捆绑-讽刺,机智,情感。一个案例研究建议更广泛的原则

IF 0.4 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Reuven Tsur, C. Gafni
{"title":"捆绑-讽刺,机智,情感。一个案例研究建议更广泛的原则","authors":"Reuven Tsur, C. Gafni","doi":"10.12697/SMP.2018.5.2.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study submits to empirical investigation an old idea of Tsur’s regarding the effect of enjambment on the perceived subtleness of irony in a poetic passage. We submitted two versions of a Milton passage to over 50 participants with “background in literary studies”, ranging from undergraduates to tenured professors, asking them to rate the perceived subtleness of irony and forthrightness of expression. We received four incompatible combinations of relative subtleness and forthrightness in the two passages. Two of the combinations were logically reasonable (though resulting from opposite performances), and two were internally inconsistent. An analysis of these results revealed two sources of this discrepancy: enjambments can be performed in three different ways, and participants respond not to abstract enjambments, but to performed enjambments; and they act upon partly overlapping definitions of irony. Assuming different performances of the enjambment, both logically acceptable response patterns support our hypothesis. Yet, a large part of the responses in this study were incoherent to some extent. This highlights the difficulty in collecting subjective interpretations of complex aesthetic events. We discuss this methodological issue at length.","PeriodicalId":55924,"journal":{"name":"Studia Metrica et Poetica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enjambment – Irony, Wit, Emotion. A Case Study Suggesting Wider Principles\",\"authors\":\"Reuven Tsur, C. Gafni\",\"doi\":\"10.12697/SMP.2018.5.2.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study submits to empirical investigation an old idea of Tsur’s regarding the effect of enjambment on the perceived subtleness of irony in a poetic passage. We submitted two versions of a Milton passage to over 50 participants with “background in literary studies”, ranging from undergraduates to tenured professors, asking them to rate the perceived subtleness of irony and forthrightness of expression. We received four incompatible combinations of relative subtleness and forthrightness in the two passages. Two of the combinations were logically reasonable (though resulting from opposite performances), and two were internally inconsistent. An analysis of these results revealed two sources of this discrepancy: enjambments can be performed in three different ways, and participants respond not to abstract enjambments, but to performed enjambments; and they act upon partly overlapping definitions of irony. Assuming different performances of the enjambment, both logically acceptable response patterns support our hypothesis. Yet, a large part of the responses in this study were incoherent to some extent. This highlights the difficulty in collecting subjective interpretations of complex aesthetic events. We discuss this methodological issue at length.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55924,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studia Metrica et Poetica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studia Metrica et Poetica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12697/SMP.2018.5.2.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Metrica et Poetica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12697/SMP.2018.5.2.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

本研究以实证研究的方式提出了Tsur关于诗歌段落中反讽的微妙性的纠缠效应的旧观点。我们提交了两个版本的弥尔顿段落给50多名有“文学研究背景”的参与者,从本科生到终身教授,要求他们对讽刺的微妙和表达的直率进行评分。在这两段经文中,我们得到了相对微妙和直率的四种不相容的组合。其中两个组合在逻辑上是合理的(尽管产生于相反的表现),另外两个在内部是不一致的。对这些结果的分析揭示了这种差异的两个来源:捆绑可以以三种不同的方式进行,参与者不是对抽象的捆绑做出反应,而是对实际的捆绑做出反应;他们对反讽的定义部分重叠。假设连接的不同表现,两种逻辑上可接受的反应模式都支持我们的假设。然而,本研究中很大一部分的回答在某种程度上是不连贯的。这凸显了收集复杂审美事件的主观解释的困难。我们详细讨论了这个方法问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enjambment – Irony, Wit, Emotion. A Case Study Suggesting Wider Principles
This study submits to empirical investigation an old idea of Tsur’s regarding the effect of enjambment on the perceived subtleness of irony in a poetic passage. We submitted two versions of a Milton passage to over 50 participants with “background in literary studies”, ranging from undergraduates to tenured professors, asking them to rate the perceived subtleness of irony and forthrightness of expression. We received four incompatible combinations of relative subtleness and forthrightness in the two passages. Two of the combinations were logically reasonable (though resulting from opposite performances), and two were internally inconsistent. An analysis of these results revealed two sources of this discrepancy: enjambments can be performed in three different ways, and participants respond not to abstract enjambments, but to performed enjambments; and they act upon partly overlapping definitions of irony. Assuming different performances of the enjambment, both logically acceptable response patterns support our hypothesis. Yet, a large part of the responses in this study were incoherent to some extent. This highlights the difficulty in collecting subjective interpretations of complex aesthetic events. We discuss this methodological issue at length.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Studia Metrica et Poetica
Studia Metrica et Poetica LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
6
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信