Grammatical Conceptualization as a Poetic Strategy in E. E. Cummings' yes is a pleasant country
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_misc/mj.200310398Keywords:
conceptual projections, mental spaces, conceptual integration, blending, metaphor, knowledge domains, blended space, composition, completion, elaborationAbstract
This article applies the theoretical principles of cognitive linguistics to E.E. Cummings’ poetic composition yes is a pleasant country. It combines the perspectives of conceptual metaphor theory, blending theory and the conceptual integration network model to show how grammatical conceptualization may be used as a poetic strategy, due to the semantic potential of grammar, which, as cognitive linguistics contends, is meaningful and symbolic in nature. The article also shows how CIN proves to be a valid model of analysis for poetic works given the highly concentrated and involved type of conceptualization they tend to use. Furthermore, it demonstrates that metaphorical mappings and blending are different and combinable mental operations which form a part of the intricate projections found in complex conceptual networks.
Downloads
References
ADAMS, Jon-K. 1985. Pragmatics and Fiction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
BARCELONA, Antonio. (ed.). 2000. Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
COULSON, Seana. 1995. “The Menendez Brothers Virus: Analogical Mapping in Blended Spaces”. In CRL Newsletter. February 1995 9 (1). La Jolla: University of California, San Diego. (Available online at http://crl.ucsd.edu/newsletter/back-issues.html)
COULSON, Seana and Todd OAKLEY. 2000. “Blending Basics”. Cognitive Linguistics. 11 (3/4): 175-196.
CUMMINGS, E. E. 1994 (1944). “yes is a pleasant country”. In Complete Poems, 1904-1962. London: W.W. Norton and Company Books.
FAUCONNIER, Gilles. 1997. Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P.
FAUCONNIER, Gilles and Eve SWEETSER. (eds.). 1996. Spaces, Worlds, and Grammar. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
FAUCONNIER, Gilles and Mark TURNER. 1994. “Conceptual Projection and Middle Spaces”. La Jolla, CA.: Cognitive Science Technical Report 9401. Available at http://www.inform.umd.edu/EdRes/Colleges/ARHU/Depts/English/englfac/MTurne/
—. 1996. “Blending as a Central Process of Grammar”. In Goldberg, Adele. (ed.). Conceptual Structure, Discourse and Language. Stanford, CA: CSLI: 113-129. Expanded web version available at www.wam.umd.edu/~mturn/WWW/blending.html#ARTICLES
—. 1998. “Conceptual Integration Networks”. Cognitive Science. 22 (2): 133-187.
—. 2000. “Compression and Global Insight”. Cognitive Linguistics. 11 (3/4): 283-304.
—. 2001. “Conceptual Integration Networks”. Expanded web version, 10 February 2001. Available online at http://www.inform.umd.edu/EdRes/Colleges/ARHU/Depts/English/englfac/MTurner/cin.web/cin.html.
GRADY, Joseph. 2000. “Cognitive Mechanisms of Conceptual Integration”. Cognitive Linguistics. 11 (3/4): 335-345.
GRADY, Joseph, Todd OADKLEY and Seana COULSON. 1999. “Blending and Metaphor”. In Steen, Gerard and Raymond Gibbs. (eds.). Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Available online at http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Grady 99.html
LANGACKER, Ronald. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1. Stanford: Stanford U. P.
—. Ronald. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 2. Stanford: Stanford U. P.
—. Ronald. 1998. “Indeterminacy in Semantics and Grammar”. In Cifuentes Honrubia, José Luis. (ed.). Estudios de Lingüística Cognitiva II. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. Departamento de Filología Española, Lingüística General y Teoría de la Literatura: 649-672.
—. Ronald. 2001. “Discourse in Cognitive Grammar”. Cognitive Linguistics 12-2: 143-188.
LAKOFF, George. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
—. 1993. “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor”. In Ortony, Andrew. (ed.). Metaphor and Thought (2nd Ed). Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.: 202-251.
—. 1996. “Sorry, I’m not Myself Today: The Metaphor System for Conceptualizing the Self”. In Fauconnier, Gilles and Eve Sweetser. (eds.) Spaces, Worlds, and Grammar. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press: 91-123.
LAKOFF , George and Mark JOHNSON. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
—. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.
LAKOFF , George and Mark TURNER. 1989. More than Cool Reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
NAVARRO I FERRANDO, Ignasi. 1999. “The Metaphorical Use of On.” Journal of English Studies 1: 145-164.
RUIZ DE MENDOZA, Francisco J. 1999. Introducción a la Teoría Cognitiva de la Metonimia. Granada: Método Ed.
SÁNCHEZ PALACIOS Ángel L. 2000. Aproximación Cognitiva al Desarrollo Polisémico de la Preposición Inglesa On. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Universidad de Salamanca.
TALMY, Leonard. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics (Vols. I, II). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2003 Pilar Alonso Rodríguez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
