{"title":"作为双向文学参与场所的活隐喻","authors":"Don Kuiken, Shawn Douglas","doi":"10.1075/SSOL.18004.KUI","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Articulation of an interactive model of literariness calls for separate specification of (a) a text’s perceptible\n mode of representation, (b) a reader’s mode of engagement with a text so perceived, and (c) the generative (e.g., creative,\n expressive) effects of the interaction between this mode of representation and mode of reader engagement. We present a model that\n identifies two aspects of metaphoric textual representation: structured sequences of nominal metaphors and quasi-metaphoric\n structures with optional metaphoric construal. This model also distinguishes two modes of reader engagement: expressive enactment\n and integrative comprehension (Kuiken & Douglas, 2017). The generativity of\n literary reading is located especially within the interplay between expressive enactment and sequences of metaphoric (and\n quasi-metaphoric) modes of representation. Evidence suggests that readers reporting expressive enactment also report inexpressible\n realizations and a temporal progression leading through epistemic tensions that comprise “living metaphor” (Ricoeur, 1981). Thus the generativity – and aesthetic effects – of literary reading are found within the\n departures from conventionality that comprise the emergent meanings of complex metaphoric structures.","PeriodicalId":222412,"journal":{"name":"Empirical Studies of Literariness","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Living metaphor as the site of bidirectional literary engagement\",\"authors\":\"Don Kuiken, Shawn Douglas\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/SSOL.18004.KUI\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Articulation of an interactive model of literariness calls for separate specification of (a) a text’s perceptible\\n mode of representation, (b) a reader’s mode of engagement with a text so perceived, and (c) the generative (e.g., creative,\\n expressive) effects of the interaction between this mode of representation and mode of reader engagement. We present a model that\\n identifies two aspects of metaphoric textual representation: structured sequences of nominal metaphors and quasi-metaphoric\\n structures with optional metaphoric construal. This model also distinguishes two modes of reader engagement: expressive enactment\\n and integrative comprehension (Kuiken & Douglas, 2017). The generativity of\\n literary reading is located especially within the interplay between expressive enactment and sequences of metaphoric (and\\n quasi-metaphoric) modes of representation. Evidence suggests that readers reporting expressive enactment also report inexpressible\\n realizations and a temporal progression leading through epistemic tensions that comprise “living metaphor” (Ricoeur, 1981). Thus the generativity – and aesthetic effects – of literary reading are found within the\\n departures from conventionality that comprise the emergent meanings of complex metaphoric structures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":222412,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Empirical Studies of Literariness\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Empirical Studies of Literariness\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/SSOL.18004.KUI\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Empirical Studies of Literariness","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/SSOL.18004.KUI","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Living metaphor as the site of bidirectional literary engagement
Articulation of an interactive model of literariness calls for separate specification of (a) a text’s perceptible
mode of representation, (b) a reader’s mode of engagement with a text so perceived, and (c) the generative (e.g., creative,
expressive) effects of the interaction between this mode of representation and mode of reader engagement. We present a model that
identifies two aspects of metaphoric textual representation: structured sequences of nominal metaphors and quasi-metaphoric
structures with optional metaphoric construal. This model also distinguishes two modes of reader engagement: expressive enactment
and integrative comprehension (Kuiken & Douglas, 2017). The generativity of
literary reading is located especially within the interplay between expressive enactment and sequences of metaphoric (and
quasi-metaphoric) modes of representation. Evidence suggests that readers reporting expressive enactment also report inexpressible
realizations and a temporal progression leading through epistemic tensions that comprise “living metaphor” (Ricoeur, 1981). Thus the generativity – and aesthetic effects – of literary reading are found within the
departures from conventionality that comprise the emergent meanings of complex metaphoric structures.