1603 and 1605 Versions of Hamlet’s Soliloquy and Cognitive Linguistics: Why is the Second Version so Popular?
Today, this topic is still in the mist of research. I rarely find any essay or thesis about analysis of two versions of Hamlet’s soliloquy which only exists in online British Library. My purpose of writing this thesis is to clear up the fog of confusion and explain the reason why the second version is so popular among these versions. By reading the text of Hamlet’s soliloquy between the line, I have used linguistic methods to analyze it. This thesis will be about introducing two versions of the monologue, and from cognitive linguistic aspect (textual analysis), illustrating the reasons of the second version’s popularism.
The paper discusses the results of research by Serbian scholars into the field of cognitive linguistics over the past ten years. Special emphasis is laid on the cognitive linguistic studies of grammar, both in Serbian proper and from the contrastive viewpoint, which successfully apply Predrag Piper?s semantic localisation theory. It highlights the achievements of Serbian scholars in the sphere of historical cognitive linguistics, as well as fuzzy linguistics. It singles out cognitive principles in research into Serbian dialectology, as well as into lexicology, cultural linguistics and ethnolinguistics. The paper specifies the distinctive principles of the multidisciplinary fields in which cognitive linguistic methods of language study are used.
Abstract Over the last few years there has been a rapprochement between Cognitive Linguistics and semantic theories of humour based on the notion of script or frame. By drawing on Ritchie’s version of the theory of frame-shifting (2005) and reviewing the cognitive linguistic account of humour, we shall demonstrate how the interpretation of jokes containing a metaphor or a metonymy involves two cognitive-pragmatic tasks: the completion of the metaphorical/metonymic mapping that results in a new frame, and the resolution of the joke’s incongruity via a contrast with the surrounding frames of the joke. We also develop a classification of frame shifts according to their ontological structure (non-metaphorical/metonymic shifts and shifts based on metaphorical and/or metonymic reasoning) and the degree of the interpreter’s inferential activity (conceptual filling out and metaphor/metonymy replacement). In doing so, we attempt to identify some of the defining features of humorous metaphors and metonymies, as well as other phenomena that may also characterise jokes.
Construction grammarians are still quite reluctant to extend their descriptions to units beyond the sentence. However, the theoretical premises of construction grammar and frame semantics are particularly suited to cover spoken interaction from a cognitive perspective. Furthermore, as construction grammar is anchored in the cognitive linguistics paradigm and as such subscribes to meaning being grounded in experience, it needs to consider interaction since grammatical structures may be grounded not only in sensory-motor, but also in social-interactive experience. The example of grounded language learning experiments demonstrates the anchoring of grammatical mood in interaction. Finally, phenomena peculiar to spoken dialogue, such as pragmatic markers, may be best accounted for as constructions, drawing on frame semantics. The two cognitive linguistic notions, frames and constructions, are therefore particularly useful to account for generalisation in spoken interaction.
Zoltán Kövecses, Metaphor: A practical introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Pp. xvi, 285. Pb. $19.95.
This is the first textbook on metaphor to appear after the cognitive linguistic revolution of metaphorical research launched two decades ago by Lakoff & Johnson with their pioneering work, Metaphors we live by. Much scholarship has since been devoted to this paradigm of research. Twenty years have passed, and Kövecses takes this as a good time to summarize the development of the field. Writing a textbook on metaphor certainly reflects the maturation of the study of metaphor within the cognitive linguistic tradition. Targeted readers are undergraduate and graduate students with interests in metaphor and cognitive linguistics. Experienced researchers may also find this book helpful in motivating new ideas.
An important reason for the tremendous interest in metaphor over the past 20 years stems from cognitive linguistic research. Cognitive linguists embrace the idea that metaphor is not merely a part of language, but reflects a fundamental part of the way people think, reason, and imagine. A large number of empirical studies in cognitive linguistics have, in different ways, supported this claim. My aim in this paper is to describe the empirical foundations for cognitive linguistic work on metaphor, acknowledge various skeptical reactions to this work, and respond to some of these questions/criticisms. I also outline several challenges that cognitive linguists should try to address in future work on metaphor in language, thought, and culture.
[Kotowaza in Cognitive Linguistic Analysis: The Use of Synecdoche]. This paper analyzes kotowaza using synecdoc through the study of cognitive linguistic. The background of this research is the difficulty of understanding relationships between the meanings of the kotowaza on foreign learners because of cultural differences and lack of dictionaries that support the process of understanding kotowaza deeply. The purpose of this research is to understand kotowaza deeply, determine the connection of these lexical-figurative meaning of Japanese proverbs using synecdoche based on the study of cognitive linguistics. The method used is a qualitative method in approach of cognitive linguistics. At the end of the study, it is concluded that synecdochecan be used to analyze the correlation between the lexical meaning and figurative meaning of kotowaza that contains a word or two which represents wider or smaller meaning such as kotowaza which related to the characteristics of an area or kotowaza that associated with number.
AbstractSince its conception, Cognitive Linguistics as a theory of language has been enjoying ever increasing success worldwide. With quantitative growth has come qualitative diversification, and within a now heterogeneous field, different – and at times opposing – views on theoretical and methodological matters have emerged. The historical “prototype” of Cognitive Linguistics may be described as predominantly of mentalist persuasion, based on introspection, specialized in analysing language from a synchronic point of view, focused on West-European data (English in particular), and showing limited interest in the social and multimodal aspects of communication. Over the past years, many promising extensions from this prototype have emerged. The contributions selected for the Special Issue take stock of these extensions along the cognitive, social and methodological axes that expand the cognitive linguistic object of inquiry across time, space and modality.
<p>This paper will approach two of Nabokov’s poems from the perspective of embodied realism in Cognitive Linguistics. We will shed light on the reasons why we believe that Nabokov makes use of the DIVIDED SELF metaphor in his poetry. In the analysis of the poems we will explain how the Subject is understood in the author’s life in exile whereas the Self is understood in the author’s feelings of anguish and longing for his Russian past. Finally, we will also explain how Nabokov’s use of the DIVIDED SELF metaphor thematically structures both poems.</p>
This research is entitled “The Construction of English Verb “SEND”: A Cognitive Linguistic Study”. It is based on cognitive linguistic, because with cognitive linguistic it could be seen how exactly the construction of English verb “send” and how the construction could have that construction. The aims of the research are; 1) to analyze the construction of English verb “SEND” as a single verb; and 2) to analyze the Construction of English verb "SEND" as a phrasal verb. The data will be collected by using observation method and noting technique. Then, it will be analyzed by using distributional method with expansion, ellipsis, and immediate constituent division. All data that have been collected and analyzed will then be described by qualitative method. As a result, there would be two main outcome found in this research. First, the construction of English verb “send” in the form of single verb, those are English verb “send” as single verb in intransitive construction, transitive construction and ditransitive construction. Second, the construction of English verb “send” in the form of phrasal verb, those are English verb “send” as phrasal verb in intransitive construction, transitive construction, and ditransitive construction.
Complementarity of the Relevance-theoretic and Cognitive Linguistic Approaches to Metaphor Study: A Critical Review
This paper attempts to take a critical review of research work on the complementarity of the cognitive linguistic and relevance-theoretic approaches to metaphor study. Addressing the current concerns and problems of metaphor studies, the complementarity view demonstrates the cooperative potential of relevance-theoretic and cognitive linguistic approaches which will benefit metaphor studies and give full accounts of metaphor understanding and interpretation. In particular, the relevance-theoretic approach gives an account of ad hoc concept, emergent property and mental imagery which complements the cognitive linguistics and helps solve some issues in metaphor interpretation.