PDF. - full text - Dunarea de Jos

More documents

Recommendations

Info

e interpreted as figure. ‘Evening’, ‘lamps’ and ‘comfort’ are now figure in cognitivism, by the side of another effect they bring about, a renewed ability to symbolize in PL. It is actually their very role in negative patterns that helped increase their power as symbols. In processing the information supplied by grammar arrangements in the two poems, we find that through those grammar devices the announcement of a few gaps happens, at the same time with a focalized intensity of thought peculiar to the subjectivity of the genre. Conclusions MS and PL have a novel way of using the adversarial or contentious aspect of arguments which are important to an understanding of their poetry. Most of the implicatures are found to explore not so much time as the relation between space and body. Wavering between positions within a space is an issue of power, and also of scale, not to mention the issue of interiority and exteriority. Hence, the interesting experience of identification through one viewer being made to go out of himself. Eventually, the major distinction between MS and PL is that the former decides on a course of action and the latter cannot do so because he finds out that knowledge and proof are lacking in what he is concerned. We can recast the idea of dialogue (present subtextually in these poems) as a conventional situation when two parties reason together for some purpose. The actuality of the poems puts forward only arguments by one party. Thus, we are faced with a one-sided argumentation in a natural-language setting, a practical and applied task that will make legitimate any response as defended by informal logic. For his invisible respondent in both cases, the questioner resorts to different kinds of sophistical arguments. In MS’s case, the argumentum ad misericordiam (an appeal to sympathy) is generated by the wretched situation of a sufferer losing bodyweight. To this, the argumentum ad populum draws upon the popular opinion that the weightless soul should perform the action of rising to heaven because people say that this is the right thing to do. On the other hand, PL has a sophistical way of pressing presumptions ahead in an aggressive tactic of many questions – what is known as “the fallacy of complex question” so that “any direct answer will trap a respondent into damaging concessions” (Walton, 1998: 26). In PL’s case, it appears that the questions themselves can be fallacies due to the fact that the questions contain presumptions that, in a subtle manner, implicate conclusions tripping up the respondent. By pressing the idea of dying as ‘going down into the ground’, the answer is contained in the question, but may not be the commitment of a respondent resembling, for instance, MS. We cannot conclude without remembering the cautious tone of David Crystal (1992: 386) when assessing that too many zeros or absences in an analysis weaken its plausibility. We must hope that our paper has not been excessive in that respect. We tried to get a grasp on the two poets’ insight in terms of purpose versus play, hierarchy versus anarchy, presence versus absence, epistemology versus ontology. This strategy of approach may yield the objectivised differences in the poets’ cultural backgrounds, instead of pondering about the genuineness of their personal grasp. PL poses questions that cannot be easily answered. MS takes an orientation that is appealing because it discharges us of the duty to give answers. We are all philosophers by dabbling, the argument of God awaiting us may impress us or may fail to do so. Truth is needed, but the notion of truth is not at all a perspicuous one. References Crisp, P. (2005). “Allegory and symbol – a fundamental opposition?” in Language and Literature. Vol. 70
14, no. 4 / November. Sage Publications. Crystal, D. (1992). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Blackwell Publishers. Evans, V. (2007). A Glossary of Cognitive Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd. Horn, L. (1989). Natural History of Negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Iuga, N. (2005). “Dacă inspiri numai ce expiri, mori”, in România literară nr. 39/5-11 oct., p. 3. Pârvu, S. (coord.) (2005). Postmodernism. Iaşi: Institutul European. Sperber D. & D. Wilson (1986). Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Tindale, C. W. (2004). Rhetorical Argumentation. Sage Publications, Inc. Walton, D. (1998). The New Dialectic. Conversational Contexts of Argument. Toronto, Buffalo, London: University of Toronto Press. Abstract This intercultural study is backed up by current competing motivations in discourse, such as economy, clarity, routinization or expressivity. The analysis is hinged on arguments about non-geographical space, time compression, metaphysical extinction in two cognitive environments: one distinctly Romanian and the other one distinctly British. Résumé Cette approche, soutenue par des thèmes d’interculturalité, invoque des motivations discursives qui concurrent pour assurer les principes de l’économie, de la clarté de l’expression, de l’expressivité du message et de son aspect quotidien. On présente des arguments en ce qui concerne l’espace qui dépasse la géographie, le temps comprimé, l’extinction métaphysique. Le tout est généré par des milieux cognitifs distincts, l’espace roumain et l’espace britannique. Rezumat Abordarea de faţă, susţinută de teme ale interculturalităţii, invocă motivaţii discursive ce concură pentru a asigura principial economia exprimării şi claritatea ei, expresivitatea mesajului şi formularea lui rutinieră. Se aduc argumente în legătură cu spaţiul transgresând geografia, timpul comprimat, extincţia metafizică, totul fiind generat de medii cognitiv distincte, unul românesc şi celălalt britanic. 71
Page 1 and 2:
Annals of “Dunărea de Jos” Uni
Page 3 and 4:
Naratorul adesea intradiegetic şi
Page 5 and 6:
Senzaţia de artificialitate pe car
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
ealitatea. Drumurile săptămânale
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
contrastul lexical pentru interpret
Page 15 and 16: de proprietăţi. Referenţii care
Page 17 and 18: organization of word meaning, in Ch
Page 19 and 20: Annals of “Dunărea de Jos” Uni
Page 21 and 22: classroom, they do not necessarily
Page 23 and 24: initiative, independence, proactive
Page 27 and 28: En plus de la mission d’éduquer
Page 29 and 30: 12 Ibidem, p. 63 3 Silvian Iosifesc
Page 33 and 34: and much more complex than many of
Page 37 and 38: Selbstsucht”, und so wird der “
Page 41 and 42: qui fait partie intégrante de l’
Page 45 and 46: different aims in an integrative ty
Page 47 and 48: cast characters as statements of al
Page 51 and 52: cover of a unified, ahistorical, tr
Page 53 and 54: originate in cultural studies, whic
Page 55 and 56: expressed by personal names without
Page 59 and 60: Either none, or else tranquility sw
Page 61 and 62: une prose de haute qualité qui mon
Page 63 and 64: poetic material: M(arin) S(orescu)
Page 65: we need to quote an opinion (Crisp,
Page 69 and 70: prétend la référence à un cadre
Page 71 and 72: dévalorisantes que l’auteur met
Page 73 and 74: tournure humoristique, le signifié
Page 75 and 76: d’étude. Il s’agit des conséq
Page 77 and 78: asservis au régime communiste qui
Page 79 and 80: Prefaţându-şi volumul, autoarea
Page 81 and 82: pe „speciile extra-literare de di
Page 83 and 84: subsol, al notelor explicative ampl
Page 85 and 86: The Annals of “Dunărea de Jos”
show all

PDF. - full text - Dunarea de Jos

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?