In:Iconicity in Cognition and across Semiotic Systems
Edited by Sara Lenninger, Olga Fischer, Christina Ljungberg and Elżbieta Tabakowska
[Iconicity in Language and Literature 18] 2022
► pp. 155–172
Władysław Strzemiński’s theory of vision and Ronald Langacker’s theory of language
Iconic dimensions of visual perception and grammar
Published online: 10 November 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.18.08tab
https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.18.08tab
Abstract
The paper presents evidence in support of the claim that there are some obvious parallels between Ronald Langacker’s theory of grammar, with its emphasis on the role of imagery in language creation and use, and the theory of visual perception as proposed by the prominent Polish art historian and philosopher Władysław Strzemiński in his 1958 book Teoria widzenia (“A Theory of Vision” (2016/1958). Strzemiński argues that paintings are iconic representations of the world as an object of different types of visual perception. Significant similarities between particular types of vision and some fundamental properties of language as defined within the cognitivist framework suggest that linguistic structures are based, to a large extent, on visual perception and that the relation between visual and verbal representations is inherently iconic. It will be argued that the relation between vision and language is based upon principles of iconicity and that an analysis of visual perception may lead to relevant insights into the processes of language creation and development.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Contour vision
- 3.Silhouette vision
- 4.Cubic vision
- 5.Chiaroscuro vision
- 6.Full empirical vision
- 7.Coda
Acknowledgements Notes References
References (18)
Borkowska, G. 1991. Szymborska eks-centryczna. (”The ec-centric Szymborska”) Teksty Drugie, nr 4 (10), 45–58.
Johnson, M. 1987. The Body in the Mind. The Bodily Basis of Meaning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. 1989. The Invariance Hypothesis. Do Metaphors Preserve Cognitive Typology? Duisburg: L.A.U.D.
1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, R. W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisties. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
1991. Concept, Image and Symbol. The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Berlin–New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1996. Oko i umysł. Szkice o ma-larstwie, “The eye and the mind. Essays about painting”; selection from Oeuvres de Maurice Merleau-Ponty, transl. S. Cichowicz. Gdańsk: Słowo, obraz, terytoria.
Murawska, M. 2006. Sztuka, która pozwala zobaczyć niewidzialne. Maurice Merleau-Ponty o malarstwie Cézanne’a i Michel Henry o abstrakcji Kandinskiego, (“Art that makes it possible to see the invisible. Maurice Merleau-Ponty about Cézanne’s painting and Michel Henry about Kandinky’s abstractions”) Przegląd Filozoficzno-Literacki 2 (14) [URL]. Access 22.04.2018
Poprzęcka, M. 2008. Inne obrazy. Oko, widzenie, sztuka. Od Albertiego do Duchampa (“Other images. The eye, the vision, the art. From Alberti to Duchamp”). Gdańsk: Słowo, obraz, terytoria.
Przyboś, J. 2016 (1958). Przedmowa (”Introduction”). In W. Strzemiński, Teoria Widzenia Łódź: Muzeum Sztuki w Łodzi. 51–60
Szymborska, W. 1993. Into the Ark (transl. S. Barańczak and C. Cavanagh). In W. Szymborska, View with a Grain of Sand: Selected Poems by Wisława Szymborska. 163 – 164. New York: Harcourt.
Światłoń, D. 2010. Nowe spojrzenie na sztukę. (“A new way of looking at art.”) Dialogi i diagnozy. Estetyka i krytyka 19 (2): 191–195.
Tabakowska, E. (2019). Zobaczyć, namalować, powiedzieć. Widzenie świata, przedstawianie świata i mówienie o świecie. “To see, to paint, to say: representing the world and sdpeaking about the world”) In A. Załazińska i J. Winiarska (eds.), Widzieć – rozumieć – komunikować. Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka. 29 – 44.