آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 6 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 121 |
| تعداد مقالات | 1,448 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 1,555,853 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 1,459,870 |
A Comparative Stylistic Study of Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer through the Lens of Goldberg’s Construction Grammar (CxG) | ||
| Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances | ||
| مقاله 13، دوره 13، شماره 2، دی 2025، صفحه 287-304 اصل مقاله (579.92 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Research Article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22049/jalda.2025.30375.1770 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Yunes Azizian* 1؛ Mohammad Yousefvand2 | ||
| 1Assistant Professor of Linguistics, English Language and Literature Department, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran | ||
| 2Assistant Professor of Linguistics, Department of English Language and Literature, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| This study employs a mixed-method, corpus-based approach to investigate the distinct argument structure constructions in Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and The Adventures of Tom Sawyer through the lens of Adele Goldberg’s (1995) Construction Grammar (CxG). A 10,000-word corpus from each novel was systematically analyzed using quantitative methods—including frequency counts and log-likelihood ratio tests—and qualitative interpretive techniques to identify and contextualize key constructions such as negative concord, resultative, caused-motion, and ditransitive. The findings reveal that Huckleberry Finn is characterized by a higher prevalence of non-standard, innovative constructions that mirror Huck’s vernacular speech and his experiential, marginal identity. In contrast, Tom Sawyer consistently employs more conventional, formulaic constructions, reflecting its structured, culturally mediated narrative style. These differences underscore the cognitive mechanisms of entrenchment, schema formation, and usage-based learning, which underlie the distinct narrative voices in Twain’s work. By integrating cognitive linguistics with literary analysis, this study not only highlights how constructional choices shape character identity and thematic depth but also provides a replicable framework for future interdisciplinary research. Overall, the results advance our understanding of Twain’s stylistic innovation and demonstrate the utility of CxG in elucidating the complex interplay between language form and literary meaning. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Construction Grammar؛ Literary Style؛ Argument Structure؛ Mark Twain؛ Narrative Voice | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Aloshyna, M. (2020). Mark Twain as a progressive writer: A study of writer’s style. Германістика та міжкультурна комунікація [German Studies and Intercultural Communication], 2, 517-533. http://dx.doi.org/10.32999/ksu2663-3426/2020-2-12
AntConc. (2014). AntConc (Version 3.5.8) [Computer software]. Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software/antconc/
Bergen, L., & Chang, N. (2002). Embodied construction grammar: Formalism for cognitive linguistics. John Benjamins.
Blair, W. (1960). Mark Twain & Huck Finn. University of California Press.
Budd, L. J. (2001). Mark Twain: Social philosopher. University of Missouri Press.
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage, and cognition. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526
Cavitch, M. (2023). Mark Twain, the talking cure, and literary form. American Literary History, 35(3), 1183-1205. https://web.english.upenn.edu/~cavitch/pdf-library/Cavitch_Twain_Talking_Cure_Literary_Form.pdf
Croft, W. (2001). Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
Dancygier, B. (2011). The language of stories: A cognitive approach. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511794414
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E. (2014). Figurative language. Cambridge University Press. https://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/05952/frontmatter/9781107005952_frontmatter.pdf
Davari, H. and Sasani, S. (2024). A dialectical reading of David Hare’s Plenty. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances, 12(2), 221-236. https://doi.org/10.22049/jalda.2024.29274.1639
Fabb, N. (2019, February 25). Literature and linguistics. In Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Fishkin, S. F. (1994). Was Huck Black? Mark Twain and African-American voices. Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268511.001.0001
Harrison, C. (2017). The Gothic syntax: A constructionist approach to fear-evoking structures. Oxford University Press.
Hill, H. (2010). Mark Twain: God’s fool. University of Chicago Press.
Hoover, D. L. (2013). Quantitative analysis and literary studies. In R. Siemens & S. Schreibman (Eds.), A Companion to digital literary studies (pp. 517-533). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405177504.ch28
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar (Vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites). Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
Lin, J. (2024). Power and poetics at work: rewriting Mark Twain’s “Cannibalism in the Cars” in Japan and China. Neohelicon, 52(4), 1-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11059-024-00777-2
Messent, P. (2001). The short works of Mark Twain. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Michaelis, L. A. (2004). Construction grammar. In M. Aronoff & J. Rees-Miller (Eds.), The handbook of linguistics (pp. 245-265). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119072256
Palmer, A. (2004). Fictional minds. University of Nebraska Press.
Quirk, T. (2004). The portable Mark Twain. Penguin Group
Setiawan, E. B. (2016). Humor and satire in Mark Twain’s ‘The adventures of Tom Sawyer’. Widya Warta, 02, 204-217. http://repository.widyamandala.ac.id/296/1/4.%20pak%20eko%20ok-sip.pdf
Sketch Engine. (n.d.). Sketch Engine [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://www.sketchengine.eu
Smitterberg, E. (2021). Syntactic change in late modern English. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108564984
Steen, G. (2011). The contemporary theory of metaphor. Language and literature, 20(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947010388154
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A Usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv26070v8
Toolan, M. (2001). Narrative: A critical linguistic introduction. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315011271
Turner, M. (1996). The literary mind: The origins of thought and language. Oxford University Press.
Twain, M. (1876). The adventures of Tom Sawyer. Gramercy Books.
Twain, M. (1885). The adventures of Huckleberry Finn (M. Fishkin, Ed.). Gramercy Books. (Original work published 1885)
Yoon, J., & Gries, S. T. (2016). Corpus-based approaches to Construction Grammar: Introduction. In J. Yoon & S. T. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to Construction Grammar (pp. 1-8). John Benjamins Publishing Company. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/cal.19.01yoo | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 168 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 47 |
||