How flexible should the grammar of mimetics be? A view from Japanese poetry

Abstract

This chapter aims to lay out a sets of semantic and meaning-related characteristics of mimetics that depart from those of non-mimetic words, and to argue that the differences make it necessary to reference the different paths that mimetics may take in connecting imagery to what we may call their ‘meaning.’ It presents a terminological distinction between mimetics and non-mimetics by referring to the latter as prosaic words. The chapter proposes the unique properties of mimetics and to argue for the need to set a particular place in the grammar of mimetics to allow for their unique properties, which generate a potentially infinite number of interpretations that emerge from our sensual experiences. James McCawley stands at the forefront of the discussion regarding the necessity of partitioning the Japanese lexicon into four classes: native, Sino-Japanese, mimetic, and foreign. The tanka pieces in are all poems by Kozue Uzawa, who has also provided with comments regarding her intention of using innovative mimetic expressions.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 63 citations exist upstream.