Anna Wierzbicka, Semantics, Culture and cognition: Universal human concepts in culture-specific configurations. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. Pp. 487. Pb $29.95.

Abstract

This book brings together six published and as many new essays by means of which Wierzbicka has enlarged and made more profound our understanding of the multiplex relations between the forms of language, notably key words such as Russian dusha 'soul', and the underlying cultural and psychological meanings which they must have and to which they inevitably contribute. Wierzbicka's method for reconnoitering and attacking these territories is two-pronged-incorporating, first, sensitive textual and contextual analyses of words, idiomatic phrases, and culturally imbricated syntactic processes, e.g. the rates of use and some of the patterns of formations of the so-called impersonal constructions. This approach entails meticulous attention to patterns of usage, including literary usage, in actual languages such as Russian and her native Polish. This book also bristles with evidence from Australian languages (both English and Aboriginal), Japanese, French, and, to a lesser extent, Ilongot, Samoan, German, Italian, and Eskimo. Wierzbicka's second method is to explain linguistic meaning in terms which, she feels, are universal and which, in her work, take the shape of syllogisms, if-this-then-that propositions, and other schemas from classical logic. We find, then, along with empirical, multilingual richness, a concern that is not only "theoretical" in one linguistic sense (e.g. alluding to contemporary syntax), but that is also genuinely philosophical in the archaic and still lively sense of someone almost as obsessed as Socrates with such "imponderables" as fate and destiny, bravery and cowardice, soul and spirit, courtesy and embarrassment, honor and shame, humility and spiritual survival. We also find, pulled together here into general linguistics, a range of philosophical views that becomes a synecdoche of the history of (Western) philosophy from Aristotle on. Similarly, sociological, social-anthropological, and socialpsychological methods and concepts are dealt with or actively used with a range from ancestral figures such as Radcliffe-Brown to our contemporary Michelle Rosaldo. Clearly, SCC is a bold, almost hubristic attempt to synthesize many strands of social science, philosophy, and literature with linguistic, particularly socio-and ethnolinguistic, theory. The results, while never seamless, are always imaginative in texture and constructive in intent.

An Axiological Discussion: Address Forms as Reflectors of Values in Multilinguals

“…Studies on the influence of culture on linguistics (Wierzbicka 1992;Enfield 2002) shed light on a variety of linguistic conundrums that are difficult to explain in other ways. Following this line of research, the quest for understanding communicative ethno-style (Larina, 2015), and cross-cultural politeness strategies began.…”

The Linguistic Power of Connotations: The Case of Silence in English and Its Bulgarian Counterparts

“…The ones, which are relevant to the present study, are listed below: To illustrate the application of NSM, Goddard (2015: 821) provides the explication of ask in X asked Y something as 'X said something to Y, because X wanted to know something; X wanted Y to say something because of this'. Exploring meaning by NSM has been applied extensively to the study of culture-specific vocabulary, emotions, mental states, activity verbs, speech acts, physical qualities with focus on contrastive analysis (see Wierzbicka 1992, 1997, 1999, 2014, Goddard 2005, Goddard and Wierzbicka 2014, 2016. The present study employs NSM to explore the common perception of silence as having the power to activate negative intellectual and emotional states, which prevails over its power to ensure positive experience.…”

Hooked on a Feeling: Russia's Annexation of Crimea Through the Lens of Emotion

“…Linguistic and sociological research, indicating that Russian culture and language, in a comparative perspective, are highly “emotionally expressive” (Wierzbicka, 1992, p. 395), also suggests that this case may be amenable to an affect‐centric approach. This statement should not be conflated with a popular bias in the literature, particularly during the Cold War, which makes sweeping assumptions about Russian foreign policy in the style of thinly veiled orientalism.…”