, A. S. R. Manstead and J. C. Wellenkamp, 3-16. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN. 1998. Are there any emotion-specific metaphors? Speaking of emotions: Conceptualisation and expression, ed. by Angeliki Athanasiadou and Elzbieta Tabakowska, 127-51. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN. 2000a. Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN. 2000b. The concept of anger: Universal or culture specific? Psychopathology 33(4).159-70.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN. 2003. Language, figurative thought, and cross-cultural comparison. Metaphor and Symbol 18(4).311-320.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN, and GARY B. PALMER. 1999. Language and emotion concepts: What experientialists and social constructionists have in common. Languages of sentiment: Cultural constructions of emotional substrates, ed. by Gary B. Palmer and Debra J. Occhi, 237-62. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
KÖVECSES, ZOLTÁN; GARY B PALMER; and RENÉ DIRVEN. 2002. Language and emotion: The interplay of conceptualisation with physiology and culture. In René Dirven and Ralf Pörings, 133-59.
LAKOFF, GEORGE. 1986. A figure of thought. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 1.215-25.
LAKOFF, GEORGE. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
LAKOFF, GEORGE. 1990. The invariance hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on image-schemas? Cognitive Linguistics 1.39-74.
LAKOFF, GEORGE. 1993. The contemporary theory of metaphor. Metaphor and thought, ed. by A. Ortony, 202-51. Cambridge University Press.
LAKOFF, GEORGE, and MARK JOHNSON. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
LAKOFF, GEORGE, and MARK JOHNSON. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh—the embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York, N.Y.: Basic Books.
LAKOFF, GEORGE, and ZOLTÁN KÖVECSES. 1987. The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English. Cultural model in language and thought, ed. by D. Holland & Q. Naomi, 195-221. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LAKOFF, GEORGE, and MARK TURNER. 1989. More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
LANGACKER, RONALD W. 1990. Concept, image, and symbol: the cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
LANGACKER, RONALD W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 2, descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
LANGACKER, RONALD W. 1994. Culture, cognition, and grammar. Language contact and language conflict, ed. by Martin Pütz, 25-53. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
LANGACKER, RONALD W. 1999a. Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
LEAVITT, J. 1996. Meaning and feeling in the anthropology of emotions. American Ethnologist 23(3).514-39.
LEDOUX, JOSEPH E. 1996. The emotional brain. New York: Touchstone.
LEDOUX, JOSEPH E. 2003. Synaptic self: How our brains become who we are. New York: Penguin.
LEDOUX, JOSEPH E., and ELIZABETH A. PHELPS. 2002. Emotional networks in the brain. Handbook of Emotions, ed. by Michael Lewis and Jeannette M. Haviland-Jones, 157-72. New York: The Guilford Press.
LEE, AMY PEI-JUNG. 1997. The case-marking and focus systems in Kavalan. M.A. Thesis. National Tsing-hua University.
LEE, PENNY. 2003. “Feeling of the mind” in talk about thinking in English. Cognitive Linguistics 14(2/3).221-49.
LERNER, JENNIFER S., and DACHER KELTNER. 2001. Fear, anger and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81(1).146-59.
LEVINSON, STEPHEN. 1981. On the grammaticalization of affect in natural language. Ms., Australian National University, Working Group on Language in Cultural Context.
LEVINSON, STEPHEN. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LEVINSON, STEPHEN C. 1996. Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: cross-linguistic evidence. Language and space, ed. by Paul Bloom, Mary A Peterson, Lynn Nadel and Merrill F. Garrett, 109-69. Cambridge, MASS.: The MIT Press.
LEVINSON, STEPHEN C. 1997. From outer to inner space: Linguistic categories and non-linguistic thinking. Language and conceptualization, ed. by J. Nuyts and E. Pederson, 13-45. Cambridge University Press.
LEVINSON, STEPHEN. C. 2003. Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge University Press.
LEVY, ROBERT I. 1973. Tahitians: Mind and experience in the Society Island. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
LEVY, ROBERT I. 1984. Emotion, knowing, and culture. Culture theory: Essays on mind, self, and emotion, ed. by Richard A. Shweder and Robert A. LeVine, 214-37. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LEWIS, MICHAEL, and JEANNETTE M. HAVILAND-JONES (eds.) 2000. Handbook of Emotions. New York: The Guilford Press.
LI, PAUL JEN-KUEI. 1978a. The case-marking systems of the four less known Formosan languages. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Fascicle 1, ed. by S. A. Wurm, and Lois Carrington, 569-615. Pacific Linguistics C-61. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.
LI, PAUL JEN-KUEI. 1978b. A comparative vocabulary Saisiyat dialects. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 49(2).133-99. Taipei: Sinica Academia.
LI, PAUL JEN-KUEI. 1990. Classification of Formosan languages: Lexical evidence. Bulletin of The Institute of History and Philology 56(4).809-44.
LI, PAUL JEN-KUEI. 1995. The classification and interaction of northern Formosan Pepo-hoan tribes. [台灣北部平埔族的種類及其互動關係] Proceedings of Research on Pepo-hoan tribes [平埔研究論文集] 潘英海&詹素娟主編, 頁21-40. 台北: 中央研究院台灣史研究所籌備處. (in Chinese)
LI, PAUL JEN-KUEI. 1996. The Formosan Tribes and Languages in I-Lan. [宜蘭縣南島民族與語言] I-Lan: I-Lan Prefecture Government. (in Chinese)
LI, PAUL JEN-KUEI. 1997. The History and Interaction of Formosan Pepo-hoan Tribes. [台灣平埔族的歷史與互動] Taipei: Formosa Folkways. (in Chinese)
LI, PAUL JEN-KUEI. 2001. The dispersal of the Formosan aborigines in Taiwan. Language and Linguistics 2(1).271-8.
LI, PAUL JEN-KUEI. 2004a. Origins of the East Formosans: Basay, Kavalan, Amis, and Siraya. Language and Linguistics 5(2).363-76.
LI, PAUL JEN-KUEI. 2004b. Kavalan phonology: Synchronic and diachronic. Selected Papers on Formosan languages Vol.1, ed. by Paul Jen-kuei Li, 283-99. (originally published in 1982 GAVA: Studies in Austronesian Languages and Cultures Dedicated to Hans Kähler 17.479-95)
LIAO, HSIU-CHUAN. 2002. The interpretation of tu and Kavalan ergativity. Oceanic Linguistics 41(1).140-58.
LICHTENBERK, FRANTISEK. 2000. Reciprocals without reflexives. Reciprocals: Forms and functions, ed. by Zygmunt Frajzyngier and Traci S. Curl, 31-62. Typological Studies in Language 41. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
LIN, DONG-YI. 2006. The language of emotion in Kavalan. M.A. thesis. National Taiwan University.
LIN, HSUEH-O. 1999. Reported speech in Mandarin conversational discourse. Ph.D. Dissertation, National Taiwan Normal University.
LINDSTRÖM, EVA. 2002. The body in expressions of emotion: Kuot. Pragmatics and Cognition 10(1).159-84.
LUCY, JOHN A (ed.) 1993. Reflexive language: Reported speech and Metapragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LUCY, JOHN A. 1993. Reflexive language and the human disciplines. Reflexive language: Reported speech and Metapragmatics, ed. by John A. Lucy, 9-32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LUCY, JOHN A. 1993. General introduction. Reflexive language: Reported speech and Metapragmatics, ed. by John A. Lucy, 1-4. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LUTZ, CATHERINE. 1980. Emotion, ethnopsychology, and parental goals on Ifaluk Atoll. Unpublished paper, American Anthropological Association Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C.
LUTZ, CATHERINE. 1982. The domain of emotion words on Ifaluk. American Ethnologist 9(1).113-28.
LUTZ, CATHERINE. A. 1983. Parental goals, ethnopsychology, and the development of emotional meaning. Ethos 11(4).246-62.
LUTZ, CATHERINE A. 1986. Emotion, thought and estrangement: Emotion as a cultural category. Cultural Anthropology 1(3).287-309.
LUTZ, CATHERINE. A. 1988. Unnatural emotions: Everyday sentiments on a Micronesian atoll and their challenge to Western theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
LUTZ, CATHERINE, and GEOFFREY M. WHITE. 1986. The anthropology of emotions. Annual Review of Anthropology 15.405-36.
LYON, MARGOT L. 1995. Missing emotion: The limitations of cultural constructionism in the study of emotion. Cultural Anthropology 10(2).244-63.
LYONS, JOHN. 1968. Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LYONS, JOHN. 1977. Semantics. Vol. 1 & 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MAJID, ASIFA; MELISSA BOWERMAN; SOTARO KITA; DANIEL B.M. HAUN; and STEPHEN C. LEVINSON. 2004. Can language restructure cognition? The case for space. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 8(3).108-14.
MANDLER, G. 1975. Mind and emotion. New York: Wiley.
MANDLER, JEAN M. 1982. Recent research on story grammars. Language and comprehension, ed. by Le Ny and W. Kintsch, 207-218. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
MANDLER, JEAN M., and NANCY S. JOHNSON. 1977. Remembrance of things parsed: Story structure and recall. Cognitive Psychology 9.111-51.
MANSTEAD, ANTONY S.R., and AGNETA H. FISCHER. 2002. Beyond the universality- specificity dichotomy (a short introduction to the special issue on culture and emotion. Cognition and Emotion (Special Issue) 16(1).1-9.
MATISOFF, J. A. 1986. Hearts and minds in South-East Asian languages and English: An essay in the comparative lexical semantics of psycho-collocations. Cashiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 15(1).5-57.
MCGREGOR, WILLIAM. 1996. The grammar of nominal prefixing in Nyulnyul. In Hilary Chappell and William McGregor, 251-92.
MCKAY, GRAHAM. 1996. Body parts, possession marking and nominal classes in Ndjébbana. In Hilary Chappell and William McGregor, 293-326.
MEIER, BRIAN P., and MICHAEL D. ROBINSON. 2004. Why the sunny side is up: Associations between affect and vertical position. Psychological Science 15.243-7.
MEIER, BRIAN P., and MICHAEL D. ROBINSON. 2005. The Metaphorical Representation of Affect. Metaphor and Symbol 20(4).239-57.
MEIER, BRIAN P., MICHAEL D. ROBINSON, and G. L. CLORE. 2004. Why good guys wear white: Automatic inferences about stimulus valence based on color. Psychological Science 15.82-7.
MERVIS, C. B. 1987. Child-basic object categories and early lexical development. Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization, ed. by U. Neisser, 201-33. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
MICHAELIS, LAURA A. 2001. Exclamative constructions. Language typology and language universals Vol. 2, ed. by Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher and Wolfgang Raible, 1038-50. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
MICHAELIS, LAURA A., and KNUD LAMBRECHT. 1996. Toward a construction-based theory of language functions: The case of nominal extraposition. Language 72.215-47.
MURPHY, G. L. 1996. On metaphoric representation. Cognition 60.173-204.
MUSGRAVE, SIMON. 1999. Emotion verbs in Acehnese and linking theory. Selected paper from the 8th International conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Li, 31-94. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
MURRAY, I. R., and J. L. ARNOTT. 1993. Toward the simulation of emotion in synthetic speech: A review of the literature on human vocal emotion. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 93(2).1907-1108.
NABI, ROBIN L. The theoretical versus the lay meaning of disgust: Implications for emotion research. Cognition & emotion 16(5).695-703.
NAYLOR, PAZ BUENAVENTURA. 1986. On the semantics of reduplication. Focal I: Papers from the Fourth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. by P. Geraghty, Lawrence Carrington and Stephen A. Wurm, 175-85. Canberra: Australian National University.
NEISSER, U (ed.) 1987. Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
NICKERSON, C., and F. BARGIELA-CHIAPPINI. 1996. At the intersection between grammar and pragmatics: A contrastive study of personal pronouns and other forms of address in Dutch and Italian. Language Sciences 18(3-4).743-64.
OATLEY, KEITH, & JOHNSON-LAIRD, P. N. 1987. Towards a cognitive theory of the emotions. Cognition and Emotion 1.29-50.
OCHS, ELINOR, and BAMBI SCHIEFFELIN. 1989. Language has a heart. Text 9(1).7-25.
ÖHMAN, A. 1999. Distinguishing unconscious from conscious emotional processes: Methodological considerations and theoretical implications. Handbook of cognition and emotion, ed. by T. Dalgleish and M. J. Power, 321-352. Chichester, English: Wiley.
OHORI, TOSHIO. 2005. Construction grammar as a conceptual framework for linguistic typology. Grammatical constructions: Back to the roots, ed. by Mirjam Fried and Hans C. Boas, 215-37. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
ONO, TSUYOSHI, and SANDRA A. THOMPSON. 2003. Japanese (w)atashi/ore/boku ‘I’: They’re not just pronouns. Cognitive Linguistics 14(4).321-47.
ORTONY, ANDREW. 1988. Are emotion metaphors conceptual or lexical? Cognition and Emotion 2(2).95-103.
OSUMI, MIDORI. 1996. Body parts in Tinrin. In Hilary Chappell and William McGregor, 433-62.
PALMER, GARY B. 2003. Introduction to the special issue of language of thinking.
Cognitive Linguistics 14(2/3).97-108.
PALMER, GARY B. 2003. Talking about thinking in Tagalog. Cognitive Linguistics 14(2/3).251-280.
PALMER, GARY B., and DEBRA J. OCCHI. 1999. Introduction: Linguistic anthropology and emotional experience. Languages of sentiment: Cultural constructions of emotional substrates, ed. by Gary B. Palmer and Debra J. Occhi, 1-22. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
PANKSEPP, JAAK. 1992. A critical role for ‘Affective neuroscience’ in resolving what is basic about basic emotions. Psychological Review 99.554-60.
PANKSEPP, JAAK. 2000. Emotions as natural kinds within the mammalian brain. Handbook of emotions, ed. by Michael Lewis and Jeannette M. Haviland-Jones, 137-56. New York: The Guilford Press.
PANTHER, KLAUS-UWE, and GÜNTER RADDEN (eds.) 1999. Metonymy in language and thought. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
PANTHER, KLAUS-UWE, and GÜNTER RADDEN. 1999. Introduction. In Klaus-Uwe Panther and Günter Radden, 1-14.
PAWLEY, A. 1994. Kalam exponents of lexical and semantic primitives. Semantic and lexical universals: Theory and empirical findings, ed. by C. Goddard and A. Wierzbicka, 387-421. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
PIAGET, J. 1946. The child conception of physical causality. Translated from the French by Gabain, M. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (originally published, 1927)
PLUTCHIK, R. 1980. Emotion: A psychoevolutionary synthesis. New York: Harper & Row.
PRIESTLEY, CAROL. 2002. Insides and emotion in Koromu. Pragmatics and Cognition 10(1).243-70.
QUIRK, R.; S. GREENBAUM; G. LEECH; and J. SVARTVIK. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London & New York: Longman.
RADDEN, GÜNTER. 1998. The conceptualization of emotional causality by means of prepositional phrases. Speaking of emotions: Conceptualization and expression, ed. by Angeliki Athanasiadou and Elizbieta Tabakowska, 273-94. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
RADDEN, GÜNTER, and ZOLTÁN KÖVECSES. 1999. Towards a theory of metonymy. In Klaus-Uwe Panther and Günter Radden, 17-59.
REDDY, WILLIAM M. 1997. Against constructionism: The historical ethnography of emotions. Current Anthropology 38(3).327-351.
REDDY, WILLIAM M. 2001. The navigation of feeling: A framework for the history of emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
RENDE, RICHARD. 2000. Emotion and behavior genetics. Handbook of Emotions, ed. by Michael Lewis and Jeannette M. Haviland-Jones, 192-203. New York: The Guilford Press.
ROSALDO, MICHELL Z. 1980. Knowledge and passion: Ilongot notions of self and social life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ROSALDO, MICHELLE Z. 1984. Toward an anthropology of self and feeling. Culture Theory: Essays on Mind, Self, and Emotion, eds. by Richard A. Shweder, and Robert A. LeVine, 137-157. N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.
ROSCH, E.; C. B. MERVIS; W. GRAY; D. JOHNSON; and P. BOYES-BRAEM. 1976. Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 7.573-605.
ROSS, MALCOLM, and STACY FANG-CHING TENG. 2005. Formosan languages and linguistic typology. Language and Linguistics 6(4).739-81.
ROSS, MALCOLM. 2002. History and transitivity of western Austronesian voice and voice marking. The history and typology of western Austronesian voice systems, ed. by Fay Wouk and Malcolm Ross, 17-62. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
RUSSELL, JAMES A. 1991. Culture and the categorization of emotions. Psychological Bulletin 110(3).426-50.
RUSSELL, JAMES A. 2003. Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review 110(1).145-72.
RUSSELL, JAMES A.; JOSÉ-MIGUEL FERNÁNDEZ-DOLS; ANTONY S. R MANSTEAD; and J. C. WELLENKAMP (eds.) 1995. Everyday Conceptions of Emotion: An Introduction to the Psychology, Anthropology and Linguistics of Emotion. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
SADOCK, JERROLD M., and ARNOLD M. ZWICKY. 1985. Speech act distinctions in syntax. Language typology and syntactic description Vol 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
SCHEGLOFF, E. A. 1991. Conversation analysis and socially shared cognition. Perspectives on socially shared cognition, ed. by Lauren B. Resnick, John M. Levine and Stephanie D. Teasley, 150-71. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.
SCHERER, K. R. 1986. Vocal affect expression: A review and a model for future research. Psychological Bulletin 99.143-165.
SCHIFFRIN, DEBORAH. 1987. Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
SCHMID, HANS-JÖRG. 2000. English Abstract nouns as conceptual shells: From corpus to cognition. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.
SEARLE, J. R. 1980. Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3.417-24.
SEMIN, GÜN R.; CARIEN A. GÖRTS; SHARDA NANDRAM; and SEMIN-GOOSSENS ASTRID. 2002. Cultural perspectives on the linguistic representation of emotion and emotion events. Cognition and Emotion 16(1).11-28.
SHAVER, PHILLIP R.; HILLARY J. MORGAN; and SHELLEY WU. 1996. Is love a basic emotion? Personal Relationships 3.81-96.
SHAVER, P.; J. SCHWARTZ; D. KIRSTON; and C. O’CONNOR. 1987. Emotion knowledge: further exploration of a prototype approach. Journal of Personality and Social Behaviour 52.1061-86.
SHEN, CHIA-CHI. 2005. Reflexives and reciprocals in Kavalan. M.A. thesis. National Taiwan University.
SHIBATANI, MASAYOSHI. 1991. Grammaticalization of topic into subject. Approaches to grammaticalization, Vol. II. Focus on types of grammatical markers, ed. by Elizabeth Closs Traugott and Bernd Hein, 93-133. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
SHIBATANI, MASAYOSHI. 1996. Applicatives and benefactives: A cognitive account. Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani and Sandra A. Thompson, 157-94. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
SHWEDER, RICHARD A., and MARIA A. SULLIVAN. 1993. Cultural psychology: Who needs it? Annual Review of Psychology 44.497-523.
SOLOMON, ROBERT C. 1984. Getting angry. Culture Theory, ed. by Richard A. Shweder and Robert A. LeVine, 238-54. N. Y.: Cambridge U. Press.
SOLOMON, ROBERT C. 2000. The philosophy of emotion. Handbook of Emotions, ed. by Michael Lewis and Jeannette M. Haviland-Jones, 3-15. New York: The Guilford Press.
STAROSTA, STANLEY, ANDREW PAWLEY, and LAWRENCE REID. 1982. The evolution of focus in Austronesian languages. Papers from the Third International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics Vol. 2: Tracking the Travelers, ed. by A. Halim et al.,145-70. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
STAROSTA, STANLEY. 1986. Focus as recentralization. Focal I: Papers from the Fourth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. by Paul Geraghty, Lois Carrington and S. A. Wurm, 73-95. Pacific Linguistics, c-93.
STAROSTA, STANLEY. 1995. A grammatical subgrouping of Formosan languages. Austronesian Studies Relating to Taiwan. Symposium Series of the Institute of History and Philology, No. 3, ed. by Paul Jen-kuei Li, Cheng-hwa Tsang, Ying-kuei Huang, Dan-an Ho, and Chui-yu Tseng. 683-726. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
STASSEN, LEON. 1985. Comparison and universal grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.
STEIN, N. L., and L. J. LEVINE. 1990. Making sense out of emotion: The representation and use of goal-structure knowledge. Psychological and biological approaches to emotion, ed. by N. L. Stein, b. Leventhal and T. Trabasso, 45-73. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erbaulm.
STEWART MIRANDA. 2001. Pronouns of power and solidarity: The case of Spanish first person plural nosotros. Multilingual 20(2).155-69.
SU, LILY I-WEN. 2005. Conditional reasoning as a reflection of mind. Language and Linguistics 6(4).655-80.
SU, LILY I-WEN, and RACHEL HSIAO. 2006. Emotion events in Mandarin emotion constructions. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Construction Grammar. Sept. 1-3, Tokyo, Japan.
SUNG, LI-MAY, and CHIA-CHI SHEN. 2006. Reciprocals in Kavalan and a typological comparison. Language and Linguistics. Monograph, W-5. Streams converging into an ocean: Festschrift in honor of Professor Paul Jen-kuei Li on his 70th birthday, ed. By Henry Y. Chang, Lillian M. Huang and Dah-an Ho, 239-77. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
Sung, Li-May, and Shuping Huang. 2006. Split intransitivity in Kavalan. Paper presented at the Thirteen Annual Meeting of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association (AFLA-13), March 24-26. Taiwan: National Tsing-hua University.
SWEETSER, EVE. 1990. From etymology to pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
SWEETSER, EVE, and GILLES FAUCONNIER. 1996. Cognitive links and domains: Basic aspects of mental space theory. Spaces, world and grammar, ed. by Gills Fauconnier and Eve Sweetser, 1-28. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
SWEETSER, EVE. 1996. Conditionals and mental spaces. Spaces, world and grammar, ed. by Gills Fauconnier and Eve Sweetser, 318-33. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
TALLON, A. 1997. Head and heart: Affection, cognition, volition as triune consciousness. New York: Fordham University.
TALMY, LEONARD. 1972. Semantic structures in English and Atsugewi. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
TALMY, LEONARD. 1976. Semantic causative types. The grammar of causative constructions. Syntax and semantics, vol. 6, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani, 43-116. New York: Academia.
TALMY, LEONARD. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. Language typology and syntactic description, vol. 3, Grammatical categories and the lexicon, ed. by Timothy Shopen, 57-149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
TALMY, LEONARD. 1988. The relation of grammar to cognition. Topics in cognitive linguistics, ed. by Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn, 165-205. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
TALMY, LEONARD. 1996. The windowning of attention in language. Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani and Sandra A. Thompson, 235-87. New York: Oxford University Press.
TALMY, LEONARD. 2000. Toward a cognitive semantics. New York: Bradford Books.
TAN, ED S. 2000. Emotion, art, and the humanities. Handbook of emotions, ed. by Michael Lewis and Jeannette M. Haviland-Jones, 116-34. New York: The Guilford Press.
TAYLOR, JOHN R. 1995. Introduction: On construing the world. Language and the cognitive construal of the world, ed. by John R. Taylor and Robert E. MacLaury, 1-21. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
TAYLOR, JOHN R. 1998. Syntactic constructions as prototype categories. The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to languages structure, ed. by M. Tomasello, 177-202. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
TAYLOR, JOHN R. 2002. Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
TENG, STACY F. 2000. A Puyuma reference grammar. Series on Formosan Languages, 10. Taipei: Yuan-liu Publishing Co. (In Chinese)
TOMASELLO, M. 1992. First verbs: A case study in early grammatical development. New York: Cambridge University Press.
TOMASELLO, M. 1998. Introduction: The cognitive-functional perspective on language structure. The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to languages structure, ed. by M. Tomasello, 1-25. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
TOMASELLO, M. 2003. Introduction: Some surprises for psychologists. The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to languages structure, Vol. 2, ed. by M. Tomasello, 1-14. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
TURNER, MARK. 1990. Aspects of the invariance hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics 1(2).284-324.
TURNER, MARK. 1993. An image-schematic constraint on metaphor. Conceptualization and mental processing in language, ed. by Ed. R. A. Geiger and B. Rudzka-Ostyn, 291-306. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
TURNER, MARK. 1996. The literary mind. New York: Oxford University Press.
TYLER, S. A. 1969. Cognitive anthropology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
VAN GOOZEN, STEPHANIE, and FRIJDA, NICO H. 1993. Emotion words used in six European countries. European Journal of Social Psychology 23(1).89-95.
VAN VALIN, ROBERT D., JR. 1991. Another look at Icelandic case marking and grammatical relations. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9.145-94.
VIBERG, ÅKE. 1983. The verbs of perception: A typological study. Linguistics 21(1).123-62.
VIBERG, ÅKE. 2004/2005. The lexical typological profile of Swedish mental verbs. Languages in Contrast 5(1).121-57.
VOLOŠINOV, V. 1986 [1929]. Marxism and the philosophy of language, L. Matejka and I. Titunik (trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
WHARTON, TIM. 2003. Interjections, language and the ‘showing’/’saying’ continuum. Pragmatics and Cognition 11(2).173-215.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1986a. Human emotions: Universal or culture-specific? American Anthropologist 88.584-94.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1986b. Precision in vagueness: The semantics of English ‘approximatives’. Journal of Pragmatics 10.597-614.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1988a. Emotions across culture: Similarities and differences. American Anthropologist 90.982-3.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1988b. The semantics of grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1989. Soul and mind: Linguistic evidence for ethnopsychology and cultural history. American Anthropologist 91.41-58.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1992a. Semantics, culture, and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1992b. Talking about emotions: Semantics, culture and cognition. Cognition and Emotion 6(3/4).285-319.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1992c. Defining emotion concepts. Cognitive Science 16.539-81.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1992d. The semantics of interjection. Journal of Pragmatics 18.159-92.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1993. A conceptual basis for cultural psychology. Ethos 21(2).205-31.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1994a. ‘Cultural scripts’: A new approach to the study of cross-cultural communication. Language contact and language conflict, ed. by Martin Pütz, 69-87. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1994b. Emotion, language and cultural scripts. Emotion and culture, ed. by Shinobu Kitayama and H. R. Markus, 133-196. Washington: American Psychological Association.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1995. The relevance of language to the study of emotions. Psychological Inquiry 6(3).248-252.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1996. Japanese cultural scripts: Cultural psychology and “cultural grammar”. Ethos 24(3).527-55.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1998. German ‘cultural scripts’: Public signs as a key to social attitudes and cultural values. Discourse & Society 9(2).241-82.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 1999. Emotions across languages and culture: Diversity and universals. Cambridge University Press.
WIERZBICKA, ANNA. 2000. Lexical prototypes as a universal basis for cross-linguistic identification of “parts of speech”. Approaches to the typology of word classes, ed. by Petra M. Vogel and Bernard Comrie, 285-317. Mouton de Gruyter.
WIKAN, UNNI. 1989. Managing the heart to brighten face and soul: Emotions in Balinese morality and health care. American Ethnologist 16.294-312.
WILKINS, DAVID. 1986. Particle/clitics for criticism and complaint in Mparntwe Arrernte (Aranda). Journal of Pragmatics 10.575-596.
WILKINS, DAVID P. 1992. Interjections as deictics. Journal of Pragmatics 18.119-58.
WILSON, MARGARET. 2002. Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 9(4).625-36.
YEH, MARIE M. 1991. Saisiyat structure. M.A. Thesis, Tsing-hua University.
YEH, MARIE M. 1995. Focus and case marking system in Saisiyat. Papers from the First International Symposium on Languages in Taiwan, 29-58. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Company, Ltd.
YEH, MARIE M. 2000a. A Saisiyat reference grammar. Series on Formosan Languages, 2. Taipei: Yuan-liu Publishing Co. (In Chinese)
YEH, MARIE M. 2000b. Syntax and semantics of the Saisiyat negators. Grammatical analysis: Morphology, syntax and semantics. Studies in honor of Stanley Starosta (Oceanic Linguistic Special Publication No. 29), ed. by Videa P. De Guzman and Byron Bender, 258-73. Honolulu: University of Hawaii.
YEH, MARIE M. 2003. A Syntactic and Semantic Study of Saisiyat Verbs. Ph.D. Dissertation, National Taiwan Normal University.
YEH, MAYA YUTING. 2002. Emotion Concepts in Squliq Atayal. M.A. thesis, National Taiwan University.
YEH, YUTING. 2005. Negation in Kavalan: A syntactic study. M.A. thesis, National Taiwan University.
YU, NING. 1995. Metaphorical expressions of anger and happiness in English and Chinese. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 10(2).59-92.
YU, NING. 1998. The contemporary theory of metaphor: A perspective from Chinese. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
YU, NING. 2002. Body and emotion: Body parts in Chinese expression of emotion. Pragmatics & Cognition 10(1-2).341-67.
ZANUTTINI, RAFFAELLA, and PAUL PORTNER. 2000. The characterization of exclamative clauses in Paduan. Language 76(1).123-32.
ZWICKY, ARNOLD M. 1977. Hierarchies of person. Papers from the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 714-33. CLS, Chicago, IL.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 史書美〈張愛玲的慾望街車:重讀《傳奇》〉,收入《二十一世紀雙月刊》第24期,1994年8月。
2. 王健〈黃金枷鎖桎梏的兩條女性生命——曹七巧與蟬阿姨形象評析〉,收入《國文天地》第15卷9期,2000年。
3. 王曉明〈張愛玲文學模式的意義及其影響〉,收入《明報月刊》,第30卷第10期,1995年10月。
4. 白蘊華〈走過三十年代的傳奇:張愛玲短篇小說欣賞〉,收入《文藝月刊》,第204期,1986年6月。
5. 朱西寧〈先覺者、後覺者、不覺者談——〈張愛玲雜碎〉(唐文標著)〉,收入《書評書目》第42期,1976年10月。
6. 江迅〈新世紀再現張愛玲傳奇〉,收入《亞洲週刊》第14卷第44期,2000年11月。
7. 林幸謙〈張愛玲的少作論——壓抑符碼與文本的政治含意〉,收入《當代》第109期,1995年5月。
8. 林幸謙〈重讀〈金鎖記〉:鐵閨閣與雙重人格的儒家瘋女〉,收入《人文中國學報》第5期,1998年。
9. 林幸謙〈重讀《怨女》:尋找女性和他者的聲音〉,收入《中國現代文學理論》第12期,1998年。
10. 林幸謙〈女性焦慮與醜怪身體:論張愛玲小說中的女性亞文化群體〉,《中外文學》第27卷第6期,1998年。
11. 范伯群、季進〈論張愛玲的前期小說創作〉,收入《中國現代文學理論》第10期,1998年。
12. 范銘如〈文化.空間.嬝狀F治——蘇偉貞的「孤島張愛玲」〉,收入《聯合文學》第209期,2002年。
13. 袁瓊瓊〈張愛玲記〉,收入《聯合文學》第11期,1995年。
14. 馬莊穆 著、于錫娟 譯〈由張愛玲看中國傳統在文學中的優點〉,收入《文季》第3期,1974年。
15. 高全之〈那人正在燈火闌珊處——張愛玲如何三思「五四」〉,收入《當代》第176期,2002年。
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔