Cover not available
Article published In:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics
Vol. 18:1 (2020) ► pp.244–274

Delivering the unconventional across languages

A Cognitive Grammar analysis of nonce words in “Jabberwocky” and its Ukrainian renditions

 | Masaryk University
 | Tomas Bata University in Zlin
 | Rice University
This paper presents an analysis of nonce words that relies on Cognitive Grammar (CG) using the English version of “Jabberwocky” and its two Ukrainian renditions. We identify great variation among the versions, both inter-lingual and intra-lingual. In particular, not only do the versions differ greatly in terms of construal presented in CG terms, but there are various elements that do not, and simply cannot, get through between the English version and the Ukrainian ones. We accordingly propose that the use of Multiple-Parallel-Text (MultiParT) approach can not only help make generalizations across representative text producers within the same language but also allow one to investigate how different systems of human communication are equipped to produce unconventional meaning using its own conventionalized means, and that use of CG is capable of providing a reliable analytical framework with high descriptive adequacy. We also propose that a combination of MultiParT and CG may constitute an advantage in cross-linguistic research of literary semantics and cognitive poetics.
Keywords: cognitive poetics, Cognitive Grammar, translation, lexical blending
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Translation and Cognitive Linguistics
  • 3.Background: Overview of CG in relation to word formation processes
    • 3.1Word formation in CG
    • 3.2Lexical blends from a CG perspective
  • 4.Choice of research materials and the Ukrainian versions of “Jabberwocky”
  • 5.A CG analysis of the first stanza of “Jabberwocky”
    • 5.1Carroll’s Jabberwocky, Lukaš’s Kurzu-verzu and Narižna’s Kaznahtun
    • 5.2Carroll’s brillig, Lukaš’s smažen’ and Narižna’s nadpečirok
    • 5.3Carroll’s slithy toves, Lukaš’s švymki jasky and Narižna’s boščurky
    • 5.4Carroll’s gyre and gimble, Lukaš-Malkovyč’s spiralyly and Narižna’s gryzryly
    • 5.5Carroll’s wabe, Lukaš’s kružvi and Narižna’s posogdi
    • 5.6Carroll’s borogoves, Lukaš’s psašky and Narižna’s švirky
    • 5.7Carroll’s mome and Lukaš’s dolovi
    • 5.8Carroll’s outgrabe
  • 6.Untranslatability, intratextuality and the descriptive adequacy of CG
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Dictionaries
Published online: 17 August 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00058.lu
References (56)
References
Achard, М. (2007). Usage-based semantics: Body parts with three French ‘breaking’ verbs. In M. Nenonen & S. Niemi (Eds.), Collocations and idioms 11 (pp. 1–13). Joensuu: Joensuu University Press.Google Scholar
Bennardo, G. (2003). Language, mind, and culture: From linguistic relativity to representational modularity. In M. T. Banich & M. Mack (Eds.), Mind, brain, and language: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 23–60). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Carroll, L. (2008). The life and letters of Lewis Carroll. ReadHowYouWant. E-book.Google Scholar
(2009). Through the Looking Glass. Portland: The Floating Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2001). Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, B. (2012). The language of stories. New York & Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. (1976). Frame semantics and the nature of language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Conference on the origin and development of language and speech, 2801, 20–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freeman, M. H., & Takeda, M. (2006). Art, science, and Ste. Emilie’s sunsets: a Háj-inspired cognitive approach to translating an Emily Dickinson poem into Japanese. Style, 40(1–2), 109–127.Google Scholar
Freeman, M. (2006). The Fall of the Wall between literary studies and linguistics: Cognitive poetics. In G. Kristiansen, M. Achard, R. Dirven & F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Current applications and future perspectives (pp. 403–428). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2003). Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(5), 219–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harrison, C., Nuttall, L., et al. (Eds.). (2014). Cognitive Grammar in literature. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hiraga, M. K. (1999). Blending and an interpretation of haiku: A cognitive approach. Poetics Today, 20(3), 461–481.Google Scholar
Kal’nyčenko, O., & Kal’nyčenko, N. (2010). Mykola Lukaš jak teoretyk perekladu: Aktual’nist teoretyčnogo spadku [Mykola Lukaš as a scholar of translation: Timeliness of his theory]. Naukovi Zapysky. Serija: Filologični Nauky (Movoznavstvo) [Scientific Notes. Series: Philology (Linguistics)], 89(1), 63–69.Google Scholar
Kemmer, S. (2003). Schemas and lexical blends. In H. Cuyckens, T. Berg, R. Dirven & K. Panther (Eds.), Motivation in language: Studies in honor of Günter Radden (pp. 69–97). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kolomijec’, L. (2010). Prototyp fenomenu Mykoly Lukaša v ukraїnskij perekladac’kij kul’turi 1920 – poč. 1930h rokiv [Mykola Lukaš’s persona in the Ukrainian translation culture of 1920s – early 1930s]. Movni i konceptual’ni kartyny svitu [Linguistic and conceptual pictures of the world], 301, 13–18.Google Scholar
Komissarov, V. (1990). Teorija perevoda (Lingvističeskije aspekty) [Translation theory (Linguistic aspects)]. Moscow: Vysšaja Škola.Google Scholar
Kuprijan, O. (2008). Gapčyns’ka feat Kerroll. LitAkcent. Last modified April 24, 2008, [URL] (accessed 9 March 2019).
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1986). An introduction to Cognitive Grammar. Cognitive Science, 101, 1–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 2. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(2008). Cognitive Grammar: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lu, W., & Verhagen, A. (2016). Shifting viewpoints: How does that actually work across languages? An exercise in parallel text analysis. In B. Dancygier, W. Lu & A. Verhagen (Eds.), Viewpoint and the fabric of meaning: Form and use of viewpoint tools across languages and modalities (pp. 170–190). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lu, W., Verhagen, A., & Su, I. (2018). A Multiple-Parallel-Text approach for viewpoint research across languages: The case of demonstratives in English and Chinese. In S. Csabi (Ed.), Expressive minds and artistic creations: Studies in cognitive poetics (pp. 131–158). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lu, W. (2018). A Cognitive Grammar approach to leadership rhetoric: Schemata and categories in “I Have a Dream”. In C. Haase & A. Schröder (Eds.), Analogy, copy, and representation: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 47–55). Bielefeld: Aisthesis Verlag.Google Scholar
(2019). Time, tense and viewpoint shift across languages: A Multiple-Parallel-Text approach to “tense shifting” in a tenseless language. Cognitive Linguistics, 30(2), 377–397. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marugina, N. (2008). Kognitivnyj aspekt perevoda metafory (na materiale povesti M.A. Bulgakova ’Sobač’je serdce” i jeje perevodov na anglijskij jazyk) [Cognitive approach to translation metaphor (based on M. Bulgakov’s novel “Dog’s heart”and its translations into English)]. Jazyk i kultura [Language and culture], 41, 42–52.Google Scholar
Mattiello, E. (2013). Extra-grammatical morphology in English: Abbreviations, blends, reduplicatives, and related phenomena. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radden, G., & Panther, K.-U. (Eds.). (2003). Studies in linguistic motivation. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Retsker, J. (2007). Teorija perevoda i perevodčeskaja praktika. Očerki lingvističeskoj teorii perevoda [Translation theory and practice. Essays on linguistic theory of translation]. Moscow: R. Valent.Google Scholar
Rojo, A., & Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2013). Cognitive Linguistics and translation: Advances in some theoretical models and applications. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ševčuk, S. V. (2016). Nazvy misiaciv u rosijs’kij ta ukraїns’kij movakh [Names of the months in Russian and Ukrainian]. Kul’tura movy [Language Culture] 61. Available at [URL] (Accessed 2 Mar 2020).
Shurma, S., & Chesnokova, A. (2017). Emily Dickinson’s poetry in Russian and Ukrainian translation: Synaesthetic shift. Vertimo Studijos, 101, 95–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shurma, S., & Lu, W. (2016). A cognitive poetic analysis of LIFE and DEATH in English and Ukrainian: A Multiple-Parallel-Text approach to Hamlet’s soliloquy. Theatralia, 19(2), 9–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slavins’ka, I. (2013). Viktorija Narižna: V Našyh Školah Včat’ Nenavydity Literaturu [Viktorija Narižna: They teach to hate literature in our schools]. Ukraїns’ka Pravda Žytt’a [Ukrainian truth of life]. Last modified September 30, 2013. [URL] (accessed 9 March 2019).
Stockwell, P. (2002). Cognitive Poetics: An introduction. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tabakowska, E. (1993). Cognitive Linguistics and poetics of translation. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
(2014). Lewis Carroll’s Alice in grammatical wonderlands. In Ch. Harrison, L. Nuttall, P. Stockwell & W. Yuan (Eds.), Cognitive Grammar in literature (pp. 101–116). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamin. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. R. (2015). Word-formation in Cognitive Grammar. In P. O. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, F. Rainer (Eds.), Word-formation: An international handbook of the languages of Europe (pp. 145–158). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2005). Constructing a language: a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tsur, R. (2002). Aspects of Cognitive Poetics. In E. Semino & J. Culpeper (Eds.), Cognitive stylistics. Language and cognition in text analysis (pp. 279–318). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turner, M. (Ed.). (2006). The artful mind: Cognitive science and the riddle of human creativity. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verhagen, A. (2012). Construal and stylistics – within a language, across contexts, across languages. In Stylistics across disciplines (Conference Proceedings, CD-ROM). Leiden.Google Scholar
Verkerk, A. (2014). The evolutionary dynamics of motion event encoding. Nijmegen: MPI Series in Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
Dictionaries
Akademičnyj tlumachnyj slovnyk (1970–1980)’ [Academic dictionary]. [URL]. [URL]
Dictionary.com. [URL]
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. [URL]
Mel’nychuk, O. S. et al. (Eds.). (1982). Etymologičnyi slovnyk ukraїnskoї movy [Etymologic Dictionary of the Ukrainian language]. Vol. 11. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka.Google Scholar
(Eds.). (1985). Etymologičnyi slovnyk ukraїnskoї movy [Etymologic Dictionary of the Ukrainian language]. Vol. 21. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka.Google Scholar
(Eds.). (1989). Etymologičnyi slovnyk ukraїnskoї movy [Etymologic Dictionary of the Ukrainian language]. Vol. 31. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka.Google Scholar
(Eds.). (2003). Etymologičnyi slovnyk ukraїnskoї movy [Etymologic Dictionary of the Ukrainian language]. Vol. 41. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka.Google Scholar
(Eds.). (2006). Etymologičnyi slovnyk ukraїnskoї movy [Etymologic Dictionary of the Ukrainian language]. Vol. 51. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka.Google Scholar
Nomis, M. (Ed.). (1864). Ukraїnski pryslivja, prykazky i take inše [Ukrainian proverbs, sayings, and so on]. St. Petersburg: Drukarni Tiblena i comp. i Kulisha.Google Scholar
Oxford English Dictionary. [URL]
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Knotková, Magdaléna & Wei-lun Lu
2020. Rendering, generalization and variation. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 7:1 ► pp. 201 ff. DOI logo
Knotková, Magdaléna & Wei-lun Lu
2022. Rendering, generalization and variation. In Visual Metaphors [Benjamins Current Topics, 124], ► pp. 209 ff. DOI logo
Lu, Wei-lun
2020. Narrative viewpoint and subjective construal across languages. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 7:2 ► pp. 334 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 september 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.