meaning, then there is little conceptual difference between the word and larger units such as compound nouns or modified noun phrases. This would suggest that more complex abstract
nominals, such as are found in typical Burmese sentences see chapter 5, would also be processed by the same rapid conceptual operations.
A further implication with regard to the conceptual blending model is the relevance of the Generic Space in selecting a “frame” of inputs, which itself is a form of contextual
selection and narrowing of options that can increase response time for cross-space mapping sets for various kinds of blends—both constructional and lexical meaning.
1.4 Conceptual Blends in N + N Constructions
As a head-final language, the Burmese order is Modifier + Head. Compound nouns also manifest this relation: the final noun of the compound serves as the psychological ground or
basis, while the first element is similar to a modifier. Although there are cases where semantically the relation is balanced or coordinate, the predominant pattern is where the final
noun serves as the head of the compound.
Conceptually, the Modifier position fills the conceptual blend role of Source space,
while the Head or Ground, fills the role of conceptual Target space in what is an asymmetrical relation of Input spaces. So, for example, the word for a medical doctor 6a in
Burmese is often analyzed as a compound noun or a modified noun that has become lexicalized pragmatically into a unitary noun, a completed blend.
6
Burmese compound nouns Component parts
Meaning in English
a. hc ăra wan
q|m 0ef
teacherdoctor + officialminister
medical doctor
b. a-myui: sa:
trsdK:om:
a kindracesome + sonmaleperson
countryman nationalcitizen
c. ca pe
pmay
writingpaper + palm leaf
literature Using the notions exemplified in figures 2 and 3, table 3 displays the roles of the
component parts of 6a, b, c in the conceptual blends. Elements that are brought into the Input spaces from the Generic space are not semantic primitives in some absolute, universal
lexicon but rather are relativistic, relational, and perceptually cognitive. In fact, they can be individualistic, as in the cases of poets and more creative thinkers or speakers, but the
resources of the Generic space, the cultural set of relevant similarities, are usually conventional so that working out the meaning of an innovation is possible and an
intellectually pleasant experience.
Grammar Modifier Head
Conceptual Structure
Source Input Space Target Input Space
Y Z hc
ăra wan
q|m 0ef
teacher, respected, title, doctor
government minister, cabinet official
a-myui: sa:
trsdK:om:
a kind, a race, a variety son, male, person
ca pe
pmay
writing, paper, religion, specialist palm leaf
Table 3. Blended elements in Burmese compound nouns The juxtaposition of two nominals is an implicit statement that there is a relationship
between them. The cognitive process of determining that relationship is here called
CONCEPTUAL BLENDING
or
SEMANTIC INTEGRATION
, which other models would call an
INTERSECTION OF FEATURES
. It is also a process that underlyingly is equative and as such is very like the stative predication in Burmese. Being a verb-final language, equative clauses are
as a rule simply juxtaposed nominals with a verb ‘be’ often omitted in non-Formal Burmese. “Today Saturday” is sufficient information in Burmese; the construction imposes the equative
verb. That is, to say that A is B, is to request the listener to establish the cross-linked mapping of elements that are relevant and to blend or resolve the two differences into some sort of
integrated sense either as an equative statement or as a blended nominal compound. The processing of equative or existential predications is different in complexity but not different
in nature to the cognitive processing that goes on with more lexically elaborate predications, such as ‘enveloped’, ‘established’, ‘comforted’, ‘equipped’. In these predicates the elements
contained in the Input spaces are more specific, which is why these types of verbs are more pictorial, more expressive, easier to process cognitively, and flow with the discourse better
than the relations established via juxtaposition. In juxtapostion extensive online cognitive operations are required unless the collocation is already highly conventionalized into a
unitary, blended meaning. Such word combinations in English, which may have initially taken more processing time and still may for some segments of the population that regard
them as unconventional, are ‘same-sex marriage’, ‘dead right’, ‘birth mother’, ‘mouse click’, ‘web post’. In each of these cases the two input domains are constrained by the linguistic
context, which makes cognitive processing easier and faster. For instance, in English it is not immediately clear without context whether ‘post’ and ‘click’ are nouns or verbs. The
grammatical word class allocation further reduces processing time by restricting the number of options considered relevant to the Input spaces.
One cognitive function of grammatical word classes—as noun or verb—is to reduce the interpretive options and to enable optimal processing of semantic blended elements.
Grammatical constructions then are those more complex arrangements of words into patterns that, as a whole, restrict the level and degree of interpretive possibilities, thereby facilitating
more rapid resolution of meaning. They establish quickly the intended sense in the connected
flow of speech and specify how a particular chunk of meaning relates to other chunks of meaning.
1.5 The Role of Grammatical Particles as Predicators
