TY - JOUR
T1 - Poetic language and semantic information-processing
AU - Tsur, Reuven
N1 - Funding Information:
This Research was Supported by the Fund for Basic Research Administered by the Israel Academy of Science and Humanities
PY - 1985
Y1 - 1985
N2 - In this paper I am proposing a cognitive theory and description of the semantic structure of figurative language and rhyme. My assumption is, that an adequate theory of metaphor must satisfy four requirements: 1. to give a structural description of metaphors; 2. to explain how human beings understand novel metaphors; 3. to explain the relationship between this process and the process by which human beings produce and understand novel pieces of literal discourse; 4. to explain the relationship between these processes and the perceived effects of metaphors. The semantic information processing model underlying this paper is a hierarchic model of “meaning components’*. The same model can explain word acquisition by infants, word association, the understanding of new metaphors, the perceived effects of rhymes and other cognitive phenomena. A theory of minimum features cannot do justice to the richness of real-life categories. So the model is further developed in three directions: Mervis’ work on “good examples”; Collins and Quillian's work on the structure of semantic memory; Rumelhart's work on “cognitive schemata”.
AB - In this paper I am proposing a cognitive theory and description of the semantic structure of figurative language and rhyme. My assumption is, that an adequate theory of metaphor must satisfy four requirements: 1. to give a structural description of metaphors; 2. to explain how human beings understand novel metaphors; 3. to explain the relationship between this process and the process by which human beings produce and understand novel pieces of literal discourse; 4. to explain the relationship between these processes and the perceived effects of metaphors. The semantic information processing model underlying this paper is a hierarchic model of “meaning components’*. The same model can explain word acquisition by infants, word association, the understanding of new metaphors, the perceived effects of rhymes and other cognitive phenomena. A theory of minimum features cannot do justice to the richness of real-life categories. So the model is further developed in three directions: Mervis’ work on “good examples”; Collins and Quillian's work on the structure of semantic memory; Rumelhart's work on “cognitive schemata”.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84944295454&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1515/thli.1985.12.2-3.205
DO - 10.1515/thli.1985.12.2-3.205
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:84944295454
VL - 12
SP - 205
EP - 212
JO - Theoretical Linguistics
JF - Theoretical Linguistics
SN - 0301-4428
IS - 2-3
ER -