REPOZYTORIUM UNIWERSYTETU
W BIAŁYMSTOKU
UwB

Proszę używać tego identyfikatora do cytowań lub wstaw link do tej pozycji: http://hdl.handle.net/11320/16253
Pełny rekord metadanych
Pole DCWartośćJęzyk
dc.contributor.authorYerznkyan, Yelena-
dc.contributor.authorMovsisyan, Diana-
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-28T11:52:13Z-
dc.date.available2024-03-28T11:52:13Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.citationCrossroads. A Journal of English Studies 43 (4/2023), pp. 156-180pl
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11320/16253-
dc.description.abstractThe paper studies the correlation between understanding and evaluation in the light of social interactions, and aims at exploring the metaphorical mapping of the process of understanding in the English and Armenian languages. The purpose of the paper is to analyze the two cognitive processes, based on the contrastive study of verbs of understanding in terms of the evaluative meaning of their collocates, thus explaining the dynamics of understanding-evaluation relations, fully manifested in the metaphorical patterns underlying the sense of the verb. It is shown that the evaluative meaning of the collocates plays a pivotal role in shaping how understanding is emotionally and rationally assessed. A corpus driven analysis of the English and Armenian factual material reveals the collocations that metaphorically confer different dimensions to the process of understanding and points out a clear tendency to mark understanding as positive when evaluated rationally and negative when evaluated emotionally. The research detects and determines three types of evaluation in the axiological system under study and classifies them as emotional, rational or orientational. Their relative positioning on the axiological scale correlates with the accepted norm viewed as the deictic centre (reference point) of the whole process. The main findings of the research make a novel contribution to the study of understanding-evaluation correlation, offering insights into the metaphorical nature of how understanding is perceived and evaluated in both English and Armenian.pl
dc.language.isoenpl
dc.publisherThe University of Białystokpl
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike 4.0 International Licensepl
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/-
dc.subjectverbs of understandingpl
dc.subjectcognitive metaphorpl
dc.subjectdeixispl
dc.subjectnormpl
dc.subjectemotional evaluationpl
dc.subjectrational evaluationpl
dc.subjectorientational evaluationpl
dc.titleUnderstanding and evaluation: A cross-linguistic study of the evaluative collocates of English and Armenian verbs of understandingpl
dc.typeArticlepl
dc.rights.holderCreative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)pl
dc.identifier.doi10.15290/CR.2023.43.4.08-
dc.description.EmailDiana Movsisyan: movsisyan.diana@gmail.compl
dc.description.BiographicalnoteProf. Dr. Yelena Yerznkyan is the head of the Chair of the English Language, Yerevan State University (Armenia). She has extensive experience in teaching undergraduate and postgraduate courses in linguistics and ESP/EAP. She is the author of highly ranked monographs in pragmasemantics and cognitive linguistics, Armenian-English, English-Armenian extended dictionaries and more than 180 academic papers. Her teaching and research areas include cognitive linguistics, semantics, pragmatics, lexicology and lexicography, critical discourse analysis, multimodality, metaphor theory, methods of teaching ESL/ESP/EAP, as well as testing and assessment.pl
dc.description.BiographicalnoteDiana Movsisyan holds a PhD in Philology. She obtained her PhD from Yerevan State University, Armenia. She is a senior lecturer at the Chair of Languages, Armenian State University of Economics. The scope of her academic interests includes semantics, pragmatics, cognitive linguistics, metaphor theory and corpus linguistics.pl
dc.description.AffiliationYelena Yerznkyan - Yerevan State University, Armeniapl
dc.description.AffiliationDiana Movsisyan - Armenian State University of Economics, Armeniapl
dc.description.referencesAnderson, J. R. 1993. Problem solving and learning. American Psychologist 48 (1): 35-44.pl
dc.description.referencesBakhtin, M. M. 1995. Человек в мире слова [Man in the World of the Word]. Moscow: Russia Open University Press.pl
dc.description.referencesBaumberger, Ch., Baisbart, C., Brun, G. 2016. What is understanding? An overview of recent debates in epistemology and philosophy of science. In: S. Grimm, Ch. Baumberger, S. Ammon (eds.), Explaining Understanding: New Perspectives from Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, 1–34. New York/London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.pl
dc.description.referencesBühler, K. 2011. Theory of Language: The Representational Function of Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.pl
dc.description.referencesBurgers, Ch., Konijn, E. A., Steen, G. J. 2016. Figurative framing: shaping public discourse through metaphor, hyperbole, and irony. Communication Theory 26 (4): 410–430.pl
dc.description.referencesde Regt, H.W. 2014. Visualisation as a tool for understanding. Perspectives on Science 22 (3): 377–396.pl
dc.description.referencesDilthey, W. 2001. Герменевтика и теория литературы (собрание сочинений, том 4) [Hermeneutics and the Study of History (Selected Works, Volume 4)]. Moscow: “Dom Intellektual’noj Knigi”.pl
dc.description.referencesElgin, C. Z. 2007. Understanding and the facts. Philosophical Studies 132: 33–42.pl
dc.description.referencesFuoli, M. A., Littlemore, J., Turner, S. 2021. Sunken ships and screaming banshees: metaphor and evaluation in film reviews. English Language and Linguistics 26 (1): 75–103.pl
dc.description.referencesGadamer, H.-G. 2005. The hermeneutic significance of temporal distance. In: N. Stehr & R. Grundmann (eds.), Knowledge: Critical Concepts 2: Knowledge and Society: Forms of Knowledge, 235–264. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.pl
dc.description.referencesGadamer, H.-G. 2008. Philosophical Hermeneutics. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.pl
dc.description.referencesGallagher, Sh. 2008. Understanding others: embodied social cognition. In: P. Calvo & T. Gomola (eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Science: An Embodied Approach, 439–452. Amsterdam: Elsevier Ltd.pl
dc.description.referencesGibbs, R. W. 1994. The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.pl
dc.description.referencesGraesser, A. C., Singer, M., Trabasso, T. 1994. Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review 101(3): 371–395.pl
dc.description.referencesGrimm, S. 2006. Is understanding a species of knowledge? The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57: 515–535.pl
dc.description.referencesGrimm, S. 2016. How understanding people differs from understanding the natural world. Philosophical Issues (Noûs Supplement) 26: 209–225.pl
dc.description.referencesKecskes, I. 2014. Intercultural Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.pl
dc.description.referencesKelly, S. D., Barr, D. J., Church, R. B., Lynch, K. 1999. Offering a hand to pragmatic understanding: the role of speech and gesture in comprehension and memory. Journal of Memory and Language 40: 577–592.pl
dc.description.referencesKövecses, Z. 2005. Metaphor in Culture: Universality and Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.pl
dc.description.referencesKuhn, D. 1991. The Skills of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.pl
dc.description.referencesKvanvig, J. L. 2003. The Value of Knowledge and the Pursuit of Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.pl
dc.description.referencesLakoff, G. & Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.pl
dc.description.referencesLipton, P. 2009. Understanding without Explanation. In: de H. W. Regt, S. Leonelli & K. Eigner (eds.), Scientific Understanding: Philosophical Perspectives, 43–63. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.pl
dc.description.referencesMartin, J. & White, P. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.pl
dc.description.referencesRiggs, W. D. 2003. Understanding “virtue” and the virtue of understanding. In: M. De-Paul & L. Zagzebski (eds.), Intellectual Virtue: Perspectives from Ethics and Epistemology, 206–226. Oxford: Clarendon Press.pl
dc.description.referencesRosenberg, J. R. 1981. On Understanding the Difficulty in Understanding Understanding. In: H. Parret & J. Bouveresse (eds.), Meaning and Understanding, 29–43. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.pl
dc.description.referencesSemino, E. & Masci, M. 1996. Politics is football: metaphor in the discourse of Silvio Berlusconi in Italy. Discourse & Society 7: 243–269.pl
dc.description.referencesShchedrovitsky, G. P. 1995. Избранные труды [Selected Papers]. Moscow: “Shkola Kul’turnoj Politiki”.pl
dc.description.referencesSusen, S. 2016. The sociological challenge of reflexivity in Bourdieusian thought. In: D. Robbins (ed.), The Anthem Companion to Pierre Bourdieu, 49–94. London/New York: Anthem Press.pl
dc.description.referencesYerznkyan, Y. L. 2013. Дейксис слова: семантика и прагматика [Word Deixis: Semantics and Pragmatics]. Yerevan: Yerevan State University Publishing House.pl
dc.description.referencesYerznkyan, Y. L. 2018. On the Metaphoric Development of Deictic Verbs. Foreign Languages in Higher Education 2 (25): 13–20.pl
dc.description.referencesYlikoski, P. 2009. The illusion of depth of understanding in science. Scientific Understanding: Philosophical Perspectives: 100–119.pl
dc.description.referencesBritish National Corpus. https://www.english-corpora.org/bnc/pl
dc.description.referencesCorpus of Contemporary American English. https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/pl
dc.description.referencesEastern Armenian National Corpus. http://www.eanc.net/pl
dc.description.referencesAghayan, E. B. (1976). Արդի հայերենի բացատրական բառարան [Explanatory Dictionary of Modern Armenian]. Yerevan: “Hayastan” Publishing House.pl
dc.description.referencesAmerican Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (AHDEL). https://www.ahdictionary.com/pl
dc.description.referencesCambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (CALD). https://dictionary.cambridge.org/pl
dc.description.referencesCollins Cobuild Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (CCALD). http:/www.collinsdictionary.com/pl
dc.description.referencesMacmillan English Dictionary (MED). http://www.macmillandictionary.com/pl
dc.description.referencesMerriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (MWCD). http://www.merriam-webster.com/pl
dc.description.referencesNoah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language (NWADEL). https://www.1828.mshaffer.com/pl
dc.description.referencesOxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of English (OALD). http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/pl
dc.description.referencesWordNet 3.0 Thesaurus. http://freedictionary.org/pl
dc.description.referenceswww.vocabulary.compl
dc.identifier.eissn2300-6250-
dc.description.issue43 (4/2023)pl
dc.description.firstpage156pl
dc.description.lastpage180pl
dc.identifier.citation2Crossroads. A Journal of English Studiespl
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-3930-6176-
dc.identifier.orcid0009-0005-1606-9365-
Występuje w kolekcji(ach):Crossroads. A Journal of English Studies, 2023, Issue 43

Pliki w tej pozycji:
Plik Opis RozmiarFormat 
Crossroads_43_2023_Y_Yerznkyan_D_Movsisyan_Understanding_and_evaluation.pdf430,92 kBAdobe PDFOtwórz
Pokaż uproszczony widok rekordu Zobacz statystyki


Pozycja ta dostępna jest na podstawie licencji Licencja Creative Commons CCL Creative Commons