Cover not available
Article published In:
English Text Construction
Vol. 9:2 (2016) ► pp.244–267

Intertextuality as cognitive modelling

The aim of this paper is to demonstrate a way in which the concept of cognitive modelling can be applied to studies of intertextuality. The paper suggests a fresh way of looking at intertextuality – from the perspective of the cognitive processes involved in decoding intertextual references, namely, analogical mapping across different domains. Our knowledge of cognitive processes is largely based on the study of cognitive processing of texts, but texts with intertextual references have until now been a less studied area of cognitive research. I define three different ways in which texts relate to each other: hard modelling, soft modelling and loose association. From a cognitive perspective, I suggest that mental processing of these texts involves different knowledge structures which I describe using Schank’s (1982, 1986, 1999) theory of dynamic memory.
Keywords: cognitive processing, analogies, mapping, intertextuality, Hamlet
Published online: 24 November 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.9.2.02kar
References (63)
Baer, Brian James. 2010. Literary translation and the construction of a Soviet intelligentsia. In Translation, Resistance, Activism, Maria Tymoszko (ed.). Amherst, Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, 149–167.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1984a. Problems of Dostoyevsky’s Poetics. Manchester: Manchester University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1984b. Rabelais and His World. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland. 1974. S/Z. Richard Miller (trans.). New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Beker, Katinka, Dietsje Jolles, Robert F. Lorch Jr. & Paul van den Broek. 2016. Learning from texts: Activation of information from previous texts during reading. Reading and Writing 291: 1161–1178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Black, Max. 1962. Models and Metaphors. Ithaca, New York: Cornell U.P. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Checkland, Peter. 1990. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Chichester, New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Checkland, Peter & Jim Scholes. 1991. Soft Systems Methodology in Action. Chichester, New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Coffee, Neil, Jean-Pierre Koenig, Shakthi Poornima, Roelant Ossewaarde, Christopher Forstall & Sarah Jacobson. 2012. Intertextuality in the digital age. Transactions of the American Philological Association 142 (2): 383–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. The Tesserae Project: Intertextual analysis of Latin poetry. Literary and Linguistic Computing 28 (2): 221–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culler, Jonathan. 1981. The Pursuit of Signs. London and Heanley: Routledge and Paul Kegan.Google Scholar
Dyer, Michael. 1983. Understanding stories through morals and remindings. In IJCAI-83, Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence , 8–12 August 1983, Karlsruhe, West Germany, 75–77.
Eco, Umberto. 1979. The Role of the Reader: Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
. 1986. Reflections on the Name of the Rose. William Weaver (trans.). London: Secker and Warburg.Google Scholar
Eysenck, Michael & Mark Keane. 1995. Cognitive Psychology: A Student’s Handbook. Hove, UK: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Forstall, Christopher, Neil Coffee, Thomas Buck, Katherine Roache, & Sarah Jacobson. 2015. Modeling the scholars: Detecting intertextuality through enhanced word-level n-gram matching. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 30 (4): 503–515. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genette, Gerard. 1997. Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree (Vol. 81). Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Gentner, Dedre. 1983. Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science 71: 155–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1989. The mechanisms of analogical learning. In Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, Stella Vosniadou & Andrew Ortony (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 199–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond Jr. 1994. The Poetics of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2005. Embodiment and Cognitive Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hesse, Mary B. 1970. Models and Analogies in Science. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Haight, Amanda. 1990. Anna Akhmatova: A Poetic Pilgrimage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Holyoak, Keith. 1982. An analogical framework for literary interpretation. Poetics 111: 105–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holyoak, Keith & Paul Thagard. 1995. Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Housman, Alfred Edward. 2007. The Letters of A.E. Housman (Vol. 21). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, Philip N. 1993. Analogy and the exercise of creativity. In Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, Stella Vosniadou & Andrew Ortony (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 313–331.Google Scholar
Kintsch, Walter. 1992. A cognitive architecture for comprehension. Cognition: Conceptual and Methodological Issues, Herbert L. Pick Jr., Paulus Willem van den Broek & David C. Knill (eds). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 143–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koestler, Arthur. 1964. The Act of Creation. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Kristeva, Julia. 1974. Revolution in Poetic Language. Margaret Waller (trans.). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
. 1986. Word, dialogue, novel. In The Kristeva Reader, Toril Moi (ed.). Oxford: Blackwell, 34–61.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1993. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Metaphor and Thought (2nd edn), Andrew Ortony (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 202–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Turner. 1989. More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1990. Semantics. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Lehnert, Wendy G. & Martin H. Ringle. 2014. Strategies for Natural Language Processing. New York: Psychology Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lotman, Yuri. 1997. Pushkin. St Petersburg: Iskusstvo.Google Scholar
Ramsey, Ian. 1964. Models and Mystery. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rowe, Eleanor. 1976. Hamlet: A Window on Russia. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Schank, Roger C. 1982. Reading and Understanding: Teaching from the Perspective of Artificial Intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
. 1986. Explanation Patterns: Understanding Mechanically and Creatively. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
. 1999. Dynamic Memory Revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schank, Roger C. & Robert P. Abelson. 1995. Knowledge and memory: The real story. In Knowledge and Memory: The Real Story, Robert S. Wyer, Jr (ed.). Hillsdale, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1–85.Google Scholar
Shelly, Cameron & Paul Thagard. 1996. Mythology and analogy. In Modes of Thought: Explorations in Culture and Cognition, David R. Olson & Nancy Torrance (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 152–184.Google Scholar
Seifert, Colleen M., Gail McKoon, Robert P. Abelson & Roger Ratcliff. 1986. Memory connections between thematically similar episodes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 12 (2): 220–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spengler, Brigit. 2015. Literary Spinoffs: Rewriting the Classics – Re-Imagining the Community. Frankfurt, New York: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
Sukhanova, Ekaterina. 2004. Voicing the Distant: Shakespeare and Russian Modernist Poetry. Madison, Teaneck: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.Google Scholar
Trillini, Regula Hohl & Sixta Quassdorf. 2010. A ‘key to all quotations’? A corpus-based parameter model of intertextuality. Literary and Linguistic Computing 25 (3): 269–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Peteghem, Julie 2015. Digital readers of allusive texts: Ovidian intertextuality in the ‘Commedia’ and the digital concordance on ‘Intertextual Dante’. Humanist Studies and the Digital Age 4 (1): 39–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vosniadou, Stella & Andrew Ortony. 1989. Similarity and analogical reasoning: A synthesis. In Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, Stella Vosniadou & Andrew Ortony (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, H. Paul. 1990. Model Building in Mathematical Programming. Chichester, New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Zakharov, Nikolay. 2015. Shakespearean canon in the Russian literature at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries. Znanie, Ponimanie, Umenie 31: 374–386. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Adams, Douglas. 2009. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. Basingstoke, Oxford: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Akhmatova, Anna. 2011. Final Meeting: Selected poetry of Anna Akhmatova. Andrey Kneller (trans.). Boston: Kneller.Google Scholar
Borges, Jorge Luis. 1998. Collected Fictions. Andrew Hurley (trans.). London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Eliot, T.S. 1954. Selected Poems. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Holy Bible. King James Version.
O’Neil, Eugene. 1988. Complete Plays 1913–1920. New York, NY: Literary Classics of the United States.Google Scholar
Pasternak, Boris. 1958. Doctor Zhivago. Max Hayward & Manya Harari (trans.). London: Collins.Google Scholar
Pushkin, Alexander. 1965. Eugene Onegin. Babette Deutsch (trans.). London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Shakespeare, William. 1992. Hamlet. Ware: Wordsworth Editions.Google Scholar
Stoppard, Tom. 1967. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. London, Boston: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar