Cover not available
Article published In:
Perception, Culture and Language
Edited by Judit Baranyiné Kóczy and Rita Brdar-Szabó
[Cognitive Linguistic Studies 10:2] 2023
► pp. 342–366

The perspective of the other

A corpus-based analysis of visual perception in Hungarian elegiac poetry

ORCID logo | Eötvös Loránd University
The central question of the paper is whether visual perception serves as a grounding cognitive act for experiencing and reflecting on the other in elegiac poetry. I assume that elegy has a cultural scheme in which the lyric subject can see the environment not only from his own point of view but also from the perspective of the other, and this mental contextualization has reoccurring linguistic patterns (e.g.,the expressions of retrospection/looking backwards, or looking to the natural environment from different points of view) in elegiac tradition. For testing the assumption, I use corpus-based analysing methods: in a quantitative analysis a specific research corpus is built from canonical Hungarian elegies, and it is analysed with Lancsbox with the aim of identifying the characteristic linguistic construction of visual perception. I explore the distribution and the collocational patterns of the Hungarian verbs lát ‘see’, néz ‘look’ and figyel ‘watch’ in the elegy corpus, and keyword analysis is made with the use of a reference corpus built from Hungarian odes.
Keywords: visual perception, elegy, cognitive poetics, corpus linguistics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical orientation
  • 3.Material and methods
    • 3.1The process of corpus building
    • 3.2Methodology of examination
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Frequency patterns
    • 4.2Keywords
    • 4.3Qualitative analyses
    • 4.4Collocation patterns
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 17 November 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00104.sim
References (28)
References
Brezina, V., McEnery, T., & Wattam, S. (2015). Collocations in context: A new perspective on collocation networks. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 20 (2), 139–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brezina, V., Timperley, M., & McEnery, A. (2018). #LancsBox v.4.x. Retrieved from [URL]
Culler, J. (2015). Theory of the lyric. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, J. (2009). Keyness: Words, parts-of-speech and semantic categories in the character-talk of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet . International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14 (1), 29–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Curran, S. (2010). Romantic elegiac hybridity. In K. Weisman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the elegy (pp. 238–250). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duhaime, D. (2014). Identifying poetry in unstructured corpora. Retrieved from [URL]
Eve, M. P. (2022). The digital humanities and literary studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evert, S. (2009). Corpora and collocations. In A. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook (volume 2) (pp. 1212–1248). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbons, A., & Whiteley, S. (2018). Contemporary stylistics: Language, cognition, interpretation. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
István, S. (1997). Műfajelmélet mindenkinek [Genre theory for everyone]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Labádi, G. (2019). Géppel mért irodalom: A mikszáthi élőbeszédszerűség [Machine-readable literature: “Spoken language” in Mikszáth’s short stories]. Digitális Bölcsészet, 2 1, 3–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lennard, J. (2006). The poetry handbook (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McEnery, T., & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus linguistics: Method, theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, P. A. (2010). ‘What’s love got to do with it?’: The peculiar story of elegy in Rome. In K. Weisman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the elegy (pp. 46–66). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moretti, F. (2013). Distant reading. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Moses, O. (2018). Poetry and the environmentally extended mind. New Literary History, 49 (3), 309–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rounds, C. H. (2001). Hungarian: An essential grammar. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rychlý, P. (2008). A Lexicographer-friendly association score. In P. Sojka & A. Horák (Eds.), Recent advances in Slavonic natural language processing (pp. 6–9). Brno: Masaryk University.Google Scholar
Sharifian, F. (2008). Distributed, emergent cultural cognition, conceptualisation and language. In R. M. Frank, R. Dirven, T. Ziemke & E. Bernárdez (Eds.), Body, language and mind: Vol. 2: Sociocultural situatedness (pp. 109–136). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simon, G. (2017). “Hová lettél, hová levél”: Az idő nyelvi megformálása Arany János elégikus költészetében [“Where have you gone, where have you been going”: The construal of temporality in the elegiac poetry of János Arany]. Magyar Nyelv, 113 1, 420–432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simon, G., & Tátrai, S. (2017). “Tőlem ne várjon senki dalt”: Az elégikus líramodell kidolgozása Arany János költészetében [“None should now expect a song of mine”: On elaborating the elegiac model of lyric poetry of János Arany]. Magyar Nyelvőr, 141 1, 164–190.Google Scholar
Sőtér, I. (Ed.). (1978). A magyar irodalom története (Vol. 4–61) [The History of Hungarian Literature]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stockwell, P. (2009). Texture: A cognitive aesthetics of reading. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stubbs, M. (2014). Quantitative methods in literary linguistics. In P. Stockwell & S. Whiteley (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of stylistics (pp. 46–62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waters, W. (2003). Poetry’s Touch. On Lyric Address. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weisman, K. (2010). Introduction. In K. Weisman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the elegy (pp. 1–10). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Baranyiné Kóczy, Judit
2023. Cultural conceptualizations of sight and cultural values. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 10:2 ► pp. 313 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.