In:Visual Metaphors
Edited by Réka Benczes and Veronika Szelid
[Benjamins Current Topics 124] 2022
► pp. 209–230
Rendering, generalization and variation
On the use of multiple parallel texts as a comparative method in cognitive poetics
Published online: 9 September 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.124.09kno
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.124.09kno
Abstract
The chapter presents a case study of how the use of multiple parallel texts may be employed as a useful research method in cognitive poetics, using the English version of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass and its four published Czech versions as the samples. In the analysis, we examine the language of space in alternative verbalizations of the same literary scene across languages (English and Czech) and within the target language (Czech), and the different mental images invoked by the different ways of verbalizing the same scene. Our analysis shows that the use of multiple parallel texts can be a helpful research method in cognitive poetics, in the sense that the method is capable of providing naturalistic and representative linguistic evidence of how languages systematically differ, even for a domain as basic as space.
Keywords: construal, construction, generalization, parallel texts, stylistics
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Data and method
- 3.How the systems are similar
- 4.When the systems differ: Flexibility and irreducible difference
- 4.1Multiple parallel texts as a window to human cognitive flexibility
- 4.2Diachrony in multiple parallel texts as a key to identifying an irreducible difference between languages
- 5.Towards the use of multiple parallel texts as a method in comparative cognitive poetics
Acknowledgements Notes References Appendix
References (44)
Berman, R. A., & Slobin, D. I. (1987). Five
ways of learning how to talk about events: A cross-linguistic study of children’s
narratives. Cognitive Science Program, Institute of Cognitive Studies, University of California at Berkeley.
(1994). Relating
events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bowerman, M., & Pederson, E. (1992). Topological
relations picture series. In Cross-linguistic studies of spatial
semantic organization: Annual report of the Max Planck Institute for
Psycholinguistics, (pp. 53–56).
Brône, Geert & Vandaele, J. (2009). Cognitive
poetics: Goals, gains and gaps. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Carroll, L. (1902). Malé
Elišky země divů a příhod. (J. Váňa, Trans.). Praha: Alois Hynek. (Original work published 1865)
(1931). Alenčinadobrodružství
v říšidivů. (J. Císař, Trans.). Praha: František Borový. (Original work published 1865)
(1961). Alenka
v kraji divů. (A. Skoumal & H. Skoumalová, Trans.). Praha: SNDK. (Original
work published 1865)
Clark, H. (1973). Space,
time, semantics, and the child. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive
development and the acquisition of
language (pp. 27–63). New York: Academic Press.
Fillmore, C. (1968). The
case for case. In E. Bach & R. T. Harns (Eds.), Universals
in linguistic
theory (pp. 1–88). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Firbas, J. (1992). Functional
sentence perspective in written and spoken
communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions
at work: The nature of generalization in
language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gruber, J. S. (1965). Studies
in lexical relations (Doctoral Dissertation). Reprinted as part
of Lexical structures in syntax and
semantics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Landau, B., & Jackendoff, R. (1993). “What”
and “where” in spatial language and spatial cognition. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 16, 217–265.
Langacker, R. W. (1991). Foundations
of cognitive grammar: Descriptive
application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
(1995). The symbolic alternative. In H. Kardela & G. Persson (Eds.), New Trends in Semantics and Lexicography (pp. 89–118). Umea: Swedish Science Press.
Leech, G. N., & Short, M. (1981). Style
in fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional
prose. London: Longman.
Levinson, S. C. (2003). Space
in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive
diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lu, W. (2015). Image-schemas,
domains, co-text and the semantics of resultatives: A cognitive linguistic approach to –shang. Chinese Language and
Discourse, 6(2), 162–182.
Lu, W., & Verhagen, A. (2016). Shifting
viewpoints: How does that actually work across languages? An exercise in parallel text
analysis. In B. Dancygier, W. Lu & A. Verhagen (Eds.), Viewpoint
and the fabric of meaning: Form and use of viewpoint tools across languages and
modalities (pp. 169–190). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Lu, W. (2017). Metaphor,
conceptual archetypes and subjectification: The case of COMPLETION IS UP and the polysemy of shàng in
Chinese. In A. Athanasiadou (Ed.), Studies
in figurative thought and
language (pp. 231–249). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2019). Time,
tense and viewpoint shift across languages: A multiple-parallel-text approach to “tense shifting” in a tenseless
language. Cognitive
Linguistics, 30(2), 377–397.
(2020). Viewpoint and subjective construal across languages: English inversion, associated strategies and their Chinese renditions in multiple parallel texts. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, 7(2), 333–355.
Lu, W., Shurma, S., & Kemmer, S. (2020). Delivering the unconventional across languages: A Cognitive Grammar analysis of nonce words in ‘Jabberwocky’ and its Ukrainian renditions. Submitted to Review of Cognitive
Linguistics 18(1), 244–274.
Lu, W., Verhagen, A., & Su, I. (2018). A
multiple-parallel-text approach for viewpoint research across languages: The case of demonstratives in English and
Chinese. In Sz. Csábi (Ed.), Expressive
minds and artistic creations: Studies in cognitive
poetics (pp. 131–157). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rambousek, J. (2015). Back-translation and notes. In J. A. Lindseth & A. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Alice in a world of wonderlands: The translations of Lewis Carroll’s masterpiece (pp. 151–156). Delaware: Oak.
Semino, E., & Culpeper, J. (2002). Cognitive
stylistics: Language and cognition in text
analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Slobin, D. I. (1996). Two
ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In M. Shibatani & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical
constructions: Their form and
meaning (pp. 195–220). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Strnadová, Z. (2006). Předložky. In L. Dušková, et al. (Eds.), Mluvnicesoučasné
angličtinynapozadíčeštiny (pp. 273–302). Praha: Academia.
(2014). Lewis Carroll’s Alice in grammatical wonderlands. In Ch. Harrison et al. (Eds.), Cognitive Grammar in literature (pp. 101–116). Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
Talmy, L. (1983). How
language structures space. In H. L. Pick Jr. & L. P. Acreo (Eds.), Spatial
orientation: Theory, research, and
application (pp. 225–282). New York: Plenum Press.
Taylor, J. R. (2012). The
mental corpus: How language is represented in the mind. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tsur, R. (2008). Toward
a theory of cognitive poetics. Brighton and Portland: Sussex Academic Press.
Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2001). Reconsidering
prepositional polysemy networks: The case of over. Language, 77(4), 724–765.
Verhagen, A. (2012). Construal
and stylistics – within a language, across contexts, across languages. Stylistics across
disciplines:Conference proceedings (CD-ROM). Leiden.
Zhang, Y., Segalowitz, N., & Gatbonton, E. (2011). Topological
spatial representation across and within languages: IN and ON in Mandarin Chinese. The Mental
Lexicon, 6(3), 414–445.
