Abstract
In analysing and modelling the Tuscany regional system of innovation poles (www.poliinnovazione.unimore.it), we examine systematically available information on websites with two objectives: (i) to analyze the variety of language and content that characterize the poles in their online activities; (ii) examine the extent poles refer to the same institutions, enterprises, organizations, projects, and among these, organizations / or activities directly related to the (such as the companies managing the poles laboratories, incubators, the adherents ).
The notions of chunking and collocational networks are central to linguistics (e.g. Bybee 2010; McEnery 2006, 2012); chunking has been described as follows: “When two or more words are often used together, they […] develop a sequential relation, [… known] as ‘chunking’ […]. The strength of the sequential relations is determined by the frequency with which the two words appear together. […] The frequency with which sequences of units are used has an impact on their phonetic, morphosyntactic and semantic properties.
This paper focuses upon research aimed at providing a more detailed definition of dysphemisms and euphemisms in the context of a constructional approach to language (e.g. Goldberg 2006). In the last decades increasing attention has been devoted to taboo language, swearing and impoliteness, with a focus on so-called swearwords (also dysphemisms) and euphemisms - (e.g. Allan and Burridge 2006; McEnery 2006). To provide an understanding of how taboo language works, I propose a constructional approach centred on dysphemisms and euphemisms.
This paper focuses upon research aimed at providing a more detailed definition of dysphemisms and euphemisms in the context of a constructional approach to language (e.g. Goldberg 2006). In the last decades increasing attention has been devoted to taboo language, swearing and impoliteness, with a focus on so-called swearwords (also dysphemisms) and euphemisms - (e.g. Allan and Burridge 2006; McEnery 2006). To provide an understanding of how taboo language works, I propose a constructional approach centred on dysphemisms and euphemisms.
This paper focuses upon research aimed at providing a more detailed definition of dysphemisms and euphemisms in the context of a constructional approach to language (e.g. Goldberg 2006). In the last decades increasing attention has been devoted to taboo language, swearing and impoliteness, with a focus on so-called swearwords (also dysphemisms) and euphemisms - (e.g. Allan and Burridge 2006; McEnery 2006). To provide an understanding of how taboo language works, I propose a constructional approach centred on dysphemisms and euphemisms.