Conceptual Types of Iconicity of Poetic Text

© The Editorial Council and Editorial Board of Linguistic Studies

Linguistic Studies
Volume 40(2), 2020, pp. 15-25

Conceptual Types of Iconicity of Poetic Text

Bezuhla Liliia

Article first published online: December 01, 2020 


Additional information
 Author Information: 

Bezuhla Liliia, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Professor of Department of German Philology and Translation at Vasyl’ Karazin Kharkiv National University. Correspondence: liliia.bezugla@karazin.ua

Citation: 

Bezuhla, L. Conceptual Types of Iconicity of Poetic Text [Text] // Linhvistychni Studiyi / Linguistic Studies : collection of scientific papers / Vasyl' Stus Donetsk National University; Ed. by Anatoliy Zahnitko. Vinnytsia : Vasyl' Stus DonNU, 2020. Vol. 40(2). Pp. 15-25. ISBN 966-7277-88-7

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31558/1815-3070.2020.40.2.2

Publication History:

Volume first published online: December 01, 2020
Article received: July 01, 2020, accepted: August 01, 2020 and first published online: December 01, 2020

Annotation.

Проаналізовано англійсько-, українсько- і російськомовні поетичні тексти, які мають властивості образної та схемної іконічності на всіх рівнях мовної системи як у глобальному, так і в локальному і локалізованому вияві, на предмет когнітивних характеристик. Роз-глянуто символьно-іконічний семіозис – процес взаємодії символьного й іконічного смислотворення мовними знаками, які в такому разі становлять симбіоз символів та ікон. За критерієм означуваного смислу, який підлягає уподібненню, виокремлено чотири концептуальні типи іконічності поетичного тексту – номінальну, ознакову, подієву і гештальтну іконічність.

Keywords: concept, iconicity, poetic text, semiosis, typology, mimicry.



Abstract.

CONCEPTUAL TYPES OF ICONICITY IN POETIC TEXT

Liliia Bezugla

Department of German Philology and Translation, Vasyl’ Karazin Kharkiv National University, Kharkiv, Ukraine.

Abstract

Background: The iconicity of poetic text has challenged modern linguistic studies, raising the question of how the iconic function of the poetic text is realized through language means in terms of cognitive poetics.

Purpose: The purpose of the analysis is to determine types of iconicity in poetic text by the criterion of the signified meaning which the language sign mimics.

Results: The conceptual classification of iconicity rests on concept division into nominal, characteristic, event and gestalt ones. Consequently, there is nominal, characteristic, action and gestalt iconicity of poetic text. The relations between symbolic and iconic meaning creation are symbolic iconic semiosis, i. e. the meaning is created through the language sign that in this case presents a symbiosis of symbol and icon. Iconic semiosis goes together with symbolic semiosis, iconically depicting the object, which is denoted verbally (explicitly or implicitly).

Discussion: Through the means of different language levels, symbolic iconic semiosis helps to distinguish four conceptual types of iconicity in poetic text by the criterion of the signified meaning. Each type is created in the global, local and localized dimension of the text. Future research suggests a deeper analysis of iconicity types of the poetic text with the aim to determine their structural, linguistic cognitive and discursive characteristics.

Keywords: concept, iconicity, poetic text, semiosis, typology, mimicry.

Vitae. Liliia Bezugla is Doctor of Philology, Professor, Professor of Department of German Philology and Translation at Vasyl’ Karazin Kharkiv National University. Her areas of research interests include linguistic pragmatics, cognitive linguistics, historical linguistics, linguistic poetics, and discourse studies.

Correspondence: liliia.bezugla@karazin.ua

Article.

References. 

References

1.    Belickaja, Evgenija. “Kognitivnaja ikonichnost’ i dinamicheskaja semantika onima (Cognitive iconicity and dynamic semantics of an onym)”. Universum: Filologija i iskusstvovedenie: jelektron. nauchn. zhurn. (Universum: Philology and art history: electron. scientific. journal). 6(8) (2014). Web. 12 Sep. 2020.

2.    Bieliekhova, Larysa. “Ikonichnist v amerykanskykh poetychnykh tekstakh (Iconicity in American poetry texts)”. Visnyk KLU. Seriia Filolohiia (Bulletin of Kiev Linguistic University. Series Philology). 7 (2) (2004): 60–65. Print.

3.    Boldyrev, Nikolaj. Kognitivnaja semantika. Tambov: Univ. Press, 2001. Print.

4.    Vorobiova, Olha. “Kohnityvna poetyka: zdobutky i perspektyvy (Cognitive poetics: achieve­ments and prospects)”. Visnyk Kharkivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu im. V. N. Karazina (Bulletin of Kharkiv Vasyl’ Karazin National University). 635 (2004): 18–22. Print.

5.    Vorobiova, Olha. “Ideia REZONANSU v linhvistychnykh doslidzhenniakh (Idea for RESONANCE in linguistic research)”. Mova. Liudyna. Svit. Do 70-richchia profesora M. P. Kocherhana (Language. Human. World. To the 70th anniversary of Professor Mykhailo Kochergan). Kyiv: Kyiv Linguistic Univ. Press, 2006. 72–86. Print.

6.    Zhabotinskaja, Svetlana. “Koncept / domen: matrichnaja i setevaja modeli (Concept / Domain: Matrix and Network Models)”. Kul’tura narodov Prichernomor’ja (Culture of the peoples of the Black Sea region). 168(1) (2009): 254–259. Print.

7.    Lotman, Jurij. O pojetah i pojezii: Analiz pojeticheskogo teksta (On poets and poetry: Analysis of the poetic text). St-Petersburg: Iskusstvo, 1996. Print.

8.    Peirce, Charles Sanders. Nachala pragmatizma / Perevod s anglijskogo (Issues of Pragmaticism / Translation from English). St-Petersburg: Aletejja, 2000. Print.

9.    Prosiannikova, Yana. “Osoblyvosti syntaksychnoi realizatsii pryntsypu ikonichnosti (na ma­teriali khudozhnikh porivnian v anhlomovnykh kanadskykh poetychnykh tekstakh) (Pecu­liarities of syntactic realization of the principle of iconicity (on the material of artistic com­parisons in English-language Canadian poetic texts))”. Pivdennyi arkhiv (filolohichni nauky) (Southern Archive (philological sciences)). LXVI (2017): 149–152. Print.

10.    Shevchenko, Irina. “Konceptualizacija kommunikativnogo povedenija v diskurse (Conceptualization of communicative behavior in discourse)”. Kak narisovat’ portret pticy: metodologija kognitivno-kommunikativnogo analiza jazyka (How to draw a bird portrait: methodology of cognitive-communicative analysis of language). Kharkiv: Vasil’ Karazin Univ. Press, 2017. 106–147. Print.

11.    Burger, Heinz Otto, and Reinhold Grimm. Evokation und Montage. Göttingen: Sachse & Pohl, 1961. Print.

12.    Burke, Michael. “Iconicity and literary emotion”. European Journal of English Studies. 5(1) (2001): 31–46. Print.

13.    Elleström, Lars. “Spatiotemporal aspects of iconicity”. Iconic Investigations 12. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 2013. 95–117. Print.

14.    Fischer, Andreas. “What, if anything, is phonological iconicity?”. Form Miming Meaning: Iconicity in Language and Literature. Amsterdam; Benjamins, 1999. 123–134. Print.

15.    Freeman, Margaret. “Minding: feeling, form, and meaning in the creation of poetic iconicity”. Cognitive poetics: goals, gains, and gaps. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2009. 169–197. Print.

16.    Hiraga, Masako K. Metaphor and iconicity. A cognitive approach to analyzing texts. Houndmills & New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2005. Print.

17.    Haiman, John. “The iconicity of grammar: Isomorphism and motivation”. Language. 56(3) (1980): 515–540. Print.

 

List of Sources

1.    Brodskij, Iosif. Uranija (Urania). St-Petersburg: Pushkinskij fond, 2000. Print.

2.    Vyrovets, Larysa. Maskuvalna sitka (Camouflage net). Kharkiv: Kontrast. Print.

3.    Kabanov, Aleksandr. Volhvy v planetarii (Magians in the planetarium). Kharkov: Folio, 2014. Print.

4.    Kostenko, Lina. Richka Heraklita (Heraclitus River). Kyiv: Lybid, 2016. Print.

5.    Sluckij, Boris. Izbrannoe. (1944–1977) (Favorites. (1944–1977)). Moskow: Hudozh. lit., 1980. Print.

6.    Ecstatic Occasions: 85 Leading Contemporary Poets / Ed. by D. Lehman. The University of Michigan Press, 1996. Print.

2.    The Norton Anthology of Modern Poetry: Second Edition / Ed. by Richard Ellmann and Robert O’Clair. N.Y.; L.: W. W. Norton & Company, 1988. Print.