Abstract：This paper first of all points out that during the last forty years, recontextualization is a main underlying trend and characteristics of Cognitive Linguistics. However, traditional Critical Discourse Analysis also emphasizes and implements recontextualization while analyzing the data. Cognitive Linguistics’attention to social context is mainly manifested in four levels: (1) the definition and basic structure of language include cognition in a social and cultural environment; (2) research on the variability between language and culture, to explore the role of cultural models in language variability; (3) not focus on the variation between languages, but examination of the variation within a language. Critical Cognitive Linguistics appear at this level and tend to take an evaluation standpoint, not just description; (4) focus on analyzing actual dialogue and communication from the perspective of social interaction. The recontextualization of critical discourse research is embodied in the analysis of social actors, forming a three-step model of social actor analysis: identifying social actors; speculating on the ideology behind the discourse; recognizing the possible intentions of the communicator. Based on the two points mentioned above, the paper proposes the notion of “social recontextualization” in Critical Cognitive Linguistics, exploring its feasibility and suggesting that it is consistent with the third wave of cognitive science, that is, amalgamated mind that coalesces the brain, the body and the environment. In the end the paper stresses that psychological experiments can be one form of social recontextualization.
[1] van Dijk T.A. Discourse, Knowledge, Power and Politics: Towards Critical Epistemic Discourse Analysis[A].Hart C, Cap P(eds.). Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies[M]. London: Bloomsbury,2011.121-144. [2] Wodak R.Mediation between Discourse and Society: Assessing Cognitive Approaches in CDA[J]. Discourse Studies,2006,8(1):179-190. [3] Hart C, Cap P.Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies[M].London: Bloomsbury,2014.167-188. [4] Evans V, Green M. Cognitive Linguistics.An Introduction[M].Edinburgh:The University of Edinburgh Press,2006. 157-166. [5] Johnson M.The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning,Imagination and Reason[M].Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press,1987. [6] Geeraerts D.Recontextualizing Grammar:Underlying Trends in Thirty Years of Cognitive Linguistics[A].Tabakowska E,Choinski M,Wiraszka E(eds.).Cognitive Linguistics in Action:From Theory to Application and Back[M].Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter,2010.71-102. [7] Goldberg A.Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure[M].Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press,1995.1-15. [8] Coulson S.Conceptual Blending in Thought, Rhetoric and Ideology[A].Kristiansen G, Achard M, Dirven R, de Mendoza F R(eds.). Cognitive Linguistics: Current Application and Future Perspectives[M].Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter,2006.187-208. [9] Langacker R.Cognitive Grammar:A Basic Introduction[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2008.85-87. [10] Geeraerts D.Methodology in Cognitive Linguistics[A]. Kristiansen G,Achard M,Dirven R,de Mendoza F R(eds.). Cognitive Linguistics:Current Application and Future Perspectives[M].Berlin and New York:Mouton de Gruyter,2006.21-49. [11] Tummers J,Heylen K,Geeraerts D.Usage-based Appro-aches in Cognitive Linguistics:A Technical State of the Art[J].Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory,2005,1(2): 225-361. [12] Sinha C.Culture, Language and the Emergence of Subjectivity[J].Culture & Psychology,2000,6(2):197-207. [13] Sinha C. Cognitive Linguistics, Psychology and Cognitive Science[A].Geeraerts D, Guykens H(eds.). Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics[M].New York:Oxford University Pr-ess,2007.1266-1294. [14] Zlatev J.What’s in a Schema? Bodily Mimesis and the Grounding of Language[A].Hampe B(ed.).From Perception to Meaning: Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics[M].Berlin/New York:Mouton de Gruyter,2005.123-152. [15] Verhagen A.Construction of Intersubjectivity:Discourse, Syntax and Cognition[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2005.1-12. [16] K vecses Z. Anger: Its language, Conceptualization, and Physiology in the Light of Cross-Cultural Evidence[A].Taylor J, Maclaury R.E L(eds.).Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World[M].Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter,1995.181-196. [17] Geeraerts D,Grondelaers S.Looking back at Anger:Cult-ural Traditions and Metaphorical Patterns[A].Taylor J,M-acLaury R(eds.).Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World.Berlin/New York:Mouton de Gruyter,1995.153-179. [18] Kristiansen G,Dirven R.Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models and Social Systems[M].New York/Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter,2008. [19] Hart C.Construal Cperations in Online Press Reports of Political Protests[A].Hart C, Cap P(eds.). Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies[M].London:Bloomsbury,2014. 167-188. [20] Chilton P.Analyzing Political Discourse:Theory and Practice[M].London and New York: Routledge,2004.48-65. [21] 张辉, 杨艳琴.批评认知语言学:理论基础与研究现状[J].外语教学,2019,(3): 5-15. [22] 张辉, 张艳敏.批评认知语言学:理论源流、认知基础与研究方法[J].现代外语,2020,(5):628-640. [23] Clark H.Using Language[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1996.1-25. [24] Croft W.Toward a Social Cognitive Linguistics[A] Evans V, Pourcel S(eds.).New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics[M].Amsterdam: John Benjamins,2009.395-420. [25] Tomasello,M.Constructing a Language:A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition[M].Cambridge,Massach-usetts:Harvard University Press,2003.1-7. [26] Bourdieu P.Outline of a Theory of Practice[M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997.1-9. [27] Van Leeuwen, T. Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse and Analysis[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2008. [28] Schank,R.,R.Abelson.Script,Plans,Goals and Understan-ding:An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structure[M].New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,1977.5-10. [29] Levinson,S.Pragmatics[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1993.1-10. [30] Darics E, Koller V.Social Actors “to Go”: An Analytical Toolkit to Explore Agency in Business Discourse and Communication[J].Business and Professional Communication Quarterly,2019,82(2):214-238. [31] Rowlands M.The New Science of the Mind:From Extended Mind to Embodied Phenomenology[M].Cambridge,Ma-ssachusetts:The MIT Press,2010. [32] Oakley T.Rhetorical Minds: Meditation on the Cognitive Science of Persuasion[M].New York and Oxford:Berghaha Books, 2020. [33] Shapiro L.Embodied Cognition (second edition)[M].New York:Routledge,2019.58-79. [34] Brooks R. Intelligence without Representation[J].Artificial Intelligence,1991,47(1):139-159.5. [35] Hart C.Event-Frames Affect Blame Assignment and Perception of Aggression in Discourse on Political Prot-ests:An Experimental Case Study in Critical Discourse Analysis[J].Applied Linguistics,2018,39(3):400-421. [36] Hart C.“Riots Engulfed the City”:An Experimental Study Investigating the Legitimating Effects of Fire Metaphors in Discourses of Disorder[J].Discourse & Society,2018, 29(3):279-298. [37] Fuoli M, Hart C.Trust-Building Strategies in Corporate Discourse:An Experimental Study[J].Discourse & Society,2018,29(5):514-552. [38] Hart C.Experimental Methods in Discourse Analysis[A].Hart C(ed.). Researching Discourse:A Student Guide[M]. London/New York: Routledge,2020.212-238. [39] 张辉. 批评认知语言学:语言理解与接受的分析视角——再论批评认知语言学的理论建构[J].外语与外语教学,2021,(3):31-43. [40] Hart C, Fuoli M.Objectification Strategies Outperform Subjectification Strategies in Military Interventionist Discourses[J].Journal of Pragmatics,2020,162.
2022, Vol. 39 
粤公网安备44030502007936号