Reframing the frame: toward a socio-cognitive perspective on fillmorean theory
This article critically revisits the notion of semantic frame in light of developments in Cognitive Linguistics and the growing adoption of sociocognitive approaches in language studies. It argues that, although Frame Semantics originated from Charles Fillmore’s efforts to describe lexical meaning,...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) |
| Repositorio: | Cadernos de Estudos Linguísticos |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8680047 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/cel/article/view/8680047 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Cognitive Linguistics Frame Sociocognition Linguística Cognitiva Sociocognição Lingüística Cognitiva Sociocognición |
| Sumario: | This article critically revisits the notion of semantic frame in light of developments in Cognitive Linguistics and the growing adoption of sociocognitive approaches in language studies. It argues that, although Frame Semantics originated from Charles Fillmore’s efforts to describe lexical meaning, its foundations have always been deeply rooted in an experiential, interactional, and social conception of meaning. The first part of the text explores the epistemological connections between Frame Semantics and the core principles of Cognitive Linguistics, emphasizing the situated, embodied, and shared nature of human cognition. Subsequently, it examines the historical trajectory of Fillmore’s theory, from the distinction between cognitive and interactional frames to its interface with Lexicography through the FrameNet project. The second half of the article revisits Brazilian research that employs the notion of frame in various fields, highlighting the methodological flexibility and interdisciplinary potential of the concept. Applications that encompass both stable (cognitive frames) and dynamic (discursive and interactional frames) framing processes are emphasized, with special attention to phenomena such as reframing. Finally, the article discusses the limits and possibilities of using the concept of frame in contemporary linguistics. It concludes by advocating for critical and productive reinterpretations of Fillmorean theory, reaffirming its relevance for the analysis of social cognition in linguistic practices. |
|---|