A cognitive semantic assessment of עִם and אֵת's semantic potential

[摘要] ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis provides a critical assessment of the semantic potential of two Biblical Hebrewlexemes: עִם and אֵת . Previous lexical inquiries of the target lexemes provide the impetus forthe current research; this is because the linguistic frameworks assumed by these studies areoutmatched in the amount of explanatory power accompanying more recent theoreticaldevelopments, primarily evidenced within Cognitive linguistics (and semantics). As itsmethodological framework, the current study then appropriates these new advances anddemonstrates a semantic potential of the target lexemes that can be determined throughcriteria offered by Tyler and Evans (2003). This criteria specifically aids in the task ofsemantic demarcation as well as identifying the primary sense, from which the remainingnetwork of senses are derived. Furthermore, not only is an attempt made at representing therange of עִם and אֵת 's semantic potential, but a proposal for the development of these senses isoffered as well. This is done primarily through an implementation of the theory ofgrammaticalization, as posited by Heine et al. (1991). The identified semantic networks arethen analyzed from two different perspectives of lexical inquiry: 1) as a monosemy-polysemycline, and 2) from both a semasiological and onomasiological point of departure (the lattermethod of onomasiology represents a unique contribution to the assessment of עִם and אֵתsince most Biblical Hebrew lexical inquiries are limited to being a semasiological endeavor).The investigation uses the Pentateuch as its data-set and reveals a representation of (at least)eleven distinct senses in עִם 's semantic network as well as אֵת 's. Even though each lexeme'ssemantic potential is comprised of primarily the same senses, these eleven distinct senses arenot completely synonymous and represent different meanings. Significantly, it is determinedthat 1) both target lexemes share the same primary sense (i.e., proto-scene), 2) both indicatethe same core senses and consequently, 3) the target lexemes may rightly be considered asnear synonyms.

[发布机构] Stellenbosch University