In:Fictive questions in the Zhuangzi: A cognitive rhetorical study
Mingjian Xiang
[Figurative Thought and Language 18] 2023
► pp. 125–154
References
Published online: 24 May 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.18.refs
https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.18.refs
Adams, J. W. (2006). The
performative nature and function of
Isaiah 40–55. New York: T & T Clark International.
(2020). The
performative dimensions of rhetorical questions in the Hebrew Bible: Do you
not know? Do you not hear?. New York: T & T Clark International.
Adolphs, R. (2006). How
do we know the minds of others? Domain-specificity, simulation, and enactive
social cognition. Brain
Research, 1079(1), 25–35.
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2016). Sentence
types. In J. Nuyts, & J. van der Auwera (Eds.), The
Oxford handbook of modality and
mood (pp. 141–165). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ainsworth-Vaughn, N. (1994). Is
that a rhetorical question? Ambiguity and power in medical
discourse. Journal of Linguistic
Anthropology, 4(2), 194–214.
Alessio, G. C. (2006). The
Rhetorical Juvenilia of Cicero and the artes
dictaminis. In V. Cox, & J. Ward (Eds.), The
rhetoric of Cicero in its medieval and early renaissance commentary
tradition (pp. 335–364). Leiden: Brill.
Allinson, R. E. (1989). Chuang-Tzu
for spiritual transformation: An analysis of the inner
chapters. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Alsadi, W., & Howard, M. (2021). The
multimodal rhetoric of humour in Saudi media
cartoons. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Anderson, R. D. (2000). Glossary
of Greek rhetorical terms connected to methods of argumentation, figures and
tropes from Anaximenes to
Quintilian. Leuven: Peeters Publishers.
Andueza, Patricia L. (2011). Rhetorical
exclamatives in Spanish. Doctoral dissertation. Columbus: The Ohio State University.
Andueza, Patricia L. & Gutiérrez-Rexach J. (2010). Negation
and the interpretation of Spanish rhetorical
exclamatives. In C. Borgonovo, M. Español-Echevarría, & P. Prévost (Eds.), Selected
proceedings of the 12th Hispanic Linguistics
Symposium (pp. 17–25). Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Angier, T., & Raphals, L. (2021). Skill
in ancient ethics: The legacy of China, Greece and
Rome. London/New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Antović, M. (2018a). Schemas,
grounds, meaning: On the emergence of musical concepts through conceptual
blending. Musicae
Scientiae, 22(1), 57–71.
(2018b). Waging
war against oneself: A conceptual blend at the heart of Christian ascetic
practice. In P. Chilton, & M. Kopytowska (Eds.), Religion,
language, and the human
mind (pp. 386–406). New York: Oxford University Press.
(2018c). Persuasion
in musical multimedia: A conceptual blending theory
approach. In J. Pelclová, & W. Lu (Eds.), Persuasion
in public
discourse (pp. 303–327). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Anzilotti, G. I. (1982). The
rhetorical question as an indirect speech device in English and
Italian. Canadian Modern Language
Review, 38(2), 290–302.
Archer, D. (2005). Questions
and answers in the English courtroom (1640–1760): A sociopragmatic
analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Aristotle. (2007). On
rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse (G. A. Kennedy, Trans.)
(2nd edition). New York: Oxford University Press.
Badarneh, M. A. (2003). The
rhetorical question as a discursive and stylistic device in the
Quran. Doctoral dissertation. Phoenix: Arizona State University.
(2009). Exploring
the use of rhetorical questions in editorial discourse: A case study of
Arabic editorials. Text &
Talk, 29(6), 639–659.
(2016). Proverbial
rhetorical questions in colloquial Jordanian
Arabic. Folia
Linguistica, 50(1), 207–242.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1975/1981). The
dialogic imagination (M. Holquist Ed., C. Emerson, & M. Holquist Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
(1979/1986). Speech
genres and other late essays (C. Emerson, & M. Holquist Eds., V. W. McGee Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Bartels, C. (2014). The
intonation of English statements and questions: A compositional
interpretation. New York: Routledge.
Baxter, W. H., & Sagart, L. (2014). Old
Chinese: A new reconstruction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bechmann, S. (2010). Rhetorische
Fragen [Rhetorical questions]. Master
thesis. Düsseldorf: University of Düsseldorf.
Beekman, J., & Callow, J. (1974). Translating
the word of God: With scripture and topical
indexes. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Bergen, B. (2005). Mental
simulation in literal and figurative language
understanding. In S. Coulson, & B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Eds.), The
literal and nonliteral in language and
thought (pp. 255–280). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Bergen, B., & Chang, N. (2005). Embodied
construction grammar in simulation-based language
understanding. In J.-O. Östman, & M. Fried (Eds.), Construction
grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical
extensions (pp. 149–190). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bergen, B., & Wheeler, K. (2010). Grammatical
aspect and mental simulation. Brain and
Language, 112(3), 150–158.
Berkson, M. (1996). Language:
The guest of reality – Zhuangzi and Derrida on language, reality, and
skillfulness. In P. Kjellberg, & P. J. Ivanhoe (Eds.), Essays
on skepticism, relativism, and ethics in the
Zhuangzi (pp. 97–126). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
(2011). Death
in the Zhuangzi: Mind, nature, and the art of
forgetting. In A. Olberding, & P. J. Ivanhoe (Eds.), Mortality
in traditional Chinese
thought (pp. 191–224). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman
grammar of spoken and written
English. London: Longman.
Biezma, M., & Rawlins, K. (2017). Rhetorical questions: Severing asking from questioning. In D. Burgdorf, J. Collard, S. Maspong, & B. Stefánsdóttir (Eds.), Proceedings of semantics and linguistic theory 27 (pp. 302-322). Washington, DC: LSA Publishing.
Bisang, W. (2008). Underspecification
and the noun/verb distinction: Late archaic Chinese and
Khmer. In A. Steube (Ed.), The
discourse potential of underspecified
structures (pp. 55–81). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
(2013). Word-class
systems between flexibility and rigidity: An integrative
approach. In J. Rijkhoff, & E. van Lier (Eds.). Flexible
word classes: Typological studies of underspecified parts of
speech (pp. 275–302). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bizzell, P., Herzberg, B., & Reames, R. (Eds.). (2020). The
rhetorical tradition: Readings from classical times to the
present (3rd
edition). Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Black, E. (1992). Rhetorical
questions: Studies of public
discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Blair, D. (1806). The
class book: Or, three hundred and sixty-five reading lessons, adapted to the
use of schools; for every day in the year. selected, arranged, and compiled,
from the best
authors. London: R. Taylor, & Co.
Blondell, R. (2002). The
play of character in Plato’s
dialogues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bodde, D. (1991). Punctuation:
Its use in China and elsewhere, Rocznik
Orientalistyczny/Yearbook of Oriental
Studies, 47(2), 15–23.
Bonifazi, A. (2018). Embedded
focalization and free indirect speech in Homer as viewpoint
blending. In J. Ready & C. Tsagalis (Eds.), Homer
in performance: Rhapsodes, narrators, and
characters (pp. 230–254). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
(2022). Dialogic
syntax in ancient Greek
conversation. In R. F. Person Jr., R. Wooffitt, & J. P. Rae (Eds.), Bridging
the gap between conversation analysis and poetics: Studies in
talk-in-interaction and literature twenty-five years after
Jefferson (pp. 140–179). New York: Routledge.
Bonnet, M., Decety, J., Jeannerod, M., & Requin J. (1997). Mental
simulation of an action modulates the excitability of spinal reflex pathways
in man. Cognitive Brain
Research, 5(3), 221–228.
Booth, M. (2017). Shakespeare
and conceptual blending: Cognition, creativity,
criticism. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Borge, S. (2013). Questions. In M. Sbisà, & K. Turner (Eds.), Pragmatics
of speech
actions (pp. 411–443). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Bowery, A.-M. (2007). Know
thyself: Socrates as
storyteller. In G. A. Scott (Ed.), Philosophy
in dialogue: Plato’s many
devices (pp. 82–110). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Brandt, L. (2008). A
semiotic approach to fictive interaction as a representational strategy in
communicative meaning
construction. In T. Oakley, & A. Hougaard (Eds.), Mental
spaces in discourse and
interaction (pp. 109–148). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2013). The
communicative mind: A linguistic exploration of conceptual integration and
meaning construction. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Braun, B., Dehé, N., Neitsch, J., Wochner, D., & Zahner, K. (2019). The
prosody of rhetorical and information-seeking questions in
German. Language and
Speech, 62(4), 779–807.
Brier, N. M. (2015). Enhancing
self-control in adolescents: Treatment strategies derived from psychological
science. New York: Routledge.
Brown, J. (1993). A
palaeographer’s view: The selected writings of Julian
Brown (J. Bately, M. P. Brown, & J. Roberts Eds.). London: Harvey Miller Publishers.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1978/1987). Politeness:
Some universals in language
usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brueggemann, W. A. (1973). Jeremiah’s
use of rhetorical questions. Journal of
Biblical
Literature, 92(3), 358–374.
Brunyé, T. T., Ditman, T., Mahoney, C. R., Augustyn, J. S., & Taylor, H. A. (2009). When
you and I share perspectives: Pronouns modulate perspective taking during
narrative comprehension. Psychological
Science, 20(1), 27–32.
Brunyé, T. T., Ditman, T., Mahoney, C. R., Walters, E. K., & Taylor, H. A. (2010). You
heard it here first: Readers mentally simulate described
sounds. Acta
Psychologica, 135(2), 209–215.
Burke, K. (1966). Definition of man. In K. Burke (Ed.), Language as symbolic action: Essays on life, literature, and method (pp. 3–24). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bussmann, H. (2006). Routledge
dictionary of language and linguistics (G. P. Trauth, & K. Kazzazi Trans.
& Eds.). New York: Routledge.
Campbell, K. K., Huxman, S. S., & Burkholder, T. A. (2014). The
rhetorical act: Thinking, speaking and writing
critically (5th
edition). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Cao, Ch. (1982/2007). Zhuangzi
qianzhu [The annotated book of the
Zhuangzi]. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.
Cao, X. (1998). Lun
daojia shenmei guannian zhong de xiucilun neihan [On the rhetorical
implication of the Daoist aesthetic
view]. Rhetoric
Learning, 1, 10–12.
Carlson, S. M., Mandell, D. J., & Williams, L. (2004). Executive function and theory of mind: Stability and prediction from ages 2 to 3. Developmental psychology, 40(6), 1105-1122.
Carroll, J. (2020). Imagination,
the brain’s default mode network, and imaginative verbal
artifacts. In J. Carroll, M. Clasen, & E. Jonsson (Eds.), Evolutionary
perspectives on imaginative
culture (pp. 31–52). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Carroll, L. (1865/1998). Alice’s
adventures in Wonderland and through the looking
glass (The centenary
edition)(H. Houghton Ed.). London: Penguin Books Limited.
Cerović, M. (2016). When
suspects ask questions: Rhetorical questions as a challenging
device. Journal of
Pragmatics, 105, 18–38.
Chai, D. (2016). On
pillowing one’s skull: Zhuangzi and Heidegger on
death, Frontiers of Philosophy in
China, 11(3), 483–500.
Chang, J. (2012a). Cong
xinli kongjian lilun jiedu gudai duochong laiyuan danyi mubiao toushe yupian
zhong de yinyu [Mental space theory and the metaphorical interpretations in
classical Chinese discourse with multiple
source], Journal of Chinese Language
Learning, 9(1), 2–23.
(2012b). Xinli
kongjian lilun yu zhuangzi yong de yinyu [Mental space theory and the
relation of metaphors to ‘usefulness’ in the
Zhuangzi]. Language and
Linguistics, 13(5), 999–1027.
Chen, G. (1983/2007). Zhuangzi
jinshi jinyi zuixin xiuding ban [Modern
commentaries and translations of Zhuangzi (Newly revised
edition)]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
Chen, G. L., & Wang, J. (1998). Zhongguo
xiucixue tongshi: Xianqin lianghan weijin nanbei chao
juan [A complete history of Chinese rhetoric:
Pre-Qin, Two Han, Wei, Jin, Southern, and Northern
dynasties]. Changchun: Jilin Education Press.
Chen, H. (2003). Cong
dao de guannian xingtai kan zhuangzi de xiuci lixiang [On Zhuangzi’s
rhetorical ideal from his conceptulization of
Dao]. Journal of Hebei Normal University
(Philosophy and Social Sciences
Edition), 26(1), 46–50.
Chen, M. (1992). Hanyu
jiaxing yiwenju yanjiu [A study on no-genuine interrogative sentences in
Mandarin]. Journal of Nanjing Normal
University (Social Science
Edition), 4, 78–83.
Chen, P. Q. (1983). Zhongguo
gudai yuyanshi [A History of Fables in Ancient
China]. Changsha: Hunan Education Press.
Chen, P. (2001). Zhuangzi
de yuyanguan ji dui xiandai xiuci d qishi [Zhuangzi’s view of language and
its implication for modern rhetoric]. Journal
of Language and Literature
Studies, 5, 61–63.
Chen, Q. (2009). Yujing
cha yu zhuangzi de xiuci renzhi [Context gap and the cognition of Zhuangzi’s
rhetoric]. Journal of Yangtze University
(Social Sciences
Edition), 32(4), 151–152.
(2010a). Shuo
buke shuo: Zhuangzi de huayu yanshuo celüe [Speak about the unspeakable: The
discourse strategy of Zhuangzi]. Journal of
Putian University (Social Sciences
Edition), 32(4), 151–152.
(2010b). Zhuangzi
xiuci yanjiu [A study on the rhetoric in the
Zhuangzi]. Changchun: Jilin University Press.
Chen, X., Feng, M., & Xu, R. (2013). Xianqin
wenxian xinxi chuli [Pre-Qin document information
processing]. Beijing: World Publishing Corporation.
Chou, F. (1961). Zhongguo
gudai yufa zaoju bian shang [A historical grammar
of ancient Chinese Part 1:
Syntax]. Taipei: Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica.
Chou, Y. (2011). Zhuangzi
qiwulun jiegou yanjiu: Lun qi wenju xingshi yinyu ji
yuyan [Research into the structure of Zhuangzi
“Qiwulu”: Question form, metaphor and
allegory]. Master
thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan University.
Cicero, M. T. (1954). Cicero
Ad C. Herennium de ratione dicendi:(Rhetorica ad
Herennium) (H. Caplan, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cienki, A. (2008). Looking
at analyses of mental spaces and blending/Looking at and experiencing
discourse in
interaction. In T. Oakley, & A. Hougaard (Eds.), Mental
spaces in discourse and
interaction (pp. 235–245). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cienki, A., & Giansante, G. (2014). Conversational
framing in televised political discourse: A comparison from the 2008
elections in the United States and
Italy. Journal of Language and
Politics, 13(2), 255–288.
Claridge, C. (2005). Questions
in early modern English pamphlets. Journal of
Historical
Pragmatics, 6(1), 133–168.
Classe, O. (2000). Encyclopedia
of literary translation into English:
A-L. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers.
Cole, S. N., Smith, D. M., Ragan, K., Suurmond, R., & Armitage, C. J. (2021). Synthesizing
the effects of mental simulation on behavior change: Systematic review and
multilevel meta-analysis. Psychonomic
Bulletin &
Review, 28(5), 1514–1537.
Colston, H. L. (2021). Cognitive
linguistics and figurative
language. In W. Xu, & J. R. Taylor (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of cognitive
linguistics (pp. 408–420). New York: Routledge.
Combs, S. C. (2004). The
useless-/usefulness of argumentation: The Dao of
disputation. Argumentation and
Advocacy, 41(2), 58–71.
Comrie, B. (1984). Russian. In W. Chisholm, L. T. Milic, & J. A. C. Greppin (Eds.), Interrogativity:
A colloquium on the grammar, typology and pragmatics of questions in seven
diverse languages, Cleveland, Ohio, October 5th 1981–May 3rd
1982 (pp. 7–46). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Conrad, R. (1982). Rhetorische
Fragen [Rhetorical questions]. Zeitschrift
für
Slawistik, 27(3), 420–428.
Cooren, F. (2010). Action
and agency in dialogue: Passion, incarnation and
ventriloquism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2012). Communication
theory at the center: Ventriloquism and the communicative constitution of
reality. Journal of
Communication, 62(1), 1–20.
Coulson, S. (2001). Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
(2005). Sarcasm
and the space structuring
model. In S. Coulson, & B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Eds.), The
literal and nonliteral in language and
thought (pp. 129–144). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
(2006). Purple
persuasion: Deliberative rhetoric and conceptual
blending. In J. Luchjenbroers (Ed.), Cognitive
linguistics investigations: Across languages, fields and philosophical
boundaries (pp. 47–65). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Coulson, S., & Pascual, E. (2006). For
the sake of argument: Mourning the unborn and reviving the dead through
conceptual blending. Annual Review of
Cognitive
Linguistics, 4(1), 153–181.
Coutinho, S. (2015). Conceptual
analyses of
the Zhuangzi. In X. Liu (Ed.), Dao
companion to Daoist
philosophy (pp. 159–191). Dordrecht: Springer.
Creel, H. G. (1982). What
is Taoism?: And other studies in Chinese cultural
history. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cutrer, M. (1994). Time and tense in narratives and everyday language. Doctoral dissertation. San Diego, CA: University of California, San Diego.
D’Argembeau, A., Ruby, P., Collette, F., et al.. (2007). Distinct
regions of the medial prefrontal cortex are associated with self-referential
processing and perspective taking. Journal of
Cognitive
Neuroscience, 19(6), 935–944.
Dai, W. (1986). Daojia
xiuci sixiang jiqi lishi diwei [The Daoist Rhetorical Thought and its
historical]. Seeking
Truth, 2, 75–77+57.
(2008). Personal
pronouns, blending, and narrative
viewpoint. In A. Tyler, Y. Kim, & M. Takada (Eds.), Language
in the context of use: Discourse and cognitive approaches to
language (pp. 167–182). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E. (2012). Viewpoint
in language: A multimodal
perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dancygier, B., & Vandelanotte, L. (Eds.) (2017). Special
issue: Viewpoint phenomena in multimodal
communication. Cognitive
Linguistics, 28(3), 371–598.
Dancygier, B., Lu, W., & Verhagen, A. (2016). Viewpoint
and the fabric of meaning. Form and use of viewpoint tools across languages
and
modalities. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Davis, D. (2008). Identification:
Burke and Freud on who you are. Rhetoric
Society
Quarterly, 38(2), 123–147.
de Regt, L. J. (1994). Functions
and implications of rhetorical questions in the Book of
Job. In R. D. Bergen (Ed.), Biblical
Hebrew and discourse
linguistics (pp. 361–373). Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
de Regt, L. J. (1996). Discourse implications of rhetorical questions in Job, Deuteronomy and the Minor Prophets. In L. J. de Regt, J. de Waard, & J. P. Fokkelman (Eds.), Literary structure and rhetorical strategies in the Hebrew Bible (pp. 51-78). Assen: Van Gorcum.
Decety, J. (1996). Do
imagined and executed actions share the same neural
substrate? Cognitive Brain
Research, 3(2), 87–93.
(2005). Perspective
taking as the royal avenue to
empathy. In B. F. Malle, & S. D. Hodges (Eds.), Other
minds: How humans bridge the divide between self and
others (pp. 143–157). New York/London: The Guilford Press.
Decety, J., & Grèzes, J. (1999). Neural
mechanisms subserving the perception of human
actions. Trends in Cognitive
Sciences, 3(5), 172–178.
Decety, J., & Ingvar, D. H. (1990). Brain
structures participating in mental simulation of motor behavior: A
neuropsychological interpretation. Acta
Psychologica, 73(1), 13–34.
Dehé, N., & Braun, B. (2020a). The
intonation of information-seeking and rhetorical questions in
Icelandic. Journal of Germanic
Linguistics, 32(1), 1–42.
(2020b). The
prosody of rhetorical questions in
English. English Language &
Linguistics, 24(4), 607–635.
Demetrius. (1995). On
style (Doreen C. Innes Ed.
& Trans., based on William Rhys
Roberts). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Deng, Ch.
(2010). Zhuangzi qiwulun yiwenju xiuci
fenxi [Rhetorical analysis of interrogatives in Zhuangzi’s chapter
Qiwulun], Journal of Chuzhou
University, 12(4), 1–3.
Ditman, T., Brunyé, T. T., Mahoney, C. R., & Taylor, H. A. (2010). Simulating
an enactment effect: Pronouns guide action simulation during narrative
comprehension. Cognition, 115(1), 172–178.
Driver, J. L. (1988). Vain
questions. In M. Meyer (Ed.), Questions and
questioning (pp. 243–253). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Du Bois, J. W., & Giora, R (2014). From
cognitive-functional linguistics to dialogic
syntax. Cognitive
Linguistics, 25(3), 351–357.
Egg, M. (2007). Meaning
and use of rhetorical
questions. In M. Aloni, P. Dekker, & F. Roelofsen (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 16th Amsterdam
Colloquium (pp. 73–78). Amsterdam: ILLC/Department of Philosophy, University of Amsterdam.
Eno, R. (1996). Cook
Ding’s Dao and the limits of
philosophy. In P. Kjellberg, & P. J. Ivanhoe (Eds.), Essays
on skepticism, relativism, and ethics in the
Zhuangzi (pp. 127–151). Albany: SUNY Press.
Enos, T. (Ed.) (2013). Encyclopedia
of rhetoric and composition: Communication from ancient times to the
information age. New York: Routledge.
Escalas, J. E. (2004). Imagine
yourself in the product: Mental simulation, narrative transportation, and
persuasion. Journal of
Advertising, 33(2), 37–48.
Escandell-Vidal, V. (1998). Intonation
and procedural encoding: The case of Spanish
interrogatives. In V. Rouchota, & A. H. Jucker (Eds.), Current
issues in relevance
theory (pp. 169–204). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Estes, D. (2013). The
questions of Jesus in John: Logic, rhetoric and persuasive
discourse. Leiden: Brill.
(2017). Questions
and rhetoric in the Greek New Testament: An essential reference resource for
exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive
linguistics: An
introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Fahnestock, J. (2005). Rhetoric
in the age of cognitive
science. In R. Graff, A. E. Walzer, & J. Atwill (Eds.), The
viability of the rhetorical
tradition (pp. 159–179). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
(2009). Quid
pro nobis. Rhetorical stylistics for argument
analysis. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Examining
argumentation in context. fifteen studies on strategic
maneuvering (131–152). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fairclough, N. (1994). Conversationalization
of public discourse and the authority of the
consumer. In N. Abercrombie, R. Keat, & N. Whiteley (Eds.), The
authority of the
consumer (253–268). London/New York: Routledge.
Fantin, J. D. (2010). The
Greek imperative mood in the New Testament: A cognitive and communicative
approach. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Farnsworth, W. (2011). Farnsworth’s
classical English
rhetoric. Boston, MA: David R. Godine Publisher.
Fauconnier, G. (1985/1994). Mental
spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural
language. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
(1999). Methods and generalizations. In T. Janssen, & G. Redeker (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Foundations, scope, and methodology (pp. 95–129). The Hague: Mouton De Gruyter.
(2007). Mental
spaces. In D. Geeraerts, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Oxford
handbook of cognitive
linguistics (pp. 351–376). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(2010). Ten lectures on cognitive construction of meaning. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (1994). Conceptual
projection and middle spaces. UCSD cognitive science technical report 9401.
(1996). Blending
as a central process of
grammar. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), Conceptual
structure, discourse, and
language (pp. 113–130). Stanford: CSLI.
(2002). The
way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden
complexities. New York: Basic Books.
Faul, L., Jacques, P. L. S., DeRosa, J. T., Parikh, N., & De Brigard, F. (2020). Differential
contribution of anterior and posterior midline regions during mental
simulation of counterfactual and perspective shifts in autobiographical
memories. Neuroimage, 215, 116843.
Fillmore, C. (1982). Frame
semantics. In The
Linguistic Society of Korea
(Ed.), Linguistics in the morning
calm (pp. 111–137). Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Co.
Fonseca, P., Pascual E., & Oakley, T. 2020. “Hi,
Mr. President!”: Fictive interaction blends as a unifying rhetorical
strategy in satire. Review of Cognitive
Linguistics, 18(1), 183–216.
Forsyth, M. (2013). The
elements of eloquence: How to turn the perfect English
phrase. London: Icon Books Ltd.
Frank, J. (1990). You
call that a rhetorical question?: Forms and functions of rhetorical
questions in conversation. Journal of
Pragmatics, 14(5), 723–738.
Frank, S. L., & Vigliocco, G. (2011). Sentence
comprehension as mental simulation: An information-theoretic
perspective. Information, 2(4), 672–696.
Fraser, B. (1998). Contrastive
discourse markers in
English. In A. H. Jucker, & Y. Ziv (Eds.), Discourse
markers: Descriptions and
theory (pp. 301–326). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Freeborn, D., French, P., & Langford, D. (1993). Variety
in written English: An introduction to the study of
language (2nd
edition). London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.
Fu, H. (2007). Shiwen
xuda yu zhiwen buda: Shewen de liangzhong teshu leixing [Questions with
non-genuine answers and questions with no answers: Two special types of
rhetorical questions]. Journal of Zhejiang
Shuren
University, 7(6), 121–124.
Fung, Y. (1948/1997). A
short history of Chinese philosophy (D. Bodde Ed.). New York: The Free Press.
(Trans.). (1964). Chuang-Tsŭ:
A new selected translation with an exposition of the philosophy of Kuo
Hsiang (2nd
edition). New York: Paragon Book Reprint Corp.
Galambos, I. (2014). Punctuation
marks in medieval Chinese
manuscripts. In J. Quenzer, D. Bondarev, & J.-U. Sobisch (Eds.), Manuscript
cultures: Mapping the
field (pp. 341–357). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Ge, Z. (2014). An
intellectual history of China, volume one: Knowledge, thought, and belief
before the seventh century CE (M. S. Duke & J. Chiu-Duke, Trans.). Leiden: Brill.
Geeraerts, D. (2021). Second-order
empathy, pragmatic ambiguity, and
irony. In A. Soares da Silva (Ed.), Figurative
language – Intersubjectivity and
usage (pp. 19–40). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gerrig, R. J. (1993). Experiencing
narrative worlds: On the psychological activities of
reading. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Gibbons, M. (2018). A
neurorhetoric of incongruity. Poroi: An
Interdisciplinary Journal of Rhetorical Analysis &
Invention, 13(2).
Gibbs, R. W. Jr., & Matlock T. (2008). Metaphor,
imagination, and simulation: Psycholinguistic
evidence. In R. W. Gibbs Jr. (Ed.), The
Cambridge handbook of metaphor and
thought (pp. 161–176). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs, R. W., Jr., & Okonski, L. (2022). Allegory
and bodily
imagination. In V. Brljak (Ed.), Allegory
studies: Contemporary
perspectives (pp. 213–234). New York: Routledge.
Givón, T. (1983). Topic
continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language
study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding
language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin
&
Review, 9(3), 558–565.
Goldberg, A. E., & Del Giudice, A. (2005). Subject-auxiliary
inversion: A natural category. The Linguistic
Review, (22), 411–428.
Goldman, A. I. (2006). Simulating
minds: The philosophy, psychology, and neuroscience of
mindreading. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gómez Ramírez, D. A. J. (2020). Artificial
mathematical intelligence: Cognitive, (meta)mathematical, physical, and
philosophical foundations. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Gomola, A. (2018). Conceptual
blending in early Christian discourse: A cognitive linguistic analysis of
pastoral metaphors in patristic
literature. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Gordejuela, A. (2021). Flashbacks
in film: A cognitive and multimodal
analysis. New York: Routledge.
Gowans, C. W. (2021). Self-cultivation
philosophies in ancient India, Greece, and
China. New York: Oxford University Press.
Grady, J. (2000). Cognitive
mechanisms of conceptual
integration. Cognitive
Linguistics, 11(3–4), 335–345.
Graham, A. C. (1979/1990). How
much of Chuang Tzu did Chuang Tzu
write? In A. C. Graham (Ed.), Studies
in Chinese philosophy and philosophical
literature (pp. 283–321). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
(1989). Disputers
of the Tao: Philosophical argument in ancient
China. La Salle, IL: Open Court Publishing Company.
Graziani, R. (2021). Fiction
and philosophy in the Zhuangzi: An introduction to early Chinese Taoist
thought. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Green, M. C. (2004). Transportation
into narrative worlds: The role of prior knowledge and perceived
realism. Discourse
Processes, 38(2), 247–266.
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The
role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public
narratives. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 79(5), 701–721.
(2002). In
the mind’s eye: Transportation-imagery model of narrative
persuasion. In M. C. Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative
impact: Social and cognitive
foundations (pp. 315–341). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Green, M. C., & Donahue, J. K. (2009). Simulated
worlds: Transportation into
narratives. In K. D. Markman, W. M. P. Klein, & J. A. Suhr (Eds.), Handbook
of imagination and mental
simulation (pp. 241–256). New York: Psychology Press.
Grésillon, A. (1980). Zum
linguistischen Status rhetorischer Fragen [On the linguistic status of
rhetorical questions]. Zeitschrift für
Germanistische
Linguistik, 8(3), 273–289.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic
and
Conversation. In P. Cole, & H. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax
and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech
Acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.
Grimm, J. (1890). Deutsche
Grammatik von Jacob Grimm [German Grammar by Jacob
Grimm]
(Part 3). Gütersloh: Bertelsmann.
Gruber, D. (2013). The
neuroscience of rhetoric: Identification, mirror neurons, and making the
many
appear. In J. Jack (Ed.), Neurorhetorics (pp. 37–53). New York: Routledge.
Gruber, D., Jack, J., Keranen, L., McKenzie, J. M., & Morris, M. B. (2011). Rhetoric
and the neurosciences: Engagement and
exploration. Poroi: An Interdisciplinary
Journal of Rhetorical Analysis &
Invention, 7(1).
Günther, F. (2016). Constructions
in cognitive contexts: Why individuals matter in linguistic relativity
research. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Guo, J. (1997). Fanwenju
de yuyi yuyong tedian [The semantic and pragmatic characteristics of
rhetorical questions]. Zhongguo
Yuwen, 2, 111–121.
Guo, Q. (1894/2013). Zhuangzi
jishi [Collected interpretations of the
Zhuangzi] (X. Y. Wang Collated). Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.
Gutiérrez-Rexach, J. (1998). Rhetorical
questions, relevance and scales. Revista
Alicantina de Estudios
Ingleses, (11), 139–156.
Gwynne, R. W. (2014). Logic,
rhetoric and legal reasoning in the Qur’an: God’s
arguments. New York: Routledge.
Hala, S., Hug, S., & Henderson, A. (2003). Executive
function and false-belief understanding in preschool children: Two tasks are
harder than one. Journal of Cognition and
Development, 4(3), 275–298.
Halmari, H., & Virtanen, T. (2005). Persuasion
across
genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Han, L. (2005). Hanyu
xiuci jiqiao jiaocheng [A course on rhetorical
devices in
Chinese]. Beijing: Huawen Publishing House.
Hansen, C. (1992). A
Daoist theory of Chinese thought: A philosophical
interpretation. New York: Oxford University Press.
(2003). Guru
or skeptic? Relativistic skepticism in the
Zhuangzi. In S. Cook (Ed.), Hiding
the world in the world: Uneven discourses on the
Zhuangzi (pp. 128–162). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Hao, C. (2009). Zhuangzi
neipian zhong xiuci wenju de yuanhuayu tezheng ji gongneng [The
meta-discursive characteristics and functions of rhetorical questions in the
Inner Chapters of the
Zhuangzi]. Contemporary
Rhetoric, 1, 70–77.
Harbsmeier, C. (1998). Science
and civilisation in China, Vol. 7, Part 1: Language and
logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hartmann, C. (1986). Yü-yen. In W. H. Nienhauser, Jr. (Ed.), The Indiana companion to traditional Chinese literature, Vol. 1 (pp. 946–949). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Somatotopic
representation of action words in human motor and premotor
cortex. Neuron, 41(2), 301–307.
Haverkate, H. (1997). Indirectness
in speech acts from a diachronic perspective: Some evolutionary aspects of
rhetorical questions in Spanish
dialogue. In J. Gvozdanović (Ed.), Language
change and functional
explanations. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 219–246.
Hayes, E. (2008). The
pragmatics of perception and cognition in MT Jeremiah 1: 1–6: 30: A
cognitive linguistics
approach. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Heisey, D. R. (1998). Perspectives
on classical Chinese theories of
rhetoric. Paper presented at the Annual
Conference of the Chinese Communication
Society. Taipei. Retrieved
April 30, 2015 from [URL].
Herman, D. (2002). Story
logic: Problems and possibilities of
narrative. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Herman, V. (1999). Deictic
projection and conceptual blending in
epistolarity. Poetics
Today, 20(3), 523–541.
Herrick, J. A. (2021). History
and theory of rhetoric: An introduction (7th
edition). New York: Routledge.
Hogan, K., & Speakman, J. (2006). Covert
persuasion: Psychological tactics and tricks to win the
game. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Howe, B. (2006). Because
you bear this name: Conceptual metaphor and the moral meaning of 1
Peter. Leiden: Brill.
Howe, B., & Green, J. B. (2014). Cognitive
linguistic explorations in Biblical
studies. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Hoyle, R. A. (2008). Scenarios,
discourse, and translation: The scenario theory of cognitive linguistics,
its relevance for analysing New Testament Greek and modern Parkari texts,
and its implications for translation
theory. Dallas, TX: SIL International.
Hu, X. (1999). Fanwenju
de zhiyue yinsu [The discursive constraining factors of rhetorical
questions]. Chinese Teaching in the
World, 1, 46–51.
Huang, M. (1982). Zhuangzi
xiuci shoufa chutan [A tentative investigation of the use of rhetorical
devices in the
Zhuangzi]. Rhetoric
Learning, 4, 21–22.
Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G. K. (2002). The
Cambridge grammar of the English
language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ilie, C. (1994). What
else can I tell you?: A pragmatic study of English rhetorical questions as
discursive and argumentative
acts. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.
(2009). Rhetorical
questions. In L. Cummings (Ed.), The
Routledge pragmatics
encyclopedia (pp. 405–408). London/New York: Routledge.
(2015). Questions
and
questioning. In K. Tracy, C. Ilie, & T. Sandel (Eds.), The
international encyclopedia of language and social
interaction (Vol. 3, pp. 1257–1271). Boston, MA: John Wiley & Sons.
(2017). Questioning
the questionable: Arguments and counter-arguments in political
accountability
interviews. In C. Ilie, & G. Garzone (Eds.), Argumentation
across communities of practice: Multi-disciplinary
perspectives (73–98). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2021). Questions
we (inter)act with: Interrelatedness of questions and answers in
discourse. In C. Ilie (Ed.), Questioning
and answering practices across contexts and
cultures (1–31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ivanhoe, P. J. (1993). Zhuangzi
on skepticism, skill, and the ineffable
Dao. Journal of the American Academy of
Religion, 61(4), 639–654.
(2019). Raveling
the brain: Toward a transdisciplinary
neurorhetoric. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Press.
Jack, J., & Appelbaum, L. G. (2010). “This
is your brain on rhetoric”: Research directions for
neurorhetorics. Rhetoric Society
Quarterly, 40(5), 411–437.
Jao, Tsung-I. (1993). Tianwen
wenti de yuanliu: Fawen wenxue zhi tantao [On the source of the style of
Heavenly Questions: A discussion on questioning
literature]. In Fanxue
ji [Collection of Sanskrit studies]
(pp. 27–60). Shanghai: Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House.
Jensen, J. V. (1987). Rhetorical
emphases of Taoism. Rhetorica: A Journal of
the History of
Rhetoric, 5(3), 219–229.
Ji, Sh.
(1986). Guhanyu
xiuci [Classical Chinese
rhetoric]. Changchun: Jilin Culture and History Press.
Jiménez, O. (2022). Metaphors
in the narrative of Ephesians 2: 11–22: Motion towards maximal proximity and
higher
status. Leiden: Brill.
Jochim, C. (1998). Just
say no to “no self” in
Zhuangzi. In R. T. Ames (Ed.), Wandering
at ease in the
Zhuangzi (pp. 35–74). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Kahn, C. H. (1998). Plato
and the Socratic dialogue: The philosophical use of a literary
form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kamp, A. H. (2004). Inner
worlds: A cognitive-linguistic approach to the Book of
Jonah. Leiden: Brill.
Kantor, H.-R. (2010). ‘Right
words are like the reverse’ – The Daoist rhetoric and the linguistic
strategy in early Chinese Buddhism. Asian
Philosophy, 20(3), 283–307.
Kao, K. S. Y. (1986). Rhetoric. In W. H. Nienhauser (Ed.), The
Indiana companion to traditional Chinese
literature (pp. 121–137). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Kappes, H. B., & Morewedge, C. K. (2016). Mental
simulation as substitute for
experience. Social and Personality Psychology
Compass, 10(7), 405–420.
Karhanová, K. (2005). Rhetorical
questions in polemical media
dialogue. In A. Betten, & M. Dannerer (Eds.), Dialogue
analysis IX: Dialogue in literature and the media, Part 2: Media: Selected
papers from the 9th IADA Conference, Salzburg
2003 (pp. 203–214). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Kegel, J. (2012). »Wollt
ihr den totalen krieg?«: Eine semiotische und linguistische gesamtanalyse
der Rede Goebbels’ im Berliner sportpalast am 18. Februar
1943 [“Do you want total war?” A semiotic and
linguistic overall analysis of Goebbel’s spech in the Sportpalast of Berlin
on February 18,
1943]. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Kennedy, G. A. (1963). The art of persuasion in ancient Greece. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kennedy, G. A. (1972). The
art of rhetoric in the Roman world: A history of
rhetoric. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
(1984). New
Testament interpretation through rhetorical
criticism. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
(1998). Comparative
rhetoric: An historical and cross-cultural
introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kiefer, F. (1980). Yes-no
questions as
wh-questions. In J. Searle, F. Kiefer, & M. Bierwisch (Eds.), Speech
act theory and
pragmatics (pp. 97–119). Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Kleinke, S. (2012). Responses
to rhetorical questions in English and German Internet public news
groups. Functions of
Language, 19(2), 174–200.
Knaul, L. (1982). Lost
Chuang-Tzu passages. Society for the Study of
Chinese Religions
Bulletin, 10(1), 53–79.
Kohn, L. (1992). Early
Chinese mysticism: Philosophy and soteriology in the Taoist
tradition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Koshik, I. (2002). A
conversation analytic study of Yes/No questions which convey reversed
polarity assertions. Journal of
Pragmatics, 34(12), 1851–1877.
(2005). Beyond
rhetorical questions: Assertive questions in everyday
interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kövecses, Z. (2015). Where
metaphors come from: Reconsidering context in
metaphor. New York: Oxford University Press.
Królak, E. (2008). Fictive
interaction: Its functions and usage in
discourse. Doctoral
dissertation. Warsaw: University of Warsaw.
Kroll, P. W. (2017). A
student’s dictionary of classical and medieval
Chinese (Revised
edition). Leiden: Brill.
Kuntz, J. K. (1997). The
form, location, and function of rhetorical questions in
Deutero-Isaiah. In C. C. Broyles, & C. A. Evans (Eds.), Writing
and reading the Scroll of
Isaiah (Vol. 1, pp. 121–141). Leiden: Brill.
(2009). Making
a statement: Rhetorical questions in the Hebrew
Psalter. In J. H. Ellens, & J. T. Greene (Eds.), Probing
the frontiers of Biblical
studies (pp. 156–178). Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications.
Lai, K., & Chiu, W. W. (Eds.). (2019). Skill
and mastery: Philosophical stories from the
Zhuangzi. London/New York: Rowman & Littlefield International.
(1996). Sorry,
I’m not myself today: The metaphor system for conceptualizing the
self. In G. Fauconnier, & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Spaces,
worlds and
grammar (pp. 91–123). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy
in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western
thought. New York: Basic Books.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations
of cognitive grammar: Theoretical
prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
(1991). Foundations
of cognitive grammar: Descriptive
application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
(2012). Interactive
cognition: Toward a unified account of structure, processing, and
discourse. International Journal of Cognitive
Linguistics, 3(2), 95–125.
(2016). Toward
an integrated view of structure, processing, and
discourse. In G. Drożdż (Ed.), Studies
in lexicogrammar: Theory and
applications (pp. 23–53). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lanham, R. A. (1991). A
handlist of rhetorical terms (2nd
edition). Berkeley: University of California Press.
(1993). The
electronic word: Democracy, technology, and the
arts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lausberg, H. (1998). Handbook
of literary rhetoric: A foundation for literary
study (M. T. Bliss, A. Jansen, & D. E. Orton, Trans., D. E. Orton, & R. D. Anderson Eds.). Leiden: Brill.
Lee, J. (2015). The
rhetoric of transformation: The arts of persuasion in the
Zhuangzi. In L. Kohn (Ed.), New
visions of the
Zhuangzi (pp. 134–144). St. Petersburg, FL: Three Pines Press.
Legge, J. (Trans.). (1891a). The
Tāo Teh King; The writings of Kwang-Ӡze Books
I-XVII. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leong, A. C. H. (2021). A
cognitive semantic study of Biblical Hebrew: The root šlm for
completeness-balance. Leiden: Brill.
Li, C. N., & Thompson S. A. (1976). Subject
and topic: A new typology of
language. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject
and
topic (pp. 457–489). New York: Academic Press.
Li, F. (1997). Fanwenshi
shewen [A study on rhetorical questions with
answers]. Rhetoric
Learning, 3, 25–26.
Li, H. (2005). Zhuangzi
xiuci qianxi [A tentative analysis of rhetoric in the
Zhuangzi]. Journal of
Gansu Radio & Television
University, 15(3), 28–31.
Li, M. (2016). Zhuangzi
neipian yiwen daici yanjiu [A study on the interrogative pronouns in the
Inner Chapters of the
Zhuangzi]. Journal of
Shangqiu Vocational and Technical
College, 15(3), 88–90.
Li, M. Y. (2010). Xianqin
lianghan tezhishi fanwenju yanjiu [A study on
rhetorical wh-questions in Pre-Qin and Han
Dynasties]. Doctoral
dissertation. Changchun: Jilin University.
Li, Y. (1990). Fanwenju
de goucheng jiqi lijie [The formation and comprehension of rhetorical
questions]. Yindu
Journal, 3, 91–99.
Li, S., Ding, L., & Zhang, Y. (1988). Guhanyu
yufa xiuci cidian [Dictionary of classical Chinese
grammar and
rhetoric]. Jinan: Mingtian Publishing House.
Libby, L. K., & Eibach, R. P. (2011). Visual
perspective in mental imagery: A representational tool that functions in
judgment, emotion, and
self-insight. In M. P. Zanna, & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Advances
in Experimental Social
Psychology (Vol. 44, pp. 185–245). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Lin, W. (2000). Zhuangzi
neipian xiuci tanze [An exploration of rhetoric in
the Inner Chapters of the
Zhuangzi]. Master
thesis. Taipei: Taiwan Normal University.
Lin, X. (1981). Shanggu
hanyu de yudiao wenti [Tones in archaic
Chinese]. Journal of Southwest University
(Social Sciences
Edition), 2, 107–113.
Lipson, C. S., & Binkley, R. A. (Eds.). (2004). Rhetoric
before and beyond the Greeks. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Liu, Ch.
(2005). Zhuangzi zhong de yiwen daici
‘he’, ‘shui’, ‘shu’ [Interrogative pronouns “he” “shui” and “shu” in the
Zhuangzi]. Journal of
Anyang Normal
University, 4, 41–43.
Liu, D. (2010a). Cong
yufa goushi dao xiuci goushi (shang) [From grammatical constructions to
rhetorical constructions (I)]. Contemporary
Rhetoric, 3, 7–17.
(2010b). Cong
yufa goushi dao xiuci goushi (xia)[From grammatical constructions to
rhetorical constructions (II)]. Contemporary
Rhetoric, 4, 14–23.
Liu, F. (2011). Xiandai
hanyu fanwenju de biaoji yanjiu [A study on markers
of rhetorical questions in Mandarin]. Master
thesis. Shenyang: Shenyang Normal University.
Liu, N., & Bergen, B. (2016). When
do language comprehenders mentally simulate
locations?. Cognitive
Linguistics, 27(2), 181–203.
Liu, X. (2015). Textual
issues in
the Zhuangzi. In X. Liu (Ed.), Dao
companion to Daoist
philosophy (pp. 129–157). Dordrecht: Springer.
Liu, Y. (2014). Xiandai
hanyu huihua zhong de fanwenju yanjiu: Yi fouding fanwenju he tezhi fanwenju
weili [A study of rhetorical questions in Mandarin
conversations: Taking reversed-polarity rhetorical questions and rhetorical
wh-questions as
examples]. Shanghai: Xuelin Publishing House.
Liu, Y., & Tao, H. (2011). Hanyu
tanhua zhong fouding fanwenju de shili lichang gongneng ji leixing [Indexing
evaluative stances with negative rhetorical interrogatives in Mandarin
conversation]. Zhongguo
Yuwen, 2, 110–120.
Liu, Zh.
(2002). Fauconnier’s Conceptual Blending
Theory: Interpretation and
challenges. Foreign Languages and Their
Teaching, 10, 8–12.
Lloyd, K. (Ed.) (2020). The Routledge handbook of comparative world rhetorics: Studies in the history, application, and teaching of rhetorics beyond traditional Greco-Roman contexts. New York: Routledge.
Lo, Y. K. (2022). The
Authorship of
the Zhuangzi. In K. Chong (Ed.), Dao
companion to the philosophy of the
Zhuangzi (43–97). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Long, A. (2008). Plato’s
dialogues and a common rationale for dialogue
form. In S. Goldhill (Ed.), The
end of dialogue in
antiquity (45–59). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Longinus. (1965). On
the sublime. In Classical literary
criticism (T. S. Dorsch Trans.)
(97–158). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Lou, G., & Zeng, Z. (1987). Shitan
fanwenju de xiuci gongneng [A tentative discussion on the rhetorical
functions of reversed-polarity
questions]. Rhetoric
Learning, 3, 50–51.
Lu, C. (2000). Fanwenju
de yuyi fenxi ji yu yuti de shiying guanxi [The semantic analysis of
rhetorical questions and its adaptation to
genres]. Rhetoric
Learning, 3, 13–14.
Lü, Sh.
(1982). Zhongguo wenfa
yaolüe [Essentials of Chinese
grammar]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
Lu, X. (1998). Rhetoric
in ancient China, fifth to third century, BCE: A comparison with classical
Greek
rhetoric. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
(2000). The
influence of classical Chinese rhetoric on contemporary Chinese political
communication and social
relations. In D. R. Heisey (Ed.), Chinese
perspectives in rhetoric and
communication (pp. 3–24). Stamford, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
(2005). Luxun
quanji jiu: Zhongguo xiaoshuo shi le han wenxueshi
gangyao [Complete works of Lu Xun, Vol. 9: A brief
history of Chinese fiction & Outline of the history of Chinese
literature]. Beijing: People’s Literature Publishing House.
(2019). Contestation
of rhetoric within the Chinese tradition: An overview of Confucian
moralistic rhetoric, Daoist transcendental rhetoric, and Mohist utilitarian
rhetoric. Advances in the History of
Rhetoric, 22(2), 125–138.
(2020). The
intersection between intercultural communication and comparative rhetoric
studies: A review and case
studies. In K. Lloyd (Ed.), The
Routledge handbook of comparative world
rhetorics (pp. 34–48). New York: Routledge.
Lu, X. Y., & Gao, W. (2016). Xiuci
zhutijian lilun de liangge jiben wenti [Two basic issues of an
intersubjective theory of
rhetoric]. Contemporary
Rhetoric, 1, 37–46.
Lunceford, B. (2007). The
science of orality: Implications for rhetorical
theory. The Review of
Communication, 7(1), 83–102.
(2017). Where
is the body in digital
rhetoric? In A. Hess, & A. Davisson (Eds.), Theorizing
digital
rhetoric (pp. 140–152). New York: Routledge.
Luo, X. (2001). Zhuangzi
de xiuciguan: Mei zai ziran pusu [The rhetorical view of Zhuangzi: The
beauty of naturalness and
simplicity]. Rhetoric
Learning, 5, 6–7.
MacDonald, G., & Packer, D. J. (2009). Persuasion. In H. T. Reis, & S. Sprecher (Eds.), Encyclopedia
of human
relationships (Vol. 2, pp. 1231–1234). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mair, V. H. (1986). Chuang Tzu. In W.H. Nienhauser, Jr. (Ed.), The Indiana companion to traditional Chinese literature, Vol. 2 (pp. 20–26). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Mair, V. H. (2000). The
Zhuangzi and its
impact. In L. Kohn (Ed.), Daoism
handbook (pp. 30–52). Leiden: Brill.
(Trans.). (1994). Wandering
on the way: Early Taoist tales and parables of Chuang
Tzu. New York: Bantam Books.
Major, J. S. (2014). Tool
metaphors in the Huainanzi and other early
texts. In S. A. Queen, & M. Puett (Eds.), The
Huainanzi and textual production in early
China (pp. 151–198). Leiden: Brill.
Mak, M., & Willems, R. M. (2021). Mental
simulation during literary
reading. In D. Kuiken, & A. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Handbook
of empirical literary
studies (pp. 63–84). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Mandelblit, N., & Fauconnier, G. (2000). How
I got myself arrested. Underspecificity in grammatical blends as a source
for constructional
ambiguity. In A. Foolen, & F. van der Leek (Eds.), Constructions
in cognitive linguistics: Selected papers from the Fifth International
Cognitive Linguistics Conference,
Amsterdam, 1997
(pp. 167–189). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Mao, L. (2007). Studying the Chinese rhetorical tradition in the present: Re-presenting the native’s point of view. College English, 69(3), 216-237.
Markman, K. D., Klein, W. M. P., & Suhr, J. A. (2012). Handbook
of imagination and mental simulation. New York/Hove: Psychology Press.
Maxwell, K. R. (2007). Hearing
between the lines: The audience as fellow-worker in Luke-Acts and its
literary milieu. Doctoral
dissertation. Waco, TX: Baylor University.
Maynard, S. K. (1995). Interrogatives
that seek no answers: Exploring the expressiveness of rhetorical
interrogatives in
Japanese. Linguistics, 33(3), 501–530.
Mazzocco, P. J., Green, M. C., Sasota, J. A., & Jones, N. W. (2010). This
story is not for everyone: Transportability and narrative
persuasion. Social Psychological and
Personality
Science, 1(4), 361–368.
Mead, G. H. (1934/1955). Mind,
self, and society: From the standpoint of a social
behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Meineck, P., Short, W. M., & Devereaux, J. (Eds.). (2018). The
Routledge handbook of classics and cognitive
theory. New York: Routledge.
Meyers, R. R. (2007). With
ears to hear: Preaching as
self-persuasion. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers.
Miura, I. & Hara N. (1995). Production
and perception of rhetorical questions in Osaka
Japanese. Journal of
Phonetics, 23(3): 291–303.
Mocciaro, E., & Short, W. M. (Eds.). (2019). Toward
a cognitive classical linguistics: The embodied basis of constructions in
Greek and
Latin. Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Poland Ltd.
Moeller, Hans-Georg.
(2004). Daoism explained: From the dream of the
butterfly to the fishnet
allegory. Chicago: Open Court.
Møllgaard, E. (2007). An
introduction to Daoist thought: Action, language, and ethics in
Zhuangzi. New York: Routledge.
Morris, E. P. (1890). The
sentence-question in Plautus and Terence: Concluding
paper. The American Journal of
Philology, 11(2), 145–181.
Moshavi, A. (2009). Two
types of argumentation involving rhetorical questions in Biblical Hebrew
dialogue. Biblica, 90(1), 32–46.
(2010). Rhetorical
question or assertion? The pragmatics of אלר in
Biblical
Hebrew. Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society, 32, 91–105.
(2011). Can
a positive rhetorical question have a positive answer in the
Bible? Journal of Semitic
Studies, 56(2), 253–273.
(2013). The
communicative functions of content (“wh”) questions in classical Biblical
Hebrew prose. Journal of Northwest Semitic
Languages, 39(2), 69–87.
(2014). What
can I say? Implications and communicative functions of rhetorical “WH”
questions in classical Biblical Hebrew
prose. Vetus
Testamentum, 64(1), 93–108.
(2015). Between
dialectic and rhetoric: Rhetorical questions expressing premises in Biblical
prose argumentation. Vetus
Testamentum, 65(1), 136–151.
Mou, Z. (1999). Zhuangzi
qiwulun yili yanxi [An analysis of Zhuangz’s Theory
of Equalizing All
Things]. Taipei: Shulin Press.
Nie, L. (2001). Fanwen
de fei lingxing daju [A study on the non-zero answers to rhetorical
questions]. Rhetoric
Learning, 5, 18–19.
Nienhauser Jr., W. H. (Ed.) (1986). The Indiana companion to traditional Chinese literature, Vol. 1. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Nienkamp, J. (2001). Internal
rhetorics: Toward a history and theory of
self-persuasion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nijk, A. A. (2019). Bridging
the gap between the near and the far: Displacement and
representation. Cognitive
Linguistics, 30(2), 327–350.
(2022). Tense-switching
in classical Greek: A cognitive
approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nikiforidou, K., Marmaridou, S., & Mikros, G. K. (2014). What’s
in a dialogic construction? A constructional approach to polysemy and the
grammar of challenge. Cognitive
Linguistics, 25(4), 655–699.
Ning, D. (2008). Weili
kezhu jiaxiang chouda: Zhuangzi duihua wenti lunxi [Making Up the
Interlocution and Constructing the Unique Context: Analyses of the Dialogic
Styles in the
Zhuangzi]. Journal of
Guizhou Normal University (Social Sciences
Edition), 6, 74–76.
Noordman, L. G. M., & de Blijzer, F. (2000). On
the processing of causal
relations. In E. Couper-Kuhlen, & B. Kortmann (Eds.), Cause,
condition, concession and contrast: Cognitive and discourse
perspectives (pp. 35–56). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
Oakley, T. (1998). Conceptual
blending, narrative discourse, and
rhetoric. Cognitive
Linguistics, 9(4), 321–360.
(2009a). Mental
Spaces. In F. Brisard, J.-O. Östman, & J. Verschueren (Eds.), Grammar,
meaning and
pragmatics (pp. 161–178). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2009b). From
attention to meaning: Explorations in semiotics, linguistics, and
rhetoric. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
(2011). Attention
and
rhetoric. In C. Meyer, & F. Girke (Eds.), The
rhetorical emergence of
culture (pp. 282–303). New York: Berghahn.
(2017). Multimodal
rhetoric: Fictive interaction strategies in political
discourse. Linguistics
Vanguard, 3 (s1).
Oakley, T., & Hougaard A. (2008). Mental
spaces in discourse and
interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Oakley, T., & Pascual, E. (2017). Blending
theory and its application in semantics and discourse
studies. In B. Dancygier (Ed.), The
Cambridge handbook of cognitive
linguistics (pp. 423–448). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oakley, T., & Tobin, V. (2014). The
whole is sometimes less than the sum of its parts: Toward a theory of
document acts. Language and
Cognition, 6(1), 79–110.
Oliver, R. T. (1961). The
rhetorical implications of Taoism. Quarterly
Journal of
Speech, 47(1), 27–35.
(1971). Communication
and culture in ancient India and
China. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
Pagán Cánovas, C. (2010). Erotic
emissions in Greek poetry: A generic integration
network. Cognitive
Semiotics, 6(s1), 7–32.
(2011). The
genesis of the arrows of love: Diachronic conceptual integration in Greek
mythology. American Journal of
Philology, 132(4), 553–579.
(2015). Cognitive
patterns in Greek poetic metaphors of emotion: A diachronic
approach. In J. E. Díaz-Vera (Ed.), Metaphor
and metonymy across time and cultures: Perspectives on the sociohistorical
linguistics of figurative
language (pp. 295–318). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Pagán Cánovas, C., & Turner, M. (2016). Generic
integration templates for fictive
communication. In E. Pascual & S. Sandler (Eds.), The
conversation frame: Forms and functions of fictive
interaction (pp. 45–62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Pally, R. (2012). Neurobiology
of the parent-child
relationship. In M. H. Etezady, & M. Davis (Eds.), Clinical
perspectives on reflective parenting: Keeping the child’s mind in
mind (pp. 75–96). Lanham, MD: Jason Aronson.
Pang, K. S. (2005). “This
is the linguist in me speaking”: Constructions to talk about the self
talking. Functions of
Language, 12(1), 1–38.
Park, G. J. (2017). The
rhetorical question in Ruth 1: 17b. Journal
of Northwest Semitic
Languages, 43(1), 87–103.
Pascual, E. (2002). Imaginary
trialogues: Conceptual blending and fictive interaction in criminal
courts. Utrecht: LOT.
(2006a). Fictive
interaction within the sentence: A communicative type of fictivity in
grammar. Cognitive
Linguistics, 17(2), 245–267.
(2006b). Questions
in legal monologues: Fictive interaction as argumentative strategy in a
murder trial. Text &
Talk, 26(3), 383–402.
(2008a). Text
for context, trial for trialogue: An ethnographic study of a fictive
interaction blend. Annual Review of Cognitive
Linguistics, 6(1), 50–82.
(2008b). Fictive
interaction blends in everyday life and courtroom
settings. In T. Oakley, & A. Hougaard (Eds.), Mental
spaces in discourse and
interaction (pp. 86–114). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2009). “I
was in that room!”: Conceptual integration of content and context in a
writer’s vs. a prosecutor’s description of a
murder. In V. Evans, & S. Pourcel (Eds.), New
directions in cognitive
linguistics (pp. 499–516). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2014). Fictive
interaction: The conversation frame in thought, language, and
discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Pascual, E., & Królak, E. (2018). The
‘listen to characters thinking’ novel: Fictive interaction as narrative
strategy in English literary bestsellers and their Polish and Spanish
translations. Review of Cognitive
Linguistics, 16(2), 399–430.
Pascual, E., & Oakley, T. (2017). Fictive
interaction. In B. Dancygier (Ed.), The
Cambridge handbook of cognitive
linguistics (pp. 347–360). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pascual, E., & Sandler, S. (Eds.) (2016). The
conversation frame: Forms and functions of fictive
interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Perelman, C. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The
new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation (J. Wilkinson, & P. Weaver Trans.). Notre Dame/London: University of Notre Dame Press.
Plato. (1997). Complete
works (J. M. Cooper Ed.). Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
Pleshakova, A. (2016). Meta-parody
in contemporary Russian media: Viewpoint blending behind Dmitry Bykov’s 2009
poem “Infectious”. Lege
Artis, 1(1), 202–274.
Pope, E. N. (1972). Questions
and answers in English. Doctoral
dissertation. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Prince, D. T. (2016). “Why
do you seek the living among the dead?” Rhetorical questions in the Lukan
resurrection narrative. Journal of Biblical
Literature, 135(1), 123–139.
Progovac, L. (1994). Negative
and positive polarity: A binding
approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Puett, M. (2013). Philosophy
and literature in early
China. In V. H. Mair (Ed.), The
Columbia history of Chinese
literature (pp. 70–85). New York: Columbia University Press.
Pulvermüller, F. (2005). Brain
mechanisms linking language and
action. Nature Reviews
Neuroscience, 6(7), 576–582.
Qiu, H. (2006). Zhuangzi
zhogn jizhong jushi de yanjiu [A study on several
syntactic patterns in the
Zhuangzi]. Master thesis. Urumqi: Xinjiang University.
Quintilian. (1902). Quintilian’s
institutes of oratory: Or, Education of an orator in twelve
books (Vol. 2)
(J. S. Watson Trans.). London: George Bell & Sons.
. (2001). The
orator’s
education (5 vols).
(D. Russell Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A
comprehensive grammar of the English
language. London: Longman.
Rasmussen, J. E. (1999). Selected
papers on Indo-European
linguistics (Vol. 2). Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.
Recanati, F. (1995). Le
présent épistolair: Une perspective cognitive [The epistolary present: A
cognitive perspective]. L’Information
Grammaticale, 66, 38–44.
Reich, K. A. (2011). Figuring
Jesus: The power of rhetorical figures of speech in the Gospel of
Luke. Leiden: Brill.
Richardson, D. C., Spivey, M. J., Barsalou, L. W., & McRae, K. (2003). Spatial
representations activated during real-time comprehension of
verbs. Cognitive
Science, 27(5), 767–780.
Robar, E. (2014). The
verb and the paragraph in Biblical Hebrew: A cognitive-linguistic
approach. Leiden: Brill.
Roth, H. D. (2008). Zhuangzi. The
Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2008
edition) (E. N. Zalta Ed.). Retrieved
November 20, 2012, from [URL].
Roth, M., Decety, J., Raybaudi, M., Massarelli, R., Delon-Martin, C., Segebarth, C., … Jeannerod, M. (1996). Possible
involvement of primary motor cortex in mentally simulated movement: A
functional magnetic resonance imaging
study. Neuroreport, 7(7), 1280–1284.
Ruby, P., & Decety, J. (2001). Effect
of subjective perspective taking during simulation of action: A PET
investigation of agency. Nature
Neuroscience, 4(5), 546–550.
(2003). What
you believe versus what you think they believe: A neuroimaging study of
conceptual perspective-taking. European
Journal of
Neuroscience, 17(11), 2475–2480.
(2004). How
would you feel versus how do you think she would feel? A neuroimaging study
of perspective-taking with social
emotions. Journal of Cognitive
Neuroscience, 16(6), 988–999.
Sadock, J. M., & Zwicky, A. M. (1985). Speech
act distinctions in
syntax. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language
typology and syntactic
description (pp. 155–196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Samson, D., Apperly, I. A., Kathirgamanathan, U., & Humphreys, G. W. (2005). Seeing
it my way: A case of a selective deficit in inhibiting
self-perspective. Brain, 128(5), 1102–1111.
Sanders, J. (2010). Intertwined
voices: Journalists’ modes of representing source information in
journalistic subgenres. English Text
Construction, 3(2), 226–249.
Sankoff, G. & Brown. P. (1976). The
origins of syntax in discourse: A case study of Tok Pisin
relatives. Language, 52, 631–666.
Santos Mendes, J. V. (2005). The
semantics-pragmatics of route
directions. Doctoral dissertation. Hamburg: University of Hamburg.
Schaffer, D. (2005). Can
rhetorical questions function as retorts?: Is the Pope
Catholic? Journal of
Pragmatics, 37(4), 433–460.
Schmidt-Radefeldt, J. (1977). On
so-called ‘rhetorical’ questions. Journal of
Pragmatics, 1(4), 375–392.
Schneider, R., & Hartner, M. (2012). Blending
and the study of narrative: Approaches and
applications. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Schulze, M. (1978). Rhetorical
questions in
Sunwar. In J. E. Grimes (Ed.), Papers
on
discourse (pp. 349–361). Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Schwitalla, J. (1984). Textliche
und kommunikative funktionen rhetorischer Fragen [The textual and
communicative functions of rhetorical
questions]. Zeitschrift für Germanistische
Linguistik, 12, 131–155.
Schwitzgebel, E. (1996). Zhuangzi’s
attitude toward language and his
skepticism. In P. Kjellberg, & P. J. Ivanhoe (Eds.), Essays
on skepticism, relativism, and ethics in the
Zhuangzi (pp. 68–96). Albany: SUNY Press.
Scorolli, C. (2014). Embodiment
and
language. In L. Shapiro (Ed.), The
Routledge handbook of embodied
cognition (pp. 127–138). New York: Routledge.
Searle, J. R. (1975). Indirect
speech
acts. In P. Cole, & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax
and semantics, Vol. 3: Speech
acts (pp. 59–82). New York: Academic Press.
Shao, J. (1996/2014). Xiandai
hanyu yiwenju yanjiu zengdingben [A study on
interrogatives in modern Chinese (Updated
edition)]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
(2013). Yiwenju
de jiegou leixing yu fanwenju de zhuanhua guanxi yanjiu [A study on the
relationship between the structural types of interrogatives and their
transformation into rhetorical
questions]. Chinese Language
Learning, 2, 3–10.
Shen, W. (2013). Zhuangzi
neipian yuyan quanshi: Yi qiwulun wei
zhongxin [Studying the language of the Inner
Chapters of the Zhuangzi: Analysis based on ‘Qi-Wu Theory’
as the core focus]. Doctoral
dissertation. Hsinchu: National Tsing Hua University.
Shih, V. Y-C. (1959). Introduction.
In Hs. Liu, The literary mind and the carving
of dragons (V. Y-C. Shih Trans.)(pp. xi–xlvi). New York: Columbia University Press.
Sinha, C. (2009). Language
as a biocultural niche and social
institution. In V. Evans, & S. Pourcel (Eds.), New
directions in cognitive
linguistics (pp. 289–310). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sinding, M. (2005). “Genera
Mixta”: Conceptual blending and mixed genres in
“Ulysses”. New Literary
History, 36(4), 589–619.
Short, W. M. (Ed.) (2016). Embodiment
in Latin
semantics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Siddiqui, A. H. (1977). The
syntax and semantics of questions in English, Hindi and Urdu: A study in
applied linguistics. Doctoral
dissertation. Columbus: The Ohio State University.
Sikri, R. (2015). The
cut that cures: Therapeutic methods in the Platonic Dialogues and Zhuangzi
Neipian. Doctoral
dissertation. Chicago: DePaul University.
Siemund, P. (2001). Interrogative
construction. In M. Haspelmath (Ed.), Language
typology and language universals: An international
handbook (pp. 1010–1028). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Slingerland, E. G. (2005). Conceptual
blending, somatic marking, and normativity: A case example from ancient
Chinese. Cognitive
Linguistics, 16(3), 557–584.
Smith, M. J. (1982). Persuasion
and human action: A review and critique of social influence
theories. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Soares da Silva, A. (Ed.) (2021). Figurative
language: Intersubjectivity and
usage. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Stanfield, R. A., & Zwaan, R. A. (2001). The
effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture
recognition. Psychological
Science, 12(2), 153–156.
Steinmann, M. (1973). The
speech-act hypothesis and the rhetorical question
[Abstract]. Newsletter: Rhetoric Society of
America, 3(2), 6–7.
Strange, J. J., & Leung, C. C. (1999). How
anecdotal accounts in news and in fiction can influence judgments of a
social problem’s urgency, causes, and
cures. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 25(4), 436–449.
Strecker, I. A., & Tyler, S. A. (Eds.). (2009). Culture
& rhetoric. New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Streeck, J. (2002). Grammars,
words, and embodied meanings: On the uses and evolution of
so and
like. Journal of
Communication, 52(3), 581–596.
Suhr, C. (2006). Early
modern English witchcraft pamphlets: The use of reported speech for
interaction with semiliterate
audiences. In I. Taavitsainen, J. Härmä, & J. Korhonen (Eds.), Dialogic
language
use (pp. 27–47). Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
Sweetser, E. (1990). From
etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic
structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Talmy, L. (1996/2000). Fictive
motion in language and
‘ception’. In Toward
a cognitive semantics: Concept structuring
systems (pp. 99–175). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Tan, M. A. (2023). A
dictionary of high frequency function words in literary
Chinese. New York: Routledge.
Tan, X. (2016). Guangyi
xiucixue san cenmian: Zhutijian guanxi ji xiangguan wenti [On the three
levels of broad-sense rhetorics: Intersubjective relationships and relevant
issues], Contemporary
Rhetoric, 1, 20–29.
Tang, S., & Huang, J. (1989). Hanyu
xiucige dacidian [Dictionary of Chinese figures of
speech]. Beijing: China International Broadcasting Press.
Tang, Z. (1982/2013). Shanggu
yin shouce zengdingben [Handbook of old Chinese
phonology (Updated
edition)]. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.
Taylor, J. R. (2003). Linguistic
categorization: Prototypes in linguistic
theory (3rd
edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Taylor, S. E., & Schneider, S. K. (1989). Coping
and the simulation of events. Social
Cognition, 7(2), 174–194.
TeSelle, S. M. (1975). Speaking
in parables: A study in metaphor and
theology. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
Tobin, V. (2014). Readers
as overhearers and texts as objects: Joint attention in reading
communities. Scripta, 18(34), 179–198.
Tomasino, B., Nobile, M., Re, M., Bellina, M., Garzitto, M., Arrigoni, F., . . . Brambilla, P. (2018). The mental simulation of state/psychological verbs in the adolescent brain: An fMRI study. Brain and Cognition, 123, 34-46.
Tsai, C. (1993). Frozen
rhetorical questions. Journal of the Chinese
Language Teachers
Association, 28(1), 49–68.
Tseronis, A., & Forceville, C. (Eds.). (2017). Multimodal
argumentation and rhetoric in media
genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tu, Zh.
(2003). Lun zhuangzi de xiuci lilun yu
shijian [On the rhetorical theory and practice in
the Zhuangzi]. Master
thesis. Changchun: Northeast Normal University.
Turner, M. (2010). Ten
lectures on mind and language (F. Li, Y. Ding, & Y. Gao Eds.). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
(2014). The
origin of ideas: Blending, creativity and the human
spark. New York: Oxford University Press.
Unger, U. (1994). Rhetorik
des klassischen Chinesisch [Rhetoric of classical
Chinese]. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz Verlag.
Van der Meer, L., Groenewold, N. A., Nolen, W. A., Pijnenborg, M., & Aleman, A. (2011). Inhibit
yourself and understand the other: Neural basis of distinct processes
underlying theory of
mind. Neuroimage, 56(4), 2364–2374.
Van Els, P., & Sabattini, E. (2012). Introduction:
Political rhetoric in early
China. Extrême-Orient
Extrême-Occident, (34), 5–14.
Van Emde Boas, E. (2005). Ποῖον
τὸν µῦθον ἔειπες: Rhetorical questions in ancient
Greek. Master
thesis. Amsterdam: VU Amsterdam.
Van Krieken, K., Hoeken, H. & Sanders, J. (2017). Evoking
and measuring identification with narrative characters – A linguistic cues
framework. Frontiers in
Psychology, (8), 1190.
Van Krieken, K., Sanders, J., & Sweetser, E. (2019). Linguistic
and cognitive representation of time and viewpoint in narrative
discourse. Cognitive
Linguistics, 30(2), 243–251.
Van W. Cronjé, J. (1992). The
stratagem of the rhetorical question in Galatians 4: 9–10 as a means towards
persuasion. Neotestamentica, 26(2), 417–424.
Vandelanotte, L., & Dancygier, B. (2017). Special
issue: Multimodal artefacts and the texture of
viewpoint. Journal of
Pragmatics, 122, 1–106.
Veltman, F. (1999). Conditionals. In K. Brown & J. Miller (Eds.), Concise
encyclopedia of grammatical
categories (pp. 85–87). Oxford: Elsevier.
Verhagen, A. (2005). Constructions
of intersubjectivity: Discourse, syntax, and
cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(2008). Intersubjectivity
and the architecture of the language
system. In J. Zlatev, T. P. Racine, C. Sinha, & E. Itkonen (Eds.), The
shared mind: Perspectives on
intersubjectivity (pp. 307–331). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2015). Grammar
and cooperative
communication. In E. Dąbrowska, & D. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook
of cognitive
linguistics (pp. 232–252). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Viganò, E. (2023). Moral
choices for our future selves: An empirical theory of prudential perception
and a moral theory of prudence. New York: Routledge.
Vis, K. (2011). Subjectivity
in news discourse: A corpus linguistic analysis of
informalization. Doctoral
dissertation. Amsterdam: VU Amsterdam.
Vis, K., Sanders, J. & Spooren, W. (2012). Diachronic
changes in subjectivity and stance – A corpus linguistic study of Dutch news
texts. Discourse, Context and
Media, 1(2–3), 95–102.
Volkmann, R. (1874). Die
Rhetorik der Griechen und Römer in systematischer
Übersicht [The rhetoric of the Greeks and Romans in
a systematic
overview]. Leipzig: BG Teubner.
Von der Gabelentz, G. (1881). Chinesische
Grammatik: Mit ausschluss des niederen Stiles und der heutigen
Umgangssprache [Chinese Grammar: With the exclusion
of the informal and current colloquial
speech]. Leipzig: T. O. WEIGEL.
Vorauer, J. D., & Michael Ross, M. (1999). Self-awareness
and feeling transparent: Failing to suppress one’s
self. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 35(5), 415–440.
Vrubliauskaitė, A. (2014). Language
in Zhuangzi: How to say without
saying? International Journal of Area
Studies, 9(1), 75–90.
Wang, B. (2013). Zhuangzi zhexue [The philosophy of Chuang Tzu] (2nd edition). Beijing: Peking University Press.
Wang, H. (2015). Guhanyu
fanchou cidian: Yiwen juan [Dictionary of classical
Chinese categories:
Interrogatives]. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press.
Wang, J., & Calder, B. J. (2006). Media
transportation and advertising. Journal of
Consumer
Research, 33(2), 151–162.
Wang, M. (1987). Shiwen
zhiwen buda de shewenju [A tentative discussion on non-answer-seeking
interrogatives]. Chinese Language
Learning, 4, 54–55.
Wang, R. (Trans.). (1999). Zhuangzi [The
Zhuangzi]. Changsha: Hunan People’s Publishing House; Beijing: Foreign Language Press.
Wang, Sh.
(2007). Zhuangji jiaoquan
liangjuanben [Collation and annotation of the
Zhuangzi (2
Vols.)]. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.
Wang, S. Y. (2006). Zhuzi
yulei wenju xitong yanjiu [A study on the
interrogative system in the Quotations of Zhu
Xi]. Master
thesis. Fuzhou: Fujian Normal University.
Wang, Sh., & Han, M. (1993). Laozhuang
cidian [Dictionary of Laozi and
Zhuangzi]. Jinan: Shandong Education Press.
Wang, W. (1993). Xianqin
zhuzi xiuciguan bijiao [A comparative study of the rhetorical views of
Pre-Qin masters]. Journal of
Yunmeng, 1, 66–69.
Wang, X. (2004). Hanyu
xiuci xiudingban [Chinese rhetoric (Revised
edition)]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
Wang, Y. (2003). Linguistic
strategies in Daoist Zhuangzi and Chan Buddhism: The other way of
speaking. New York: Routledge.
Wardlaw, T. R. (2008). Conceptualizing
words for God within the Pentateuch: A cognitive-semantic investigation in
literary
context. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Watson, B. (1983). Foreword. In V. H. Mair (Ed.), Experimental
essays on
Chuang-Tzu (pp. ix–xiv). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
Watson, R. S. (2020). אִם…
הֲ: A rhetorical question anticipating a negative
answer. Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament, 44(3), 437–455.
(2000). Zhuangzi,
mysticism, and the rejection of
distinctions. Sino-Platonic
Papers, No. 100. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
Weiss, A. L. (2006). Figurative
language in Biblical prose narrative: Metaphor in the Book of
Samuel. Leiden: Brill.
Wheeler, C., Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (1999). Fictional
narratives change beliefs: Replications of Prentice, Gerrig, and Bailis
(1997) with mixed corroboration. Psychonomic
Bulletin &
Review, 6(1), 136–141.
Widder, W. L. (2014). “To
teach” in ancient Israel: A cognitive linguistic study of a Biblical Hebrew
lexical
set. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
William, J. M. (2017). Cognitive
approaches to German historical film: Seeing is not
believing. Dordrecht: Springer.
Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (1988). Mood
and the analysis of non-declarative
sentences. In J. Dancy, J. M. E. Moravcsik, & C. C. W. Taylor (Eds.), Human
agency: Language, duty, and value. Philosophical essays in honor of J. O.
Urmson (pp. 77–101). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Winter, B. (2019). Sensory
linguistics: Language, perception and
metaphor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wochner, D. (2022). Prosody
meets pragmatics: A comparison of rhetorical questions, information-seeking
questions, exclamatives, and assertions. Doctoral
dissertation. Konstanz: University of Konstanz.
Wochner, D., Schlegel, J., Dehé, N., & Braun, B. (2015). The
prosodic marking of rhetorical questions in
German. Paper presented at the Interspeech 2015:
16th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication
Association. Dresden.
Wong, D. B. (2006). Natural moralities: A defense of pluralistic relativism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wong, M. C. (2020). Rhetorical
question strategies in electoral debates: An analysis of United States and
Hong Kong political discourse. Doctoral
dissertation. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
Wong, S. M.-C., & Yap, F. H. (2015). “Did
Obamacare create new jobs?” – An analysis of Mitt Romney’s use of rhetorical
questions in the 2012 US presidential election
campaign. Text &
Talk, 35(5), 643–668.
Woźny, J. (2018). The
role of conceptual integration and simple dynamic scenarios in the meaning
construction of the mapping in
mathematics. Cognitive Studies| Études
cognitives, (18), 1–8.
Wu, G. (Ed.) (2002). Chinese
characters dictionary with English
annotations. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press.
Wu, H., & Graban, T. S. (Eds.). (2022). Global
rhetorical traditions. Anderson, SC: Parlor Press LLC.
(1988). Goblet
words, dwelling words, opalescent words – Philosophical methodology of
Chuang Tzu. Journal of Chinese
Philosophy, 15(1), 1–8.
Wu, P., & Chang, J. (2010). Xinli
kongjian lilun yu lunyu zhogn de yinyu fenxi [Mental space theory and an
analysis of metaphors in the
Analects]. Journal of Chinese Language
Teaching, 7(1), 97–124.
Xiang, M. (2015). Esther
Pascual: Fictive interaction: The conversation frame in thought, language,
and discourse. Cognitive
Linguistics, 26(4), 709–716.
(2016). Real,
imaginary, or fictive? Philosophical dialogues in an early Daoist text and
its pictorial
version. In E. Pascual, & S. Sandler (Eds.), The
conversation frame: Forms and functions of fictive
interaction (pp. 63–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Xiang, M., & Ma, B. (2020). How
can I persuade you without making self-assertions? A cognitive rhetorical
analysis of the use of fictive questions in an early Daoist
text. In V. da Silva Sinha, A. Moreno-Núñez, & Z. Tian (Eds.), Language,
Thought and Identity – Signs of
Life (pp. 249–273). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Xiang, M., & Pascual, E. (2016). Debate
with Zhuangzi: Expository questions as fictive interaction blends in an old
Chinese
text. Pragmatics, 26(1), 137–162.
Xiang, M., Pascual, E., & Ma, B. (2022). Who’s
speaking for whom? Rhetorical questions as intersubjective mixed viewpoint
constructions in an early Daoist
text. Journal of Historical
Pragmatics, 23(1), 29–53.
Xie, F. (1984). Fanwenju
yao buyao zuoda? [Is it necessary to answer rhetorical
questions?]. Chinese Language
Learning, 1, 52.
Xu, G. Q. (2012). The
use of eloquence: The Confucian
perspective. In C. S. Lipson, & R. A. Binkley (Eds.), Rhetoric
before and beyond the
Greeks (pp. 115–129). Albany: SUNY Press.
Xu, H. (1985). Shitan
fanwenju yuyi xingcheng de zhu yinsu [A tentative discussion on the factors
in the formation of the semantics of rhetorical
questions]. Journal of Liaoning University
(Philosophy & Social Sciences
Edition), 3, 66–68.
Yan, P. (2007). Jiwai
lunzhi: Lun zhuangzi yuyan de duihua xingshi [Argument with the assistance
of extraneous things: On the dialogic form of allegories in the
Zhuangzi]. Hubei Social
Sciences, 4, 122–124.
Yang, B., & He, L. (2001). Guhanyu
yufa jiqi fazhan xiudingban [A grammar of classical
Chinese and its development (Revised
edition)]. Beijing: Yuwen Publishing House.
Yang, G. (2017). Zhuangzi
de sixiang shijie xiudingban [Zhuangzi’s world of
thought (Revised
edition)]. Beijing: Sanlian Book Store.
Yang, M. (2006). Zhuangzi
xiuci yanjiu [A study on the rhetoric in the
Zhuangzi]. Master
thesis. Fuzhou: Fujian Normal University.
Yang, Zh.
(2018). Xiuci wenju yu guanlian lilun: Jiyu
yuliaoku de xiuci wenju zai dubaishi wenben zhong de yuyong
yanjiu [Rhetorical questions and relevance theory:
A Corpus-based pragmatic study of rhetorical questions in monologic
genres]. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press.
Ye, Ch.
(1979/2004). Zhuangzi yuyan
yanjiu [A study on allegories in the
Zhuangzi]. Taipei: Wenshizhe Publishing House.
Yi, M. (1989/2005). Xianqin
yufa xiudingben [A grammar of pre-Qin Chinese
(Revised
edition)]. Changsha: Hunan University Press.
Yin, Sh.
(2007). Xiandai hanyu fanwenju teyou de
jufa jiegou [The unique syntactic structures of rhetorical questions in
modern Chinese]. Journal of Hunan University
of Science and Technology (Social Sciences
Edition), 10(3), 101–105.
.
(2008). Xiandai hanyu fanwneju yingda
xitong kaocha [Investigation of the system of answers to rhetorical
questions in modern Chinese]. Language
Teaching and Linguistic
Studies, 3, 37–44.
.
(2009). Xiandai hanyu fanwenju
yanjiu [A study on rhetorical questions in modern
Chinese]. Harbin: Heilongjiang University Press.
Yoo, S.-S., Freeman, D. K., McCarthy III, J. J., & Jolesz, F. A. (2003). Neural
substrates of tactile imagery: A functional MRI
study. Neuroreport, 14(4), 581–585.
Yu, G. (1984). Fanwenju
de xingzhi yu zuoyong [The nature and functions of rhetorical
questions]. Zhongguo
Yuwen, 6, 419–425.
Yu, T. (2007). Xiandai
hanyu fanwenju yanjiu [A study on rhetorical
questions in modern Chinese]. Doctoral dissertation. Beijing: Minzu University of China.
Zahner-Ritter, K., Chen, Y., Dehé, N., & Braun, B. (2022). The
prosodic marking of rhetorical questions in Standard
Chinese. Journal of
Phonetics, 95, 101190.
Zhang, C. (2012). Mozi
jian’ai he Zhuangzi qiwulun zuhewen de yuyong bijiao [A pragmatic comparison
of the use of successive questions in Mozi’s chapter ‘Universal Love’ and
Zhuangzi’s chapter Qiwulun]. Contemporary
Rhetoric, 5, 63–69.
Zhang, G. (1963). Xiandai
hanyu xiucixue [Modern Chinese
rhetoric]. Tianjin: Tianjin People’s Publishing House.
Zhang, L. (2005). Zhuangzi
neipian fanwenju de yuyi fenxi [A semantic analysis of rhetorical questions
in the Inner Chapters of the
Zhuangzi]. Journal
of Lanzhou University of Arts and Science (Social Sciences
Edition), 21(3), 35–38.
(2006a). Shixi
zhuangzi yiwenju de wenyu [A tentative analysis of the interrogative range
of questions in the
Zhuangzi], Hunan
Agricultural
Machinery, 3, 84–87.
(2006b). Zhuangzi
yuyan zhong de teshu wenda fangshi [On the special question-answer sequences
in the Zhuangzian allegories]. Journal of
Gansu Political Science and Law
Institute, 4, 134–135.
(2007). Zhuangzi
neipian fanwenju de yuyi yuyong fenxi [Semantic and pragmatic analysis of
rhetorical questions in the Inner Chapters of the
Zhuangzi]. Modern
Chinese, 7, 43–44.
Zhang, M. (1948/2007). Zhuangzi
xinshi [A new interpretation of the
Zhuangzi]. Beijing: New World Press.
Zhang, X. (2002). ‘Shu’
zuo jushou zhuangyu biao fanwen de yizhong jushi [The use of a syntactic
pattern as rhetorical question with ‘shu’ as the sentence-initial
adverbial]. Studies in Language and
Linguistics, 1, 38–40.
Zhao, P. (2012). Toward
an intersubjective rhetoric of empathy in intercultural communication: A
rereading of Morris Young’s Minor Re/Visions.
Rhetoric
Review, 31(1), 60–77.
(2017). Zhutijianxing
xiuci lilun goujian [Constructing an intersubjective rhetorical
theory]. Journal of Central South University
(Social Sciences
Edition), 23(1), 194–200.
Zhengzhang, Sh. (2013). Shanggu yinxi [Old Chinese phonology], (2nd edition). Shanghai: Shanghai Education Press.
Zhou, Z. (1991). Zhongguo
xiuci xueshi [History of Chinese
rhetoric]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
Zhu, L. (2016). Guangyi
xiucixue biaoda jieshou zhuti ji zhutijian guanxi [The expression of
broad-sense rhetoric: The expression-reception subjects and
intersubjectivity], Contemporary
Rhetoric, 1, 3–36.
Zhu, X. (1995). Daju
de yuyi leixing [The semantic types of answers to
questions]. Language Teaching and Linguistic
Studies, 3, 47–60.
(1996). Shilun
liangzhong leixing de daju [A tentative discussion on two types of answers
to questions]. Journal of Jiangsu Normal
University (Philosophy and Social Sicences
Edition), 2, 121–124.
Zhu, Z. (1985). Guhanyu
xiuci lihua [Illustration of rhetorical figures in
classical
Chinese]. Wuhan: Hubei Education Press.
Zima, E., & Brône, G. (2015). Cognitive
linguistics and interactional discourse: Time to enter into
dialogue. Language &
Cognition, 7(4), 485–498.
Ziporyn, B. (2003). How
many are the ten thousand things and I? Relativism, mysticism, and the
privileging of oneness in the ‘Inner
Chapters’. In S. Cook (Ed.), Hiding
the world in the world: Uneven discourses on the
Zhuangzi (pp. 33–63). Albany: SUNY Press.
Zlatev, J. (2007). Intersubjectivity,
mimetic schemas and the emergence of
language. Intellectica, 46(2–3), 123–152.
(2008). The
dialectics of consciousness and
language. Journal of Consciousness
Studies, 15(6), 5–14.
Zlatev, J., Racine, T. P., Sinha, C., & Itkonen, E. (Eds.). (2008). The
shared mind: Perspectives on
intersubjectivity. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Zong, T., & Wang, W. (1994). Zhongxi
gudian xiuci xueshuo yitong lun: Yi chunqiu zhanguo he gu xila luoma
weili [On the similarities and differences between Chinese and
Western classical rhetorical theories: Taking the Spring and Autumn period
and the Warring States period and Ancient Greece and Rome as
examples]. Research in Ancient Chinese
Language, 1, 49–50.