Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Cognition (1)
- cognitive approaches to language and literature (1)
- cognitive turn (1)
- linguistics (1)
- literary linguistics (1)
- literary pragmatics (1)
- literature (1)
- metrics (1)
- narratology (1)
- stylistics (1)
Editorial
(2013)
The aim of this two-part special issue of The International Journal of Literary Linguistics is to probe the implications of the cognitive turn in literary linguistics that has gone hand in hand with the field’s growing appreciation of pragmatics at the end of the twentieth century (as illustrated e.g. by MacMahon, Mey, Verdonk and Weber). The view, increasingly shared by literary linguists, that literature is a communicative endeavour between text (author) and reader has resulted in a heightened interest in the cognitive abilities that ultimately make this communication possible. Yet the ease with which the buzzword ‘cognition’ sometimes is applied to explain these abilities and processes (which are often only assumed to exist rather than substantiated with empirical evidence) seems to be at odds not least with the fact that the cognitive sciences are far from a uniform field yielding fixed and finite results. Indeed, whether or not all language phenomena are underpinned by innate cognitive rules is an issue that remains a bone of contention amongst scholars, as does the nature of these cognitive rules themselves. Even a cognitive grammarian like Ronald Langacker warns against jumping to premature conclusions about the natural foundations of language (14) and avoids making such claims in his own work. ...
The following mission statements by linguists and literary scholars working in different institutional and cultural contexts and at different stages of their careers are intended to map out the terrain covered by this journal. They tell similar stories about how these scholars came to cross the disciplinary boundary that too often divides their two fields, and they reveal a number of shared interests and emphases. But they also highlight the diversity of methodologies to which this journal is open – from metrics and stylistics to the cognitive sciences and Systemic Functional Grammar. The hopes and expectations voiced by the authors are partly pragmatic, expressing the wish that the journal’s Open Access format will have a broader reach than a journal published in the "traditional" way would, notably to colleagues outside of Western Europe. They also, however, emphasise the journal’s potential to shape our conception of "literary linguistics" and, therefore, to make an innovative contribution to shaping what continues to be a contested and often misunderstood "field".