Cover not available
Part of
The Conversation Frame: Forms and functions of fictive interaction
Edited by Esther Pascual and Sergeiy Sandler
[Human Cognitive Processing 55] 2016
► pp. 235–253

Polish nominal construction involving fictive interaction

Its scope and functions in discourse

| Independent scholar, Poland
This chapter discusses the semantics and pragmatics of the Polish construction in which a head noun is modified by a fictive interaction constituent, usually introduced by a quotative marker. A number of different quotative markers can precede fictive utterances in Polish, but these tend to occur in informal or spoken language. This nominal construction fulfils a variety of important functions in discourse. It is used to categorise concepts in a precise yet economical and often attention-gripping, humorous, or evaluative way. A wide range of concepts can be characterized by means of fictive interaction in Polish, including types of messages, individuals, and mental or physical activities. Culture-specific and novel social phenomena can also be successfully portrayed using embedded fictive utterances. The data comprises over 300 examples from a variety of oral and written texts in different genres.
Keywords: categorization, cultural values, direct speech, embedded fictive utterances, evaluative, head nouns, quotative marker, rhetorical effects
Published online: 1 November 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.55.12kro
References (14)
References
Barsalou, L.W. (1983). Ad hoc categories. Memory & Cognition, 11(3), 211–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, H.H., & Gerrig, R.J. (1990). Quotation as demonstration. Language, 66(4), 784–805. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Królak, E. (2005). The hyphen construction as an instance of metonymy. In E. Górska & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy-metaphor collage (pp. 197–204). Warsaw: Warsaw University Press.Google Scholar
. (2008). Fictive interaction: Its functions and usage in discourse. PhD Dissertation, University of Warsaw (unpublished).Google Scholar
Oakley, T.V. (1995). Presence: The conceptual basis of rhetorical effect. PhD dissertation, University of Maryland.Google Scholar
Pascual, E. (2002). Imaginary trialogues: Conceptual blending and fictive interaction in criminal courts. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
. (2006a). Fictive interaction within the sentence: A communicative type of fictivity in grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(2), 245–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2006b). Questions in legal monologues: Fictive interaction as argumentative strategy in a murder trial. Text & Talk, 26(3), 383–402. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pascual, E., & Królak, E. (2015). The ‘listen to characters thinking’ novel: Fictive interaction as narrative strategy in English literary bestsellers and their Spanish and Polish translations. Ms. [URL]
Pascual, E., Królak, E., & Janssen, Th.A.J.M. (2013). Direct speech compounds: Evoking socio-cultural scenarios through fictive interaction. Cognitive Linguistics, 24(2), 345–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tannen, D. (1986). Introducing constructed dialogue in Greek and American conversational and literary narrative. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct and indirect speech (pp. 311–332). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1989). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. (1992). How is conversation like literary discourse? The role of imagery and details in creating involvement. In P. Downing, S.D. Lima, & M. Noonan (Eds.), The linguistics of literacy (pp. 31–46). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Pascual, Esther & Emilia Królak
2018. The‘listen to characters thinking’novel. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 16:2 ► pp. 399 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 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.