1. bookVolume 19 (2018): Issue 1 (June 2018)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2199-6504
ISSN
1337-7590
First Published
08 Jul 2014
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Open Access

Semantic representation of similes (based on the Ukrainian, English and Polish languages).

Published Online: 21 Jun 2018
Volume & Issue: Volume 19 (2018) - Issue 1 (June 2018)
Page range: 18 - 32
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2199-6504
ISSN
1337-7590
First Published
08 Jul 2014
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English

Aleksandrova, S., 1981. Structural and semantic characteristics of comparative constructions in 16-17 century English. Moscow: Vyssha shkola.Search in Google Scholar

Ashchurova, D., 1970. The linguistic nature of simile in English. Moscow: Vyssha shkola.Search in Google Scholar

Bach, K. and Harnish, R., 1979. Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.10.1016/0024-3841(79)90047-0Search in Google Scholar

Beardsley, M., 1981. Aesthetics: Problems in the philosophy of criticism. Hackett Publishing.10.5040/9781350928565Search in Google Scholar

Berkov, V., 1996. Semantics of comparison and types of its expression. The theory of functional grammar: Quantity. Quality, Spb, pp. 106 – 154.Search in Google Scholar

Bilodid, K., 1980. Ukrainian dictionary. «UD – 11». vol. 10. Kyiv: Naukova dumka.Search in Google Scholar

Bronner, Y., 2007. This is no lotus, it is a face: Poetics as grammar in Dandi’s investigation of the simile. The poetics of grammar and the metaphysics of sound and sign. Boston: Brill, pp. 91-108.10.1163/ej.9789004158108.i-377.38Search in Google Scholar

Bronner, Y., 2012. A question of priority: Revisiting the Bhāmaha-Dandin debate. Indian Philos, 40, no. 1, pp. 67–118.10.1007/s10781-011-9128-xSearch in Google Scholar

Burton-Roberts, N., 2007 Varieties of semantics and encoding: Negation, narrowing/loosening and numericals. Pragmatics. Palgrave-Macmillan, pp. 90-114.10.1057/978-1-349-73908-0_6Search in Google Scholar

Burton-Roberts, N., 2013 Grice and cancellation. Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 17-28.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.11.008Search in Google Scholar

Carston, R., 2002. Thoughts and utterances. Blackwell.10.1002/9780470754603Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Cheremysina, M., 1976. Russian comparative constructions. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo Novosibirskogo un-ta.Search in Google Scholar

Chernysheva, I., 1970. The phraseology of modern German. Moscow: Vyssh. shk.Search in Google Scholar

Chiappe, D. and Kennedy, J., 2001. Literal bases for metaphor and simile. Metaphor and Symbol, vol.16, pp. 249-276.10.1080/10926488.2001.9678897Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Cohen, M., 2003. Three approaches to biblical metaphor: From Abraham Ibn Ezra and Maimonides to David Kimhi. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004493810Search in Google Scholar

Davidson, D., 1978/1984. What metaphors mean. Critical Inquiry, vol.5, no. 1, pp. 31-47. Reprinted in: Davidson, D., Inquiries into truth and interpretation. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 245-264.10.1086/447971Search in Google Scholar

Devyatova, N., 2010. Comparison in a dynamic system of the language. Moscow: URSS.Search in Google Scholar

Fedorov, A., 1985. Figurative speech. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Search in Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A., 1998. Concepts. Where cognitive science went wrong. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/0198236360.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Fogelin, R. J., 2011. Figuratively speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199739998.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Gak, V., 2000. The theoretical grammar of the French language. Moscow: Dobrosvet.Search in Google Scholar

Gargani, A., 2014. Poetic comparisons. How similes are understood. Salford: University of Salford.Search in Google Scholar

Gibbs, R. W., 2002. A new look at literal meaning in understanding what is said and implicated. Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 34, pp. 457 – 486.10.1016/S0378-2166(01)00046-7Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Glucksberg, S. and Keysar, B., 1990. Understanding metaphorical comparisons: Beyond similarity. Psychological Review, vol 97, no. 1, pp. 3–18.10.1037/0033-295X.97.1.3Search in Google Scholar

Grice, H. P., 1961. The causal theory of perception. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supp, vol. XXXV, pp. 121-53.10.1093/aristoteliansupp/35.1.121Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Hulyha, E. and Shendels, E., 1969. Grammatical and lexical fields in modern German. Moscow: Prosveshchenye.Search in Google Scholar

Iskanderova, I., 1980. The role of the context in revealing the semantics of comparisons. Research of Sentences in German. RHU, pp. 3 – 14.Search in Google Scholar

Kopylenko, M., 1989. General phraseology sketches (phraseological units in the system of the language). Voronezh: Voronezh University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kucherenko, I., 2003. Syntactical functions of comparative constructions. Topical problems of grammar. Svit, pp. 136 − 139.Search in Google Scholar

Kunin, A., 1996. The course on phraseology of modern English. Moscow: Feniks.Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, G., 2008. The neural theory of metaphor. In: R.W. Gibbs, Jr., ed. The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 17 – 38.10.1017/CBO9780511816802.003Search in Google Scholar

Lapshyna, O., 2010. Semantic category of similarity in modern Russian. Kharkiv: KhNU.Search in Google Scholar

Leech, G.; Short, M., 2007. Style in fiction. Pearson Education Limited.Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, S. C., 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813313Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Myasnyankina, L., 1999. Interrelation of metaphor and simile in Sholokhov’s ideostyle. Ukrainian Bulletin, vol. 5, KhNU, pp. 45–51.Search in Google Scholar

Malykh, L., 2012. The logical formula of a linguistic comparison. Bulletin of ISLU, vol. 1, no. 17, ISLU, pp. 184–191.Search in Google Scholar

Margolis, J., 1957. Notes on the logic of simile, metaphor and analogy. American Speech, Duke University Press, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 186 – 189.10.2307/453819Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Markus, M., 2010. As drunk as muck. The role and logic of similes in English dialects on the basis of Joseph Wright’s English Dialect Dictionary. Studia Neophilologica, vol. 82, pp. 203–216.10.1080/00393274.2010.521416Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Mizin, K., 2008. Psycholinguistic experiment or sociolinguistic monitoring? Epistemological search for axiological phraseology (based on comparative phraseology). Linguistics, vol. 1, KNU, pp. 67 – 79.Search in Google Scholar

Nazarian, A., 1998. Frozen similes in French. Moscow: Vyssh. shkola.Search in Google Scholar

Nevanlinna, S., 1993. The structure of Middle English similes of equality. Early English in the computer age. Explorations through the Helsinki Corpus. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 139–170.Search in Google Scholar

Nikolaeva, A., 2002. Functional and semantic field of comparativity in modern English. Rostov-na-Donu.Search in Google Scholar

O’Donoghue, J., 2009. Is a metaphor (like) a simile? Differences in meaning, effect and processing. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 21, pp. 125–149.Search in Google Scholar

Ogoltsev, V., 1978. Frozen similes in the system of Russian phraseology. Leningrad: Leningrad University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ortony, A., 1998. Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Search in Google Scholar

Pierini, P., 2007. Simile in English: From description to translation. CÍRCULO de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación (clac), vol. 29, pp.21 – 43.Search in Google Scholar

Prokopchuk, L., 2000. The category of comparison and its expression in a simple sentence structure. Kyiv: In-t of Ukr. lang.Search in Google Scholar

Richards, I., 1937. The Philosophy of rhetoric. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Searle, J. R., 1993. Metaphor. In: A. Ortony, ed. Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 83 – 111.10.1017/CBO9781139173865.008Search in Google Scholar

Shapovalova, N., 1998. Peculiarities of comparative semantics features in adverbial models. Functional and cognitive manifestations of grammatical structures. IZMN, pp. 57 – 62.Search in Google Scholar

Shchepka, O., 2008. Functional and semantic field of comparativity. Simferopol: Tavriyskyi National University.Search in Google Scholar

Shenko, I., 1972. On relationship between figurative devices (simile and metaphor). The stylistics of Romance and Germanic languages. RTP LGPI, pp. 151–165.Search in Google Scholar

Shyrokova, N., 1960. Types of syntactical constructions with comparative conjunctions in a simple sentence. Kazan: Yzd-vo Kazansk. Gos. Un-ta.Search in Google Scholar

Sztencel, M., 2018. Semantics, pragmatics and meaning revisited: the case of conditionals. Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-69116-9Search in Google Scholar

Telia, V., 1986. Connotational aspect of nominative unit semantics. Moscow: Nauka.Search in Google Scholar

Tsutomu, S., 1983. On linguistic classification of metaphorical expressions. Descriptive and applied linguistics, vol. 16, pp. 197–208.Search in Google Scholar

Tversky, A., 1977. Features of similarity. Psychological Review, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 327–352.10.1037/0033-295X.84.4.327Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Wilson, D. and Sperber, D., 2006. Relevance theory. The handbook of pragmatics. Blackwel Publishing, pp. 607 632.10.1002/9780470756959.ch27Search in Google Scholar

Yudina, I., 2010. Similes with an unexpressed module as a means of reader’s reflection actualization. Bulletin of Volgograd State University. Series 2, vol. 2, no. 12, pp. 31–35.Search in Google Scholar

Zamai, S., 2008. Functional and semantic category of comparativity and the means of its representation in Russian and English. Bulletin of Adygej State University, vol. 6, pp. 93 – 96.Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD