Paradoxicality in Modern English Poetic Discourse: Testing Boundaries of Linguistic Research in the 21st Century

  • O. S. Marina
Keywords: cognitive and discursive category, paradoxical poetic form, paradoxicality, focus of paradoxicality category, paradigmatic dialogue

Abstract

This article elaborates on a paradigmatic dialogue approach to explore paradoxicality manifestations in modern English poetic discourse. It follows a "jigsaw pattern" principle predominant in linguistic research in the 21st century and kaleidoscopically integrates key notions, techniques, and methodological tools of cognitive poetics, including multimodal, cognitive semiotics, and mobile stylistics. Such an approach facilitates developing a completely new view on paradoxicality. The paper defines paradoxicality as a cognitive and discursive category, modelled on the basis of "fuzzy set" principle, which predetermines the elasticity of its boundaries and constant accessibility for new members. A number of categorial features, related to certain categorial foci, structure the category. In particular, contradiction, unusualness, boundedness, anomality and mobility foci actualized to a different extent in multimodal poetic discourse through paradoxical poetic forms (micro-, macro- and megaparadoxical). The paper proves that paradoxical poetic forms are multimodal construals, incorporating preconceptual, conceptual, verbal, and non-verbal facets. Formation of paradoxical poetic forms is a result of linguistic and cognitive activity of addresser and addressee ensured by linguistic and cognitive processes of precategorization, acategorization and categorization. Cognitive and semiotic operations as well as procedures accompany each process at a certain facet of a form.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Afshordi, N. et al. (2017). From Planck Data to Planck Era: Observational Tests of Holographic Cosmology. Physical Review Letters.

Alber, J. (2016). Unnatural Narrative: Impossible Worlds in Fiction and Drama (Frontiers of Narrative). University of Nebraska Press.

Atmanspacher, H. & Fach, W. (2005). "Acategoriality as Mental Instability". Journal of Mind and Behavior 26, 181-205.

Bataille, G. (2003). Zapret i transgessiya [Prohibition and Transgression]. Available from: http://vispir.narod.ru/bataj2.htm.

Belekhova, L. (2004). Slovesnyi obraz v amerykanskiy poezii: linguokognityvnyi pogliad [Verbal Image in American Poetry: Linguistic and Cognitive Perspective]. Moscow: Zvezdopad.

Bell, A. (2014). The Possible Worlds of Hypertext Fiction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Bennett, J. (2015). Poetry. Available from: http://www.johnmbennett.net.

Blanchot, M. (1994). Opyt-predel [Experience-limit]. Tanatographiya Erosa: Zhorzh Batay I Frantsuzskaya Mysl XX veka [Tanatography of Eros: Georges Bataille and the French Thought mid XX century]. SPb: Mifril.

Burke, M. (2014). “Stylistics: From Classical Rhetoric to Cognitive Neuroscience”. In: Burke, Michael (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Stylistics. Abingdon, NY: Routledge: 1-9.

Büsse, B. (2013). “Introduction”. 32-nd PALA Conference «Mobile Stylistics». 31 July – 4 August 2013. Book of Abstracts. University of Heidelberg, 1.

Chernigovskaya, Т. (2018). Liudi so znaniyami "Kak u Vsekh" Stanut Lishnimi [People with knowledge "as Everybody has" to Become Superfluous]. Available from: http://www.more.club/post/tatyana-chernigovskaya-lyudi-so-znaniyami-kak-u-vseh-stanut-lishnimi

Epstein, M. (1999). Russian Postmodernism: New Perspectives on Post-Soviet Culture. Oxford, New York: Berghahn Books.

Eshelman, R. (2008). Performatism, or the End of Postmodernism. New York: The Davies Group Publishers.

Foucault, М. (1994). O Transgressiyi [On Transgression] Tanatographiya Erosa: Zhorzh Batay I Frantsuzskaya Mysl XX veka [Tanatography of Eros: Georges Bataille and the French Thought mid XX century]. SPb: Mifril.

Gavins, J. (2013). Reading the Absurd. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Gebser, J. (1986). The Ever-Present Origin, Part One: Foundations of the Aperspectival World and Part Two: Manifestations of the Aperspectival World. Athens: Ohio University Press.

Gibbons, A. (2012). Multimodality, Cognition, and Experimental Literature. New York: Routledge.

Gibbs, R. (1999). The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language and Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Goldsmith, K. (2011). Uncreative Writing: Managing Language in the Digital Age. Columbia: Columbia University Press.

Inman, P. (2014). Written 1976 – 2013. Manchester: if p then q.

Kirby, A. (2009). Digimodernism: How New Technologies Dismantle the Postmodern and Reconfigure Our Culture. New York; London: Continuum.

Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. (2012). London / New York: MacMillan / A.& C. Black.

Marina, О. (2015). Semiotika Paradoksalnosti u kognityvno-komunikatyvnomu vysvitlenni (na materiali suchasnogo anglomovnogo poetychnogo dyskursu) [Semiotics of Paradoxicality in Cognitive and Communicative Elucidation (on the material of Modern English poetic discourse)]. Kherson: Ailant.

Nomura, Y., et al. (2017). Toward a holographic theory for general spacetimes Physical Review D 95, 086002. Vol. 95, Iss. 8.

Nørgaard, N. (2010). “Multimodality: Extending the Stylistic Tool-Kit”. In McIntyre, Dan and Beatrix Büsse (eds.,), Language and Style. In Honour of Mick Short. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 443-448.

Oxford Dictionary for Advanced Learners. (2009). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Perloff, M. (2012). Unoriginal Genius: Poetry by Other Means in the New Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Robinson, P. (2013). The Limits and Openness of the Contemporary. The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary British and Irish poetry. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1-21.

Ryan, M.-L. (2013). Impossible Worlds and Aesthetic Illusion. Immersion and Distance : Aesthetic Illusion in Literature and Other Media. Amsterdam; New York: Brill | Rodopi. Series: Studies in Intermediality. Vol. 6, 131-150.

Stockwell, P. (2017). The Language of Surrealism. London: Palgrave.

Tsur, R. (2012). Playing by Ear and the Tip of the Tongue. Precategorial Information in Poetry. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.

Vermeulen, T. & van den Akker, R. (2010). Notes on Metamodernism. Journal of Aesthetics and Culture. Vol. 2, 10-24.

Vorobyova, O. (2013). "Lingvistika segodnia: reinterpretatsiya epistemy" [Linguistics Today: Reinterpretation of the Episteme]. Visnyk Kyivskogo Natsionalnogo Lingvistychnogo Universytetu Vol.16, No. 2, 41-47.

Vorobyova, O.P. (2017). 'Haunted by ambiguities' revisited: in search of a metamethod for literary text disambiguation. Lege artis. Language yesterday, today, tomorrow. The Journal of University of SS Cyril and Methodius in Trnava. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open. vol. II(1), 428-496.
DOI: 10.1515/lart-2017-0011 ISSN 2453-8035

Wierzbicka, A. (1992). Semantics, Culture, and Cognition: Universal Human Concepts in Culture-Specific Configurations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zade, L. (1965). "Fuzzy Sets". Information and Control, No. 8, 338-353.

Žižek, S. (2006). The Parallax View. Cambridge, MA, London: The MIT Press.
Published
2018-04-15
How to Cite
Marina, O. S. (2018). Paradoxicality in Modern English Poetic Discourse: Testing Boundaries of Linguistic Research in the 21st Century. Cognition, Communication, Discourse, (15), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.26565/2218-2926-2017-15-03