In the cognitive processes that enable us to relate to the world
symbolically (this is taken from no theorist, is just an idea of mine) we
necessitate the eye to take in visions and translate them into concepts and
then language (arbitrary words).
What create metaphorical language is the camera-eye which selects and
frames things which are out there, available.
The camera-eye (Barthes’s Camera lucida) catches what is significant , I
presume, either for pure abstract and absolute aesthetical reasons or what
is layered down in the mind already loaded with meaning and therefore
significant.
…. what you say about cognitive processes is essential to poetry: in fact
it is just what is already there, layered down and stratified in the mind –
not always by means of rationalized experiences (what we make of fear love
hate and so on) but by means of assigned capability of taking in knowledge
(our mind potentials in Chomsky’ s terms). Therefore poetry itself
coincides with the ability to utter, shape and conceive languages as
systems (of signs and symbols). Meaning (and I do believe this): every
single human being makes poetry while speaking (in fact the creation of
metaphors is a main device for all languages and is an ability of all minds)

Erminia



On Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:57:04 -0000, Christopher Walker <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>Erminia:
>+ADw-snip+AD4-
>All this perspective started from Barthes' reflections in Camera Lucida.
>
>And the enphasis puut on the eye perspectives (therefore the visual texts
>of the mind).
>No?
>+ADw-snip+AD4-
>
>I'm not sure I follow this. Are you referring +AF8-only+AF8- to how a text
is read?
>
>Both the metaphor work and the sound/rhythm work I referred to form part of
>'second generation cognitivism' (horrid phrase+ACE-), which from the 1970s
>onwards moves away from mind/body dualisms and from treating language as a
>system of discrete symbolic operands.
>
>I tacked on the issue of vision because I dimly remember specific work done
>(comparable to that within phonetics) on how lines of text are perceived
and
>apprehended. But there's also the issue (Cf Paul Saenger, for example) of
>how the change to lineation (where poetry is concerned) may be a reflex of
>the growth of silent reading.
>
>CW