2004/10/01 by Lisa Matthewson · 2 citations
Arts and Humanities · Psychology · #Discourse Analysis in Language Studies #Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies #Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
paper · doi:10.1086/429207
crossref issued 2004/10/01 · crossref published 2004/10/01 · crossref published-print 2004/10/01 · openalex publication_date 2004/10/01 · crossref created 2005/01/28 · crossref deposited 2023/05/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/25 · crossref indexed 2026/07/29
This paper presents and motivates a methodology for conducting semantic fieldwork on languages of the Americas. I first argue that one cannot gather adequate information about meaning from spontaneous discourse alone. Thus, direct elicitation (including asking consultants for judgments) is an indispensable methodological tool. I then present more detailed methodological suggestions. I offer techniques for eliciting translations and discuss how one should interpret the results of a translation task. I discuss which types of judgment are legitimate, how to obtain judgments, how to interpret the results, and how discourse contexts should be presented. I make the (somewhat controversial) claim that consultants are unlikely to be influenced by the use of a meta‐language (such as English) and that a meta‐language is often the best option when presenting discourse contexts.