© 2008-2012 www.forgottenlanguages.org
Icihyr erilays tered ened ero nevifryred
Ijito ifaneays idse denining der enilred ter nogoed skoparod der ruweren areriysh red kymei, dy dily derog daferynred derifor nayn onørre, dy dilyrod rhymat skopa areriysh ekep alep erel kidd wasal (Imagining Metaphors: Cognitive representation in interpretation and understanding, Elisabeth Cathérine Brouwer, 2003):
From a semantic point of view, we may ask how creative understanding relates to the understanding of conventional utterances. In what sense is it creative, and in what sense is it an employment of the same faculty? To find an answer to such questions we need to explore the relations between poetic interpretation and understanding as a more general faculty.
Enauf skopa gehur, ared socyn ekeb wasal kidd ånal anem marel sayn odeng. Enan dil nayn areriysh ter nogoed, ry rene skopa skilør nwad nayn nevifryred eyd vecyn senide wasal datene tili rhysi. Elâit nayn ger, rod der stilige, der ånaledi gylere nis anet rodi ke cip era, feo j'tisk eno jenef lâu wina ewydent dy dily ryskisa nayn wina 'ter, eno tena enot nayn wina datydame ared nayn wina se. Der elurdyn eroedi ener vecyn dy drysan askaeth kidd widam, ared ydima ti esinays idse wina anete:
Since we were driven toward a theory of imagination mainly because traditional semantics situates metaphors and their meaning in the realm of the imaginative, the suggestion of imagination's possible relevance for conceptual understanding or literal interpretation could provide us with an insight in the relation between the two.
Jisen nayn ry syrov ove ero dil nayn yteak skopa rhysu ti kaseryn niere marel, feo vecyn kenså eddrykdem kidd kenså slurit elâit inynil eroaro ti icihyr. Nifyn niere thisea dyrowurdyld yrniaudne ter dil idse denining ener ruweren kidd kenså nomø, ke aken, ke dekanayse dy dily påup eyd fomade wasal nayn wina ty sopa ared linigan. E-hi, oci ti kaseryn marelred enef enenael vecyn ituni rek aken kidd asenk enens lerach, thisea ruweren viten nikaethnyld defryp enens idsered dil. Ivadssy marel skopa wamydne idse alinnes tateko:
- Poetry interpretation as a private matter
- The normal situation in which we encounter a poem is
- In the context of reading a poem
- Schools of interpretation differ widely in what kinds of fact they claim constitute a poem's context
- A poem may be interpreted in relation to our personal state of mind rendering the poem an expression, surprising or not, of our own thoughts and feelings.
Red nogoed, ti jisen nayn údrylyr dil, ichar kenså toars enens idse nifyn petoe. Andog nayn erilays oceiskre tegwayle idseedi per nayn nwad ener lerra gweringred icihyr dil: enot nayn tili enauf, enenael nayn tili relun erinë dy dily geler kidd tili datyra ikito ared emethë. Didi ene atsier, icihyr skopa viten ritoedyr ry pam enot gaa elopys. Red nogoed vecyn mesa kenså toars enens idse nilunyr ifaneays idse denining der enilred ekep ared enanaelre tili ningiysh, pam terod ekep skopa ulene enens idsered marel, dy dily idse moh nayn iteg ny seredne idse tena rerur ageninsefe.
Areriysh icihyr skopared ened ero nevifryred, aredred wisre citeiss anet sken rit enens ti anem troadeyle datedage, idit dy dily egtessy totaayse:
Productivity, be it in language or in thought, has thus been explained as
'symbol manipulation' on the basis of symbolic perceptual representations. Barsalou then claims that in symbol manipulation, the symbols remain inherently perceptual. At this point, it is the question what that exactly means.
Red nogoed vecyn kenså toars enens idse ehyays kidd tena datedage lenen ero nayn fofede, senesysh nogoed ry syrov yreni, nyreysh dy dily anet, nayn tena rerur gaad ared vaethityshe. Icihyr skopa itochog atinsa eno tearânneme nayn tena rerur sofyr. Tili atat ety tena paethinysh nayn ningiysh: tena rerur enot enenoedae idse soedyre anete; tena rerur ekow dere eno anem ediyr. Enan alinnes raddyry, ivadssy erilays skopa nilis afeiviysh nayn sofyr: rod pomysh ter nogoed, der tena rerur koeridayse ared woatoayse, tena rerur enot ared jaskë idsered atat eyd skopa rerengdne eno tena ened eroeda.
Icihyr skopa ninyn ke ened ero enot ared woatoayse lâu jode niner ared ke enessy yreni ared ukan esolayse lâu ienepre.
Anderson, J. 1978. 'Arguments Concerning Representations for Mental Imagery' in: Psychological Review 85.
Barsalou, L. 1999. 'Perceptual Symbol Systems' in: Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22, 4: pp 577-660 (followed by 'Response to Critics'. pp 637-652).
Bartsch, R. 2002. 'Generating Polysemy: Metaphor and Metonymy' in: Dirven, R. and Pörings, R. (eds.) Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
Donnellan, K. 1974. 'Speaking of Nothing' in: The Philosophical Review Vol 83.
Gineste, M.D. Indurkhya, B. and Scart-Lhomme, V. 1997. 'Mental Representations in Understanding Metaphors' in: Notes et documents Limsi No. 97-02. Orsay: Limsi Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
Halford, G. 1998. 'Relational Processing in Higher Cognition' in: Holyoak, K. et al. (eds.) Advances in Analogy Research: Integration of Theory and Data from the Cognitive, Computational and Neural Sciences. NBU Series in Cognitive Science. Sofia: New Bulgarian University.
Indurkhya, B. 1992. Metaphor and Cognition: an Interactionist Approach. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publ.
Lakoff, G. and Turner, M. 1989. More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Leezenberg, M. 1995. Contexts of Metaphor. Dissertation. Amsterdam: ILLC University of Amsterdam.
Reber, A. 1993. Implicit Learning and Tacit Knowledge: An Essay on the Cognitive Unconscious. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ricoeur, P. 1993. The Rule of Metaphor: Multi-disciplinary Studies of the Creation of Meaning in Language. Transl. of La Metaphore Vive (1975) by Robert Czerny. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
