The Poetics of Longing in the Poem “A Visitor Visited Me and Stirred My Madness” by Abu Tammam | مجلة قضايا لغوية | Linguistic Issues Journal

##theme.Theme.article.main##

Zafar Abbas
This article investigates the construction of poetic meaning through two competing theoretical frameworks: the classical Aristotelian concept of mimesis (imitation) and the contemporary theory of cognitive mimesis. By contrasting these paradigms, we reveal fundamental divergences in their mechanisms of meaning-making. Our analysis begins with concrete examples embodied metaphor and imaginative projection—to demonstrate how each theory interprets poetic language. We then trace the historical development of meaning in poetic theory, from Aristotle’s emphasis on repressentation to modern cognitive approaches that prioritize embodied experience. This progression highlights how poetic meaning has evolved into an interdisciplinary nexus, bridging literary criticism, rhetoric, poetics, and cognitive neuroscience. Cognitive poetics, in particular, reframes poetic imagery through models of induction, generalization, and implicature (implied meaning). These models treat the image not as a static symbol but as a dynamic construct shaped by the reader’s imagination and perceptual grounding. Central to this approach is the principle of embodiment, which ties linguistic meaning to sensory-motor experiences and challenges traditional binaries between figurative and literal language. By examining how images emerge from and interact with everyday speech, cognitive poetics reveals the deep cognitive underpinnings of poetic effect.
Keywords: Embodiment ; Imagery ; Mimesis ; Cognitive poetics ; Cognitive neuroscience ; Comparative analysis.
1. Abū Tammām, Ḥ. i. ʾA. alṬāʾī. (2016). AlDīwān (M. Khayat, Ed.). Mohamed Gamal. (Original work composed in the 9th century)
2. Coulson, S. (2000). Semantic leaps: Frameshifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge University Press.
3. Coulson, S. (2003). Semantic leaps: Frameshifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction [Review of the book Semantic leaps, by S. Coulson]. Journal of Linguistics, 39(3), 703–704. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226703232308
4. Coulson, S., & Van Petten, C. (2002). Conceptual integration and metaphor: An ERP study. Memory & Cognition, 30(6), 958–968. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195780
5. Coulson, S. (2008). Metaphor comprehension and the brain. In R. W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 177–194). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.012
6. El Bana, A. Z. E. D. H. (2006). Studies in Arabic poetry: Spectrums and imagination. Dar Al Hadara Publishing & Distribution.
7. Fauconnier, G. (1991). Subdivision cognitive. Communications, 53, 229–248. Seuil.
8. Fauconnier, G. (1994). Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge University Press.
9. Fauconnier, G. (1996). Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 20(2), 133–187. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2002_1
10. Fauconnier, G. (2001). Conceptual blending and analogy. In D. Gentner, K. J. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 255–285). MIT Press.
11. Fauconnier, G. (2001). Conceptual integration: Mapping across mental spaces. Cognitive Science, 25(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2501_1
12. Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (1995). Conceptual integration and formal expression. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10(3), 183–204. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1003_3
13. Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. Basic Books.
14. Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2003). Conceptual blending, form and meaning. Recherches en Communication, 19, 57–86.
15. Kennedy, P. (2006). Arabic poetry in the preIslamic period. Cambridge University Press.
16. Ruthven, M. (2011). A guide to Arabic literature. Oxford University Press.
17. Turner, M., & Fauconnier, G. (1995). Conceptual integration and formal expression. Journal of Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10(3), 183204. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1003_3
18. Turner, M., & Fauconnier, G. (1995). Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 19(3), 119.



This content is Open Access

ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed in the texts published are the author’s own and do not necessarily express the views of the Editorial team of the Journal of Qaḍāyā luġawiyaẗ (Linguistic Issues)

The Authors assume all responsibility for the ideas expressed in the materials published

Authors warrant that the rights of third parties will not be violated and that the publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation

 

 

Copyright © linguistic issues 2020-2026

Center for Scientific and Technical Research for the Development of the Arabic Language

Linguistic Research Unit and Arabic Language Issues in Algeria

National Road 49 Ghardaia Road, PO Box 07 Kasdi Merbah University; Postal Code 30063 Ouargla - Algeria

Tel/Fax:+21329719361     Mail:contact@qadaya-lugawiyat.dz      Website:https://www.qadaya-lugawiyat.dz