[Lingtyp] query: "animal"

Sun Oct 14 08:55:58 UTC 2018

Hi David，
The modern usage covers just about everything that moves except micro-organisms, and contrasts with zhíwù 植物 ‘plants’ (‘things that are like posts’), and these two terms contrast in some quite early texts, but I have also seen old references (2000 years or so ago) that say that dòngwù are qínshòu 禽獸 ‘beasts’, which might mean only the higher order animals.

I have not been to a Chinese zoo (same word as in Japanese) for a very long time, but I seem to remember it being a rather wide range of creatures.

Randy
-----
Randy J. LaPolla, PhD FAHA （羅仁地）
Professor of Linguistics, with courtesy appointment in Chinese, School of Humanities 
Nanyang Technological University
HSS-03-45, 14 Nanyang Drive | Singapore 637332
http://randylapolla.net/
Most recent books:
The Sino-Tibetan Languages, 2nd Edition (2017)
https://www.routledge.com/The-Sino-Tibetan-Languages-2nd-Edition/LaPolla-Thurgood/p/book/9781138783324 <https://www.routledge.com/The-Sino-Tibetan-Languages-2nd-Edition/LaPolla-Thurgood/p/book/9781138783324>
Sino-Tibetan Linguistics (2018)
https://www.routledge.com/Sino-Tibetan-Linguistics/LaPolla/p/book/9780415577397 <https://www.routledge.com/Sino-Tibetan-Linguistics/LaPolla/p/book/9780415577397>

> On 14 Oct 2018, at 2:45 PM, Hartmut Haberland <hartmut at ruc.dk> wrote:
> 
> Japanese has 動物 (dōbutsu) which is obviously related to the Chinese term. But what creatures would a Japanese speaker expect to see in a 動物園 ‘zoo’? 
> 
> Den 14. okt. 2018 kl. 08.12 skrev David Gil <gil at shh.mpg.de <mailto:gil at shh.mpg.de>>:
> 
>> Randy,
>> 
>> So which of the items in (1-8) are covered by Chinese dòngwù (動物), ‘moving thing’?
>> 
>> David
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 14/10/2018 03:59, Randy LaPolla wrote:
>>> Hi David,
>>> The categories as you have them (1-8) reflect certain cultural conceptions, and so won’t be the same for other cultures. For example, in Chinese bats were traditionally seen as flying mice, and lizards were seen as four-legged snakes. 
>>> The word in Chinese that we translate as ‘animal’ is dòngwù (動物), ‘moving thing’. 
>>> 
>>> Randy
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> On 14 Oct 2018, at 12:33 AM, David Gil <gil at shh.mpg.de <mailto:gil at shh.mpg.de>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Dear all,
>>>> 
>>>> I am interested in exploring, cross-linguistically, the semantic range of words that correspond more or less to the English word "animal".
>>>>  
>>>> Here are examples of the things that English "animal" refers to:
>>>>  
>>>> 1. dog, kangaroo, lizard, frog ...
>>>> 2. eagle, sparrow, chicken, bat ...
>>>> 3. bee, scorpion, spider, centipede ...
>>>> 4. crab, shrimp ...
>>>> 5. worm, leech ...
>>>> 6. starfish, jellyfish, squid, octopus ...
>>>> 7. oyster, clam ...
>>>> 8. sponge (?) ...
>>>>  
>>>> I am looking for examples of languages in which the basic word closest to English "animal" is nevertheless different in its coverage. In particular, I would like to find instances — if such exist — of languages in which there is a basic word that covers the examples in 1-4 (or maybe 1-5) to the exclusion of those in 5-8 (or maybe 6-8).   (Note that the question concerns every-day words that reflect our naive folk biological knowledge, not with scientific terms in those few languages that have such terminology.)
>>>>  
>>>> Some words of background:  A colleague and I working in experimental cognitive science have found (non-linguistic) empirical evidence for the psychological reality of an ontological category that consists roughly of animals of the kind exemplified in 1-4 (and possibly also 5).  We are calling this category "higher animals".  The characteristic prototypical features of higher animals include a single axis of symmetry, the existence of head, torso and limbs, a face in the front of the head that includes sensory organs such as eyes, and a mouth for eating, and the ability to move forward in the direction that the head is facing.  A challenge that we face is that, in the (few) languages that we are familiar with, there is no simple word for higher animals.  But we are hoping that other languages might have such a word.  in addition, we would also welcome grammatical evidence for the category of higher animals, for example in the form of grammatical rules that are sensitive to the animacy hierarchy by making reference to a cut-off point between higher and other animals.
>>>>  
>>>> I look forward to your responses.  Thanks,
>>>>  
>>>> David
>>>> -- 
>>>> David Gil
>>>> 
>>>> Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
>>>> Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
>>>> Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, Germany
>>>> 
>>>> Email: gil at shh.mpg.de <mailto:gil at shh.mpg.de>
>>>> Office Phone (Germany): +49-3641686834
>>>> Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81281162816
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lingtyp mailing list
>>>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>>>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
>> 
>> -- 
>> David Gil
>> 
>> Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
>> Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
>> Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, Germany
>> 
>> Email: gil at shh.mpg.de <mailto:gil at shh.mpg.de>
>> Office Phone (Germany): +49-3641686834
>> Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81281162816
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lingtyp mailing list
>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20181014/842ccbed/attachment.htm>