Premonitory urges and Touretting volcanoes
Force construal in personal narratives on Tourette Syndrome
Causative meaning including, but not limited to, causation, prevention, and enabling is realized in language use through force construal. Force is explored in this article through consideration of narratives on Tourette Syndrome, a disorder that is largely characterized by its constitutive actions (vocal and motor tics). To account for force construal, the article proposes a merger of a vector model for the description of force in language and cognition and a lexical semantic model of ontologies and construals. Force is accounted for in terms of a number of configurations (cause, enable, prevent, withstand, and despite) that are realized through construal operations. This merger of explanatory models allows nuanced and flexible description of forceful meaning in actual language use.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
-
2.Ontologies and construals
-
2.1Force in language and cognition: The dynamics model
- 3.Data and method
- 3.1Written accounts of Tourette Syndrome
-
3.2Expressions of force
- 3.3Psychological force
- 4.Communicative coordination: Painting a forceful picture of Tourette
- 4.1
Like God’s own sneeze: Comparative construal
- 4.2
A Touretting volcano: Force as a basis for metaphorization
- 4.3
Police always make my tics worse: cause
- 4.3.1
I had to obey the pattern: cause through modals
- 4.4
I managed to suppress that tic:
withstand
-
4.5
Let the tic out:
enable
- 4.6
I can’t stop myself: prevent and despite
-
5.Implications for understanding TS experiences
-
6.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
-
References
This article is currently available as a sample article.
References (42)
References
Buckser, A. (2006). The empty gesture: Tourette Syndrome and the semantic dimension of illness. Anthropology, 45(4), 255–274.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Buckser, A. (2008). Before your very eyes: Illness, agency, and the management of Tourette Syndrome. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 22(2), 167–192. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chilton, P. (2010). From mind to grammar: Coordinate systems, prepositions, constructions. In V. Evans & P. Chilton (Eds.), Language, cognition and space: The state of the art and new directions (pp. 499–514). London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chilton, P. (2014). Language, space and mind: The conceptual geometry of linguistic meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Evans, V., & Chilton, P. (Eds.). (2010). Language, cognition, and space: The state of the art and new directions. London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gentner, D., & Smith, L. A. (2013). Analogical learning and reasoning. In D. Reisberg (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Psychology (pp. 668–681). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldberg, A. (2010). Verbs, construction and semantic frames. In M. Rappaport Hovav, E. Doron, & I. Sichel (Eds.), Syntax, lexical semantics, and event structure (pp. 39–58). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gärdenfors, P. (2014). The geometry of meaning: Semantics based on conceptual spaces. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harvey, K., & Koteyko, N. (2013). Exploring health communication: Language in action. London/New York: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hofstadter, D. R. (2001). Epilogue: Analogy as the core of cognition. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 1–19). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hofstadter, D. R., & Sander, E. (2013). Surfaces and essences: Analogy as the fuel and fire of cognition. New York, NY: Basic Books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: Chicago University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kilgariff, A., Baisa, V., Bušta, J., Kovář, V., Michelfeit, J., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2014). The Sketch Engine: Ten years on. Lexicography ASIALEX, 11, 7–36. ([URL])
Kövecses, Z. (2000). Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar: Aa basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Leckman, J. F. (2002). Tourette’s syndrome. The Lancet, 3601, 1577–86. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
O’Connor, K. P., Janelle, C., Coutu, M. F., Rouleau, A., Lessard, M. J., Kirouac, C., Marchand, A., Dupuis, G., Turgeon, L., & Bélanger, M. P. (2009). ‘I’m cured but …’: Perceptions of illness following treatment. Journal of Health Psychology, 14(2), 278–287. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Paradis, C. (2005). Ontologies and construals in lexical semantics. Axiomathes, 151, 541–573. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Paradis, C. (2008). Configurations, construals and change: Expressions of degree
. English Language and Linguistics, 12(2), 317–343. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Singer, H. S. (2005). Tourette’s syndrome: From behaviour to biology. The Lancet Neurology, 41, 149–59. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Soares da Silva, A. (2007). Verbs of letting: Some cognitive and historical aspects. In N. Delbecque & B. Cornille (Eds.), On interpreting construction schemas: From action and motion to transitivity and causality (pp. 171–200). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stukker, N., Sanders, T., & Verhagen, A. (2008). Causality in verbs and in discourse connectives: Converging evidence of cross-level parallels in Dutch linguistic categorization. Journal of Pragmatics, 401, 1296–1322. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Talmy, L. (1988). Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 121, 49–100. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Volume I: Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verhagen, A. (2005). Constructions of intersubjectivity: Discourse, syntax, and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verhagen, A. (2012). Construal and stylistics: Within a language, across contexts, across languages. Stylistics across disciplines: Conference proceedings. CD-ROM. Leiden.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verhagen, A., & Kemmer, S. (1997). Interaction and causation: Causative constructions in modern Standard Dutch. Journal of Pragmatics, 271, 611–82. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Winter, S., & Gärdenfors, P. (1995). Linguistic modality as expressions of social power. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 181, 137–166. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wolff, P. (2007). Representing causation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1361, 82–111. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wolff, P. (2012). Representing verbs with force vectors. Theoretical linguistics, 38(3/4), 237–248.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wolff, P., & Song, G. (2003). Models of causation and the semantics of causal verbs. Cognitive Psychology, 471, 276–332. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wolff, P., Song, G., & Driscoll, D. (2002). Models of causation and causal verbs. In M. Andronis, C. Ball, H. Elston, & S. Neuval (Eds.), Papers from the 37th meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, Main session, vol. 11 (pp. 607–622). Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wolff, P., & Zettergren, M. (2002). A vector model of causal meaning. In W. D. Gray & C. D. Schunn (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 944–949). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zwarts, J. (2005). Prepositional aspect and the algebra of paths. Linguistics and Philosophy, 281, 739–779. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zwarts, J. (2010). Forceful prepositions. In V. Evans & P. Chilton (Eds.), Language, cognition, and space: The state of the art and new directions (pp. 193–214). London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
HARTMAN, JENNY
2018.
Constructions of contrast in spoken testimonials on Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.
Language and Cognition 10:1
► pp. 83 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Hartman, Jenny & Carita Paradis
2018.
Emotive and sensory simulation through comparative construal.
Metaphor and Symbol 33:2
► pp. 123 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
HARTMAN, JENNY & CARITA PARADIS
2021.
Figurative meaning in multimodal work by an autistic artist: a cognitive semantic approach.
Language and Cognition 13:1
► pp. 1 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 july 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.