This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Oakley, T. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Implied narratives of medical practice in learning-for-doing texts: a simulation semantics approach to rhetorical analysis

Case Western Reserve University, USA, todd.oakley{at}case.edu

The functional interdependence of word, image, narration, and reason is recognized as a fundamental condition of modern-day persuasion, yet a substantial gap still exists in our understanding of how static textual elements interact to generate dynamic, persuasive narratives. This article attempts to narrow that gap in understanding through the development of a simulation semantics approach to rhetorical analysis as applied to print advertisements in medical journals. Located within the broader field of cognitive linguistics, simulation semantics is a theory of linguistic meaning based on the hypothesis that language users run mental simulations of perceptual and motor content of experiences which distribute inferences from these simulations during language comprehension and production. Using the perspectives and methods of conceptual blending, a programmatic model of meaning construction developed by Fauconnier and Turner (2002) and elaborated by many associates (e.g. Brandt and Brandt, 2002; Coulson and Oakley, 2000), the article attempts to show how a simulation semantic approach can lead to cognitively plausible explanations of how persuasion works in a genre of print advertisements aimed at physicians and medical practitioners I call learning-for-doing. In addition, I seek to further refine conceptual blending theory as an interpretive framework by arguing for the need to incorporate the notion of a grounding space as well as the need to distinguish between conceptual blending and conceptual integration.

Key Words: argumentation • conceptual integration and blending theory • medical humanities • mental simulation • mental space theory • rhetoric

Language and Literature, Vol. 14, No. 3, 295-310 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0963947005054483


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?