Iconicity as power: Examples from Wordsworth and Zen discourse1

MING-YU TSENG

Abstract
Scholars interested in iconicity in language and/or literature have concerned themselves with the following questions. Is it valid to define iconicity based on a signs being similar in quality to its object or referent? Is iconicity arbitrary or motivated? What iconic aspects are manifested in language structure or language change? How does iconicity on various linguistic levels contribute to the aesthetics of literature? Instead of continuing these extensively discussed issues, this study investigates how iconicity embodies or transmits what we may callat least in terms of its effectpowerful verbal energy or verbal force. Arguing for iconicity as transmitting verbal energy, the present article concentrates on three particular issues: (1) accumulative homology (i.e., structural or semantic likeness permeating various linguistic levels); (2) iconicity as a metalanguage; (3) iconicity catalysing the release of energy through a fusion of words and world. For purposes of illustration, this paper uses examples from Wordsworths The Prelude and from Zen discourse.

1. Introduction
Wordsworth himself is aware of the power of language, be it positive or negative, as he touches upon the linguistic incarnation of thought:
If words be not (recurring to a metaphor before used) an incarnation of the thought but only a clothing for it, then surely will they prove an ill gift; such a one as those poisoned vestments, read of in the stories of superstitious times, which had the power to consume and to alienate from his right mind the victim who put them on. Language, if it do not uphold, and feed, and leave in quiet, like the power of gravitation or the air we breathe, is a counter-spirit, unremittingly and noiselessly at work to derange, to subvert, to lay waste, to vitiate, and to dissolve. (Wordsworth 1974, 2: 8485)

Does Wordsworths own use of language, then, manifest the power to convey adequately his vision of reality? Some critics of Wordsworth have brought into
JLS 33 (2004), 123 03417638/04/033 1 Walter de Gruyter

Ming- Yu Tseng

question the power of his poetry. For example, Miller (1985: 112113) suggests that the sign-making power inherent in Wordsworths poetry is itself a struggle or a displacement of form and meaning, a struggle between mimesis and emblem, between imitative form and creative form, and between various meanings of the same sign (Miller 1985: 77). Davies (1986: 36118), on the other hand, highlights the power that accumulates through lexical repetition and through the tautology exemplified in Wordsworths poetry. Supported by his statistical analysis, Daviess (1986: 84) contention is that words could be reinforced and generalized by repetition and association with one another, so that they could contribute a special force to passages of reflective and abstract writing, redeeming them from plain abstractness, and revealing the strength of the link between sensuous and mental experience both in Wordsworths substance and in his style. Davies implies that the power that an appropriate choice of words can lend to verbal texture and cognitive potency is that of making thinking less abstract and bringing words and expression closer to actual corporeal feelings and emotions. Textual power can indeed be effected through various linguistic means. In this study, I illustrate how iconicity may be characterized as the well-spring of the power of language. In order to expand my illustration, I select examples from Wordsworths The Prelude and from an Eastern genre unique to Zen/Chan2 Buddhismthe koan. Koans are the short, even abrupt, paradoxical verbal exchanges recorded from ancient Chinese monastic or Chan settings. They have been used as an aid to lead Zen trainees to enlightenment, to the intuitive grasp of the Ultimate Truth as seen and known by the Buddha Shakyamuni. As such, Zen dialogues manifest the power to transform subjectivity and, therefore, merit attention in the study of textual power. The general nature of the relationship between Wordsworth and Zen was first explored by Blyth (1942: 412424). He quotes a variety of spiritual moments in Wordsworths poetic experience to illustrate sparks of Zen in his poetry. For example, he suggests that the spirit of Zenthe essential non-difference and interpenetration of inner and outeris captured and expressed by Wordsworth in these lines: sees the parts/ As parts, but with a feeling of the whole (The Prelude, VII, 712713)3. More than half a century later, employing the scholarship of comparative literature, Rudy (1996) offers a detailed intercultural account of Wordsworths spirituality and Zen Buddhism. He argues that what emerges in Wordsworths poetry is a consciousness similar in course and profile to the Zen experience of cosmic influx resulting from its formal procedures of self-emptying (Rudy 1996: 16). By contrast, in Tseng (2002a) I approach the Wordsworth-Zen connection from a linguistic-semiotic perspective rather than a literary-philosophical viewpoint. I explore how immediacy is represented and constructed in text and how the speech-writing interplay operates in both Wordsworth and Zen discourse. The present study highlights yet another linguis-

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

tic-semiotic issue, that of iconicity; however, the focus here is on the textual power of iconicity rather than the link between Wordsworth and Zen discourse. Scholars interested in iconicity in language and literature have been mostly concerned with the following questions. Is it valid to define iconicity based on a signs being similar in quality to its object or referent? (Bierman 1962; Goodman 1970; Eco 1976: 189216). Is iconicity arbitrary or motivated? (Eco 1976: 190; Fischer and Nnny 2001). What iconic aspects are manifested in language structure or language change? (Jakobson and Waugh 1979; Cooper and Ross 1975; Mayerthaler [1981] 1988; Haiman 1985; Bolinger 1975: 218; Nnny and Fischer 1999). How might a typology of iconicity in language be formulated? (Haiman 1980; Hiraga 1994; Anderson 1998: 129313; Fischer and Nnny 1999: xxixxvi). How does iconicity on various linguistic levels contribute to the aesthetics of literature? (Wimsatt 1954; Jakobson [1965] 1971; Graham 1992). Instead of continuing these extensively discussed issues, this study proposes to investigate what function iconicity serves. However, it is not the aesthetic function but the affective or performative function that is emphasized here, for such a dimension has not received sufficient attention (cf. Davie 1955: 195). Thus, the purpose of this study is mainly twofold. First, it investigates how the iconic use of language embodies verbal energy. Secondly, it analyzes some iconic aspects of The Prelude and Zen dialogues. In order to address the affective, performative dimension of iconicity, my analysis focuses on three particular textual aspects: (1) accumulative homology, (2) iconicity as a metalanguage, and (3) iconic energy, or the capacity to fuse, to forge a unity between words and world.

2. Accumulative homology as power

Johansen (1996) argues that literature exhibits a double iconicity. One is what he calls first degree iconicity: the similarity between the order of words and the order of events (Johansen 1996: 49). This type of iconicity is intersemiotic, for the similarity exists between sign and object. The other is termed second degree iconicity, which is a kind of intratextual or intralingual similaritya similarity between various linguistic levels, that is, within the sign system itself (Johansen 1996: 4850). For example, Caesars well-known dictum Veni, vidi, vici mirrors the order of the narrated events (Jakobson 1960: 350): this identity of order is first degree iconicity. Furthermore, similarity or identity also exists in the repetition of initial-consonant /v/ and final vowel /i/ and three disyllabic verbs (Jakobson 1960: 358). Such identity is an example of second degree iconicity (Johansen 1996: 49). First and second degree iconicity respectively correspond with exophoric and endophoric iconicity, proposed by Nth. The term exophoric reminds us that the verbal sign relates to something beyond language, while the term endophoric has to do with relations of reference within language (Nth 2001: 22).

Ming- Yu Tseng

Intralingual iconicity can be linked with homology. To Barthes, ([1964] 1973: 65) homology is a double paradigm, which reveals itself, for example, when the commutation test is used. The test operates by effecting a change in a signifier of a sentence and observing whether the change results in a corresponding change in the plane of content (signified). Through this test, terms of opposition, of difference or of similarity are called upon and displayed, thus establishing a paradigm for more than one term, more than one choice. The paradigm is homological in that the terms are subjected to the same paradigmatic considerations and belong to the same classification. As Barthes ([1964] 1973: 66) explains, [t]he commutation test allows us in principle to spot, by degrees, the significant units which together weave the syntagm, thus preparing the classification of those units into paradigms. Barthes utilises the notion of homology in order to illustrate the syntagm and paradigm of a sign system. However, I would add that homology functions on both the paradigmatic plane and the syntagmatic plane. Besides, by relating the concept of homology to iconicity, we can make explicit how similarity of patterning works in and beyond text. By accumulative homology I mean structural or semantic likeness or identity permeating various levels. I shall show how such resemblances are related to each other and contribute to the meaning expressed. As a result, the distinction between intralingual iconicity and intersemiotic iconicity is blurred; structural and semantic resemblances are operative within the text, and meanwhile they bridge the gap between the text and the world created and depicted. The following passage captures the essence of joy and bliss felt when the persona conversed with things that really are.
My seventeenth year was come, And, whether from this habit rooted now So deeply in my mind, or from excess Of the great social principle of life Coercing all things into sympathy, To unorganic natures I transferred My own enjoyments, or, the power of truth Coming in revelation, I conversed With things that really are, I at this time Saw blessings spread around me like a sea. Thus did my days pass on, and now at length From Nature and her overflowing soul I had received so much that all my thoughts Were steeped in feeling. I was only then Contented when with bliss ineffable I felt the sentiment of being spread Oer all that moves, and all that seemeth still, Oer all that, lost beyond the reach of thought 405

410

415

420

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

And human knowledge, to the human eye Invisible, yet liveth to the heart, Oer all that leaps, and runs, and shouts, and sings, 425 Or beats the gladsome air, oer all that glides Beneath the wave, yea, in the wave itself And mighty depth of waters. Wonder not If such my transports were, for in all things I saw one life, and felt that it was joy; 430 One song they sang, and it was audible Most audible then when the fleshly air, Oercome by grosser prelude of that strain, Forgot its functions and slept undisturbed. (The Prelude, II, 405434)

The joy is not just felt but seen like a sea. Although the bliss experienced is said to be ineffable, the persona does not stop short of attempting to characterize that sense of blessing. Under scrutiny are five linguistic devices that are used iconically in the passage: sentence length, repetition, semantic components, semantic distance, and grading. As will be shown, these devices interrelate and converge in their contributing to accumulative homology. It is through their interaction and cooperation with one another (cf. Toolan 1996: 326) that iconicity works and gains its power. The quoted passage includes two long sentences. The first one (lines 405414) introduces blessings spread (414). The continuity of the long sentence is analogous to the movement of spreading. Another long sentence, running from line 418 to 428, continues to encapsulate the sentiment of being spread. As Nnny (2001: 159) observes, [a] long line may serve as an imagic icon of length, distance, duration or, more metaphorically, of vastness, great height, swelling, spreading, stretching and width. Here, the very length of the sentences may be iconic of both the substantial extent of the joyful feelings and the movement of spreading. The prepositional phrase oer all that (421, 422, 425, 426) further intensifies the movement of the sentiment, of the experience because the preposition oer (over) itself indicates movement. Moreover, the repetition of oer all that can be interpreted as being iconic of the movement and the pervasiveness of the joy being spread. The intensity is further heightened through the repetition of the mental process (Halliday 1994: 112119) mediated through verbs such as felt and saw: I at this time/ Saw blessing spread (413414), I felt the sentiment of being spread (420), I saw one life, and felt that it was joy (430). The effect achieved is amplification: affectual meanings are repeated until the appropriate volume is reached (Martin 1992: 533). The devices of sentence length and repetition interact and interrelate in building up the verbal energy of iconicity. The semantic features or components of some words also figure in this chain of meaning-making (cf. Goodenough 1956). For example, words like move (421),

Ming- Yu Tseng

leap, run (425), beat, glide (426), and transport (429) all have the semantic feature of +ACTION. This semantic feature corresponds with the circularity of the sentiment and thus iconically presents the going-on and operative spreading of great joys. Another semantic feature that contributes to the intensity of perception is +AURAL; the following words contain such a feature: shout, sing (425), song (431), audible (431, 432), ear (432), prelude, strain (433). Taken together, these words have an iconic effect of amplifying perception, reinforced by the feature of +VISUAL as exemplified by repeated saw (414, 430). These semantic features +ACTION, +AURAL, +VISUAL do not function separately but cooperate in the rendering of the going-on of inner perception. Moreover, the clustering of semantic features does not function by itself but is integrated with other devices. The semantic feature +VISUAL corresponds to the repetition of the mental verb saw. The feature +ACTION is compatible with the length of the sentences that signifies the movement of sentiment. Like the shared semantic features, semantic opposites also contribute to the power of accumulative homology. The enormous semantic distance or space (Rips et al. 1973) created by words of contrast also plays an iconic role in the representation of ineffable bliss. The following quotations (my emphases) reveal the all-pervasiveness of the perception: all that moves versus all that seemeth still (421) and Oer all that beats the gladsome air (425426) versus oer all that glides/ Beneath the wave (426427). The enormous semantic distance, together with the shared semantic features, reinforces the devices of repetition and sentence length in that they all contribute to building up a sense of substantiality and intensity. Finally, grading is a complex of system of polarity (Sapir 1958). Such linguistic resources as intensifiers, comparison, and quantifiers are involved in grading: I had received so much (417), One song they sang, and it was audible / Most audible then when the fleshly ear,/ Oercome by grosser prelude of that strain (431433), in all things/ I saw one life, and felt that it was joy (429 430; emphases added). These linguistic resources are chosen consistently to highlight the increase side of the scale. More importantly, they iconically represent the increasing extent and intensity of the felt experience (cf. Downes 2000: 111112). Rather than contributing to moving toward the decrease or less side of the scale, the linguistic choices from the grading system further reinforce the other devices discussed so far. These five linguistic devices are a concatenation, a mutual reinforcement and cooperation with one another in the signification process. The similarities of patterningwhether it be lexical, phrasal, sentential, semantic, or textualinterrelate and integrate, stretching upwards to the sentence and supra-sentence level and diving downwards to the lexical level (cf. Hodge and Kress 1988: 263). The long sentence mirroring the substantial extent of the joyful feelings is an example of intersemiotic iconicity, and so is the semantic distance shown by the words of

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

contrast or by antonyms. Similarly, the grading system of expressing greater extent or larger quantity is intersemiotic iconicity, as it relates to something beyond language. All three devices reflect the unusual substantiality of Wordsworths perceptions. Among the examples of intralingual iconicity are repetition of the same words or phrases (e.g., saw, felt, and oer all that ) and semantic features shared by certain words, for the identity or similarity these two linguistic devices respectively exhibit relates to the language itself. However, as we have seen, the use of such intralingual iconicity also contributes to the depiction of the great joys; it emphasizes and re-emphasizes the vast extent and great intensity of the bliss which Wordsworth (or the persona) experiences. The devices themselves also evince intersemiotic iconicity. Together with the interaction and interrelation of the five linguistic devices, the combination and integration of intralingual and intersemiotic iconicity lie at the heart of accumulative homology. According to Peirce (19311958: 2.2772.282), metaphor, together with image and diagram, is a type of iconicity. Indeed, metaphorical iconicity is woven into these Wordsworthian lines already laden with iconic codification. In particular, the conceptual metaphor (Lakoff and Turner 1989: 5051; Lakoff and Johnson 1980: 39) or, in Goatlys term, the root analogy emotion is liquid comes into play (Goatly 1997: 64): blessings spread like a sea (II, 414) and all my thoughts/ Were steeped in feeling (II, 417418; my emphases). There is a difference between basic conceptual metaphors, which are cognitive in nature, and particular linguistic expressions of these conceptual metaphors (Lakoff and Turner 1989: 51). The same conceptual metaphor can be expressed through various unique linguistic expressions. For example, Wordsworth uses the sea image and the effect of water (by the use of the past participle steeped) to convey pervasive blissful experience; another poet might use, for instance, a still lake as a metaphor for a peaceful mental state. Understanding metaphor involves the mapping of source-domain schema onto the target-domain schema. The emotion-as-liquid metaphor can map the movement and spaciousness of a sea onto the domain of emotional states. The metaphor thus assists in the progressive intensification of euphoria. The metaphorical iconicity joins with accumulative homology in articulating verbal power. As Lakoff and Turner (1989: 63) point out, cognitive metaphors possess a persuasive power or influence:
For the same reasons that schemas and metaphors give us power to conceptualize and reason, so they have power over us. Anything that we rely on constantly, unconsciously, and automatically is so much part of us that it cannot be easily resisted, in large measure because it is barely even noticed. To the extent that we use a conceptual schema or a conceptual metaphor, we accept its validity. Consequently, when someone else uses it, we are predisposed to accept its validity. For this reason, conventionalized schemas and metaphors have persuasive power over us. (Original emphasis)

The link between metaphor and iconicity will be further discussed below (see Section 4).

Ming- Yu Tseng

3. Iconicity as a metalanguage
Hjelmslev ([1943] 1953: 7677) views a metalanguage as a higher-level language used to describe, explain or comment on an object language, that is, first-order language whose system is directly under scrutiny. Barthes ([1964] 1973: 92) develops Hjelmslevs ideas and thus defines a metalanguage: there the signifieds of the second system are constituted by the signs of the first. What characterizes metalanguage is that it is an operation, as Barthes ([1964] 1973: 92) explains: an operation is a description founded on the empirical principle, that is to say[,] non-contradictory (coherent), exhaustive and simple, scientific semiotics, or metalanguage, is an operation (original emphasis). Kim (1996: 122123) further elaborates on metalanguage as an operation:
Metalanguage is an operation because the plane of content itself is a system of signification. Metalanguage takes the denotative meaning system itself as its content (i.e., content2) and expresses it. Its expression is an operation. However, this operation consists of expression for expression, and this is a scientific operation. From this it follows that metalanguage functions as a language to analyze the expression of denotative meaning. Furthermore, metalanguage allows one to name signifieds (i.e., content2) derived from a denotative discourse as well as to talk about them.

Three aspects of the operation function can be derived. First and foremost, the fact that metalanguage employs the denotative language, the first language, as its content (signified) constitutes an operation, for signification itself involves meaning-making. Secondly, metalanguage serves to analyze or explain the first-order language. Besides, because of its being a semiological concept, metalanguage enables us to highlight and see clearly the signifieds of a higherorder language that could have been taken for granted or ignored had the implicit metalanguage not been brought to conscious attention. Iconicity is a metalanguage, for the iconic device functions to comment on language. More importantly, seeing iconicity as metalanguage helps to bring to the fore the signified of a higher order. This section will elucidate multiple iconicity as manifested in Zen dialogues and relate it to metalanguage. The discussion here concentrates on the pattern of question and answer as used in Zen discourse. Almost every Zen koan involves the question-answer pattern. Here are three examples. (1) A monk asked Chao Chou, The myriad Dharmas return to one. Where does the one return to? Chou said, When I was in Ching Chou, I made a shirt. It weighed seven chins [i.e., Chinese pounds]. (Piyen chi, The Blue Cliff Record, Case 45; cf. Cleary and Cleary 1992: 270) (2) A monk asked Pa Ling, What is the Blown Hair Sword [i.e., a very sharp sword that could cut a hair when it is blown against the sword]?

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

Pa Ling said, Each and every branch of coral supports the moon. (Piyen chi, The Blue Cliff Record, Case 100; cf. Cleary and Cleary 1992: 554) (3) A monk asks Shou Shan, What is Buddha? Shan said, A new bride rides a donkey; the mother-in-law drags it. (Tsungjung lu, Book of Serenity, Case 65; cf. Cleary 1988: 273) Since the questions are concerned with enlightenment, Buddhahood, or the Ultimate Truth, the answers can be adequately interpreted only in the Zen context. Discourse iconicity finds expression in the very form of question and answer, question as indicated by the verb ask (wen) and interrogatives such as where (hechu) and what (juhe) and answer because question and answer form an adjacency pair. Three simultaneous iconic qualities are exemplified in the way language is used in koans (Tseng 1997: 185190). Firstly, the questionanswer pattern itself is analogous to the process of seeking the Way, from puzzlement and confusion toideally or principallyenlightenment. It is the queston-answer pattern, not, for example, complaining-excusing or informing-acknowledging, that is foregrounded in koans. We may well ask what might be the extra meaning behind the pattern. Although the answer given in each koan generates more puzzlement than clarification, the question-answer form itself cannot be taken for granted but can be rendered an iconic interpretation in the Zen context. Secondly, the abruptness and seeming irrelevance of answers in most koan dialogues are analogous to the ineffability of the Ultimate Reality. The Reality cannot be represented in propositional terms and is not thus represented. Instead, it can only be induced to experience this Reality. In other words, saying something amounts to saying nothing and yet some aspects of the Path are still signified or pointed to. Take koan (3) for instance: in response to a monks question about the Ultimate Reality, Master Shou Shan said A new bride rides a donkey; the motherin-law drags it. It is hard to associate the response with the question. What is the connection between the new bride or the mother-in-law with enlightenment? Does riding or dragging a donkey have any special or symbolic meaning? As the monk continued to wrestle with the response, he might grasp something about the unspeakable enlightened experience, or he might not. It might be possible to understand the Masters response in this way: it is odd, unacceptable and wrong, especially in Chinese culture, to have ones mother-in-law drag a donkey while her daughter-in-law (the bride) sits on it, because a bride is supposed to serve her mother-in-law, not the other way round. Therefore, some kind of reversal is suggested in the Masters answer. This understanding is a metaphorical construal. The reversal may suggest that expecting verbal illustration of enlightenment puts one further away from it. Or the reversal may suggest negating a commonly held world-view. The inference could go on and on. But one thing is certain: the Masters answer frustrates the monks intention

10

Ming- Yu Tseng

of seeking direct verbal explanation, which can build up conceptuality rather than experience the Ultimate first-hand. The Masters remark here may amount to saying Its not right to seek the Truth through words or speech! or Stop thinking and practise! or Zen transcends words!. However, telling the monk directly Zen transcends words is pragmatically and cognitively different from saying A new bride rides a donkey; the mother-in-law drags it. The former reinforces our habitual way of using language, which Zen Masters reject. The latter has some cognitive force the former lacksat least arousing doubt in the mind of a novice. Thirdly, the difficulty in understanding the verbal exchange is a concomitant of the Zen masters wholly original, creative response, which intensely stimulates the mind of an enlightenment-seeker. Each koan as a whole illustrates the force of the macro-illocutionary device of arousing doubt and anguish so as to alter the state of consciousness and induce the consciousness aimed at. As McPhail (1996: 114) succinctly characterizes koans:
The koan, like postmodernism, is an attempt to challenge and undermine the essentializing consequences of rationality, to unmask them as constructions. But the rewards of the seafarer who attempts to navigate between the Scylla of idealism and the Charybdis of realism, like the rewards of the Zennist, are potentially great: If the grueling, frustrating pursuit of the koan is carried on to the end, there comes a breakthrough to a realm of truth far deeper than, far transcendent of, any intellectual statements explains Winston King (1993: 1920).

Thus the difficulty of koan dialogues can be construed as iconic of the doubt and anguish required for the maturation of the higher consciousness of Zen. Considered in the light of metalanguage as an operation, discourse iconicity is not a mere static concept to be identified, but an appropriate dynamic governing the discourse strategy that underlies koan dialogues. It is appropriate, for the metalanguage highlights the signified of koan dialogues: enlightened experience. Besides, the signified is in line with the working of iconicityform miming meaning (Fischer and Nnny 1999). It is dynamic, for iconicity as a metalanguage serves to signify some aspects of realization of Ultimate Truth in a subtle way and to articulate language more as an operation or a force than as mere representation (cf. Thibault 1998: 411). Iconicity as a metalanguage of a developed mind is also operative in The Prelude. Note that the subtitle of the poem is Growth of a Poets Mind. The very pattern of question and answer also functions in the poem. In the opening stanza, a series of questions or rather, reflexive questions appear, questions in which speaker and listener are the same:
Now I am free, enfranchised and at large, May fix my habitation where I will. What dwelling shall receive me, in what vale 10

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

Shall be my harbour, underneath what grove Shall I take up my home, and what sweet stream Shall with its murmurs lull me to my rest? The earth is all before mewith a heart 15 Joyous, nor scared at its own liberty, I looked about, and should the guide I chuse Be nothing better than a wandering cloud I cannot miss my way. (The Prelude, I, 919; my emphases)

11

It is not until the end of The Prelude that a possible answer is given to the speakers questions concerning where to find a place of harbour. As Wolfson (1986: 178) observes, these lines are the affirmative answers toward which Wordsworth has conducted his project of self-inquiry.
Prophets of Nature, we to them will speak A lasting inspiration, sanctified By reason and by truth; what we have loved Others will love, and we may teach them how: Instruct them how the mind of man becomes A thousand times more beautiful than the earth On which he dwells, above this frame of things (Which, mid all revolutions in the hopes And fears of men, doth still remain unchanged) In beauty exalted, as it is itself Of substance and of fabric more divine. (The Prelude, XIII, 442452)

445

450

The interrogative mind framing the questions is here moving towards an insight as the language assumes a prophetic voice. A new perception of mind is formed; Wordsworth finds Mind in its highest sense to be the destination to which any life journey that humans embark on should lead. As with koan dialogues, the question-answer pattern can be construed as iconic of a progression from unknowing to knowing, from uncertainty to realization of Truth. The process is reinforced by the form of reflexive questions. As argued in Tseng (2002a: 186 187), they highlight the process, rather than the result, of an interrogative mind. Compare the two sets of sentences:
How could I tell her the truth? What have I achieved after so many years efforts? When on earth shall I be able to finish this essay? I really dont think I should tell her the truth. I wonder if I have achieved anything after so many years efforts. I doubt when I shall be able to finish this essay.

The questions, when posed by oneself, demonstrate ones own thinking over the things that can no longer be taken for granted. The questions bring to the fore

12

Ming- Yu Tseng

the process of an inquiring mind at work. By contrast, the declaratives sound more like the result of reasoning over the activities concerned or more like reporting the result of ones thinking to another person. This emphasis on process corresponds to the operative dimension of metalanguage. Thus, the iconicity of a metalanguage operates and extends from the beginning to the end of the poem; the whole work can be seen as a meditation on the question posed at the beginning, the ending lines supplying an answer.

4. Iconic energy fusing words and world

This section further examines the verbal energy transmitted by iconicity. The so-called verbal energy or textual power refers to a writers or speakers persuasive power over and subsequent influence upon the reader or the hearer through language. It is then significant to address the reception as well as the production of iconicity. The sign can be divided into signifier and signified. The signification process or what Peirce (19311958: 5.484) calls semiosis amounts to the cognitive effect the sign has on its interpreter. That is, the sign enters the human mind, and the human mind is activated by the sign. As Kim (1996: 76) summarizes, semiosis is a transactional process in which the action of the sign and that of the consciousness meet.
The consciousness is a kind of a screen, or a medium or field where things given in the world and in the mind can meet together. Ortega y Gasset (1987) put this aspect as follows: To all appearances, consciousness is the strangest thing in the universe, for, judging by its mode or presentation, it seems to [be] the conjunction, joining, or intimate and perfect bonding of two totally different things; my act of referring-to and that-towhich-I-am-referring (Ortega y Gasset 1987: 88). The consciousness is a medium for both the representation and transformation of external realities. (Kim 1997: 7778)

Sign and consciousness are thus not separate but can be regarded as inter-fused in semiosis (cf. Merleau-Ponty 1962: 392409). This view accords with Merrells (2001) argument for a nonobjectivist view of sign or, in his own words, properly minding the sign. The fusion of mind and signs entails not only a semiotic agent or interpreter who engenders meaning but also a process of interactive becoming. Meaning requires something lending itself to the becoming of meaning and to the agent of that becoming, who is herself part of the process of becoming (Merrell 2001: 107). What lies at the heart of this argument is a call for attention to iconicity and indexicality, which are part of the entire range of the semiotic creation of meaning.
Symbols without iconic and indexical dimensions are inert; icons and indices without symbolic form are less than genuine signs. they [i.e., icons and indices] are an integrated part of the whole human interaction. The very existence of explicitly engendered symbols is dependent upon icons and indices at implicit (corporeal, felt) levels

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

13

of tacit knowability. But icons and indices cannot emerge into the arena of explicitly articulated knowledge without their proper symbolic attire. (Merrell 2001: 101)

To put it in another way, meaning as mediated through symbolic signs is based on our shared human experience such as bodily sensations, images, bodily orientation and kinesis, and relations of proximity and of causality, which are connected with iconicity and indexicality. The existence of an enormously wide range of human experience engenders the production of symbolic signs while symbolic signs in their turn give form and substance to as-yet-inarticulate human experiences. This helps to explain why iconicity is so pervasive in language. Let us further consider how iconicity figures in semiosis, where sign and consciousness meet. Tabakowska (1999: 410) writes:
The basic cognitive assumption that linguistic structures are the reflection of the world not as it is, but as it is perceived by a cognizant human being, underlies a definition of iconicity as the conceived similarity between conceptual structure and linguistic form. The relation between reality, cognition and language conditions the process of concept formation, where the consecutive stages of perception (reality), conceptualization (cognition) and symbolization (language) represent consecutive phases of abstraction (Nowakowska-Kempna 1995: 109). Forms are paired with concepts, and the motivation for this process might be some kind of similarity. (Tabakowskas emphasis)

The three consecutive stages of mental activity are compatible with Ortega y Gassets model of three modalities of consciousnessperceiving, imagining, and mentioning:
We shall refer to those events by which an object is rendered present to us as acts of perceiving or presentation, [to those in which an object is given to us in the manner of absence as acts of representation or imagining,] and to those others in which an object is given by way of allusion and reference as acts of mentioning or bringing to mind. (Ortega y Gasset 1987: 122, original emphasis; translators insertion)

Ortega y Gasset sees consciousness as a dynamic which performs three types of acts. Perceiving an object right before us corresponds, presumably, to perception. Imagining or recollecting an object to our mind and comparing it with a memory is mediated by cognitive activity, and is therefore better described as an act of conception, although Ortega y Gasset is presumably here not concerned with the thoughts which are coupled with the imagining since he does not emphasize them. His mentioning is tantamount to symbolization in that both involve the use of words, concepts and images to convey what is seen. Furthermore, one issue implicit in the accounts of Tabakowska and Ortega y Gasset is whose consciousness is involved in producing and recognizing iconicity. Some form of conception or pre-conception is imposed on the reader, smuggled into his mind, by both a writers conceived similarity between conceptual structure and linguistic form and the mentioning of an experience or supposed

14

Ming- Yu Tseng

reality. That is, readers or listeners are tacitly invited to engage in some aspect of an experience and are affected by the speakers or writers ways of saying. Consequently, they will have a strong predisposition to perceive and conceive of it in the way it is represented and told. The process of how readers and listeners identify and interpret iconicity may be different from the way a writer uses iconicity. Tabakowska (1999: 411) points out the difference:
Traditionally, it has been generally assumed that iconic relations are one-way process: from expression to concept. However, if we agree that the ability to recognize a given similarity results from the language users knowledge of a given culture and language, then we can also reasonably assume that the process may be reversed: via the (linguistic) convention, the user of language might associate (by recognizing relevant similarities) certain expressions with certain concepts, and in consequence arrive at a certain view, or interpretation, of reality.

That is, the three consecutive phases from perception, conceptualization and symbolization are reversed when the reader undertakes iconic construals: from symbolization through conception to (inner) perception. Namely, language evokes thoughts or concepts; the concept articulates and predisposes the mind to form a connection between the linguistic form and the object or content referred to. Then a certain reality or perception is created and emerges through or into the imagination. In developing a meaningful understanding and interpretation, the reader has to actively participate in recruiting, projecting, and blending additional background knowledge, context, and memories (Fauconnier and Turner 2002: 166; cf. Holland 1988: 146153; Gibbs 1994: 263264). As such, iconicity catalyses or releases perceptual-cum-verbal energy which searches persistently for possible similarities between the language used and the world, between form and meaning, between verbal expression and reality either reality as such or subjective reality. Taborsky (2001: 90, 93) uses a metaphor to characterize the energy that iconicity embodies: An iconic sign has an inherent Will, a desire to be something it refers to. Thus it is well suited to the task of establishing mediate relations as all signs do. More importantly, it has the ability not only to represent, but also to copy, to mirror, to body forth or to reflect in the mind an image of the object or the reality concerned as if it were the object or the reality itself. This is due to qualities or relations becoming established with words through long association, so that eventually it is as if no split existed between the sign and the world. What is the consequence of the readers attempting an iconic interpretation? Tabakowska (1999: 410) remarks that iconic construals do not [necessarily] relate to perceptual process per se, but directly reflect conceptual structures the ongoing flow of cognition (Langacker 1990: 108). For example, an onomatopoetic word like ding-dong reflects the sound of a doorbell; this type of iconicity is clearly perceptually motivated. However, recognizing this iconic

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

15

sign and making it meaningful require a conceptual knowledge of doorbell. In some examples of iconicity where the sequence of a series of verbs reflects the sequence of the actions mentioned, such an iconic interpretation requires our conception of sequence or linear relations without our having to see the event ourselves. Danesi (1994) reminds us of the power of conceptual structures. Free from sensory control, conceptual structures gradually come to dominate purposeful thinking. The minds conceptual cognitive system is a truly powerful one. It can be projected onto the external world of reality to partition it, organize it, classify it, and explain it (Danesi 1994: 123). I would add that conception can even distort or reshape the external world, the world of supposed reality. What is effected in the doubling back of perception and conception is a subtle influence upon or even an alteration in the consciousness of one who is fully engaged in the quest for similarities, affinities and/or perceptual relations. In order to illustrate how iconicity relates to conception and perception, I shall analyze the following passage:
A single tree 90 There was, no doubt yet standing there, an ash, With sinuous trunk, boughs exquisitely wreathed: Up from the ground and almost to the top The trunk and master branches everywhere Were green with ivy, and the lightsome twigs 95 And outer spray profusely tipped with seeds That hung in yellow tassels and festoons, Moving or stilla favourite trimmed out By Winter for himself, as if in pride, And with outlandish grace. Oft have I stood 100 Foot-bound uplooking at this lovely tree Beneath a frosty moon. The hemisphere Of magic fiction, verse of mine perhaps May never tread, but scarcely Spencers self Could have more tranquil visions in his youth, 105 More bright appearances could scarcely see Of human forms and superhuman powers, Than I beheld standing on winter nights Alone beneath this fairy work of earth. (The Prelude, VI, 90109)

At first glance, this passage describes an ash and the poetic inspiration derived from looking at the tree. Presumably, Wordsworth must have perceived the tree in his youth. The images perceivedthe ash, its branches, twigs and leaves, the yellow tassels and ivy, etc. (i.e., a composite perception) may well have been retrieved from his memory (i.e., in an act of conception) before he gave this ex-

16

Ming- Yu Tseng

perience its symbolic form (i.e., symbolization). Moreover, he must have reflected on this experience and analyzed it (i.e., in a further act of conception) before it was written. His perception (or recollection) of the tree is thus coupled with his conception or creative re-formulation of his original experience of observing the actual tree. What similarity may be conceived to exist between the poets conception of reality and the language he uses? First of all, the sequence of the visual objects mentioned in the poem iconically imitates the movement of the poets eye. The tree unfolds to the reader as the poet saw it. He set his eyes on the tree, approaching from some distance to close proximity, as suggested by the deictic or indexical expressions there and then this: A single tree standing there (VI, 9091, my emphasis), Oft have I stood/ Foot-bound uplooking at this lovely tree (VI, 100101, my emphasis). The eye also moves from the ground to the top (VI, 93) and from the general to the specific details: a single tree (VI, 90), an ash (VI, 91), sinuous trunk, boughs exquisitely wreathed (VI, 93), lightsome twigs/ And outer spray (VI, 9596), seeds, (VI, 96), and yellow tassels and festoons (VI, 97). Another iconic quality is subtly manifested in this passage: the coexistence of contrasts can be rendered an iconic interpretationoppositions are resolved (cf. Tseng 2002b: 6770). An ash trimmed out by Winter stands with its trunk and master branches green with ivy everywhere. On winter nights the poet has clear visions of human forms and superhuman powers (107) evoked by those branches. An ordinary tree is a fairy work of earth (109). The tree is depicted almost like a human form: wreathed (92), in pride (99), and with outlandish grace (100) while the poet-spectator, standing there alone foot-bound (101) and motionless, is himself almost like a tree. Nevertheless, rather than heightening the oppositions or separations, these contrasts, striking or subtle, are mingled together in the act of composition. The leaves of the tree are all gone, and yet it is still green with ivy. It is in the moonlit darkness of the night that observing the tree is so revealing. Also interfused in the description of the tree are day and night, recollection and standing: the tree beneath which the poet-spectator stands in the moonlight and the same tree recollected as he sees it in daylight when he can discern the colours green (VI, 95) and yellow (VI, 97). The poet and the tree are put into relationship in the act of beholding and through the trees magic power on the poet; this interrelationship is reinforced by a parallel: the single tree standing and the poet standing alone. Hartman (1985: 322) remarks that contrast in Wordsworth points beyond the activity of pointing. Furthermore, he sees contrast in Wordsworth as a manifestation of verbal dynamism: the dynamics of contrast and of blending cooperate, since insight still proceeds from sight, from the blended might of all the oppositions (Hartman [1964] 1987: 241). Indeed, Hartmans comment supports an iconic reading of the passage. That the contrasts are interrelated and interfused not

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

17

only attests to the workings of Mind in relation to nature but also reflects the poets conceptual reality in which oppositions are blended. What is revealed is the blended might of Mind and external world: The external World is fitted to the Mind;/ And the creation (by no lower name/ Can it be called) which they with blended might/ Accomplish (The Recluse, 821824, see Wordsworth 19401949, vol. 5). Yet again, iconicity may be observed in the concocting of the blended might. Thus, the description of the tree (i.e., symbolization) provokes reflection and the reader renders an interpretation (i.e., conceptualization). As readers, we are invited to see the reality, whether inner or outer (i.e., perception), as Wordsworth sees itas perception only rather than an ultimately separate reality. This iconic reading of the passage enables us to see how language tacitly communicates meaning, inviting us to see a certain reality mirrored and shown by language. Such a world view of interconnectedness, interpenetration or interdependence is also suggested by koan (4). (4) As the officer Lu Hsuan was talking with Nan Chuan, he said, Master of the Teachings Chao said, Heaven, earth, and I have the same root; myriad things and I are one body. This is quite marvelous. Nan Chuan pointed to a flower in the garden. He called to the officer and said, People these days see this flower as [in] a dream. (Piyen chi, The Blue Cliff Record, Case 40, Cleary and Cleary 1992: 244) This koan and Wordsworth converge in several respects. First and foremost, the interrelatedness of man and nature, subject and object, internal and external as suggested by Wordsworth is explicitly articulated by the teaching from Master Chao: Heaven, earth, and I have the same root; myriad things and I are one body. Furthermore, just as Wordsworths poetic universe is directed to things of every day (Coleridge [1817] 1983, 2: 56), Zen discourse is characterized by its everydayness. Using whatever object happens to be nearby as a means of teaching is common in the Zen context, hence the mention of a garden flower in koan (4). The act of seeing is another point of contact. Whether it is Wordsworths looking at the tree or peoples seeing the flower, the act of seeing points beyond the object being seen, and indeed beyond the act of seeing itself. The flower-as-in-a-dream metaphor can be interpreted in this way: the qualities of the source domain (i.e., the dream) such as being illusory, transient, beautiful, splendid and miraculous are mapped onto the target domainthe supposed ultimately real outwardly perceived flower. The qualities of being splendid and miraculous match the remark of the officer Lu Hsuan: This is quite marvelous. In other words, Nan Chuan seems to be implying that Lu Hsuan is one of those who see a flower as if in a dream. The Masters reply could be interpreted as refuting Lu Hsuans reaction, for he sees the flower not as

18

Ming- Yu Tseng

such but through a dream, something mediated. That is, he wonders at Master Chaos teachings, but his realization of Chaos words is not a direct, intuitive grasp of the Truth. On the other hand, the committed Buddhist is encouraged to contemplate actual life, supposedly real life itself, as illusory, impermanent, and transient just like a dream. It is only through waking from this dream that all sentient beings can come face-to-face with the Ultimate Truth of universal conditionality. All things whatsoever, not excluding words and ideas, are emptyinterdependent and interrelated. Considered in this light, then, seeing a flower as in a dream reinforces Master Chaos dictum. The contrasts evoked by the tenor (flower) and by the vehicle (dream) are blended in this metaphorreality and dream, external and internal, common and miraculous, visible and invisible. Here then, source and target are interfused or commingled, rather than there being a unidirectional mapping from source to target (cf. Hiraga 1999: 465466; Turner and Fauconnier 1995: 184187). More importantly, a metaphor-icon link is manifested in the above analysis. Hiraga (1998) illustrates how metaphor and iconicity interrelate in two ways: iconicity in metaphor and metaphor in icon. The former refers to iconic moments in metaphor, which are operative in the mapping between source and target. They are mimetic mental representations of sensory perceptions, and constitute imagic iconicity. At the same time, a mental space develops a structure by selecting and schematising the images, namely, an image-schematic structure, which has a diagrammatic representation of the image content of mental space (Hiraga 1998: 155). In other words, any image evoked by a metaphor is an imagic iconicity; it is iconic in that there exist visual similarities between the sensory perception and the image content triggered by a metaphor. Simultaneously, a middle mental space called generic space, which contains what source and target have in common, maps onto each of them (Fauconnier 1997: 149). This is a diagrammatic type of iconicity operating in the analogy between the corresponding image-schematic structures of the generic space and the input spaces [i.e., source and target] (Hiraga 1998: 156). Take koan (4) for example. The visual image of a flower evoked in ones mind is an example of imagic iconicity. Diagrammatic iconicity is the correspondence between the generic space and the input spaces: the qualities of being splendid, miraculous, and transient. Both types of iconicity illustrate iconicity in metaphor. The other type of metaphor-icon link in language is metaphor in icon. Metaphor in icon also relates to imagic and diagrammatic aspects of the linguistic form. Conventional metaphors which conceptualises our everyday experiences and reality also conceptualises our understanding of language structure and use. These metaphors navigate the way we interpret the forms of linguistic expressions (Hiraga 1998: 159). A metaphor gives an iconic meaning its form; a metaphorical reading of a text may reinforce an iconic meaning and quality in the text. Take koan (4) for instance. Understanding the flower-as-in-a-dream

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

19

metaphor indeed helps spell out the iconic qualities of the koan. First, the form of the metaphor, relating two seemingly unrelated objects to each other in a sentence, corresponds with interrelatedness and interdependence suggested by Master Chaos dictum. Hence, the form of the metaphor itself can be iconically interpreted. Furthermore, the interrelatedness is further reinforced by the blending of the contrasts respectively triggered by the two input spaces flower and dream. The two types of metaphor-icon link also illustrate the dynamic mechanism of metaphorical-iconic mappings (Hiraga 1998: 161). Prompted by metaphor, the cognitive operations of mental mappings contributes to the verbal energy of iconicity.

5. Conclusion
Although some scholars (e.g., Fischer and Nnny 1999: xvxxi; Johansen 1996: 51; Mller 2001) have considered iconicity as charged with force, their treatments leave room for further investigation. For example, Johansen (1996: 51) first attributes to the non-arbitrariness of iconicity its magical effectpretend[ing] that no split between words and world exists. He then further explains some possible reasons for such an effect:
It may be that different factors collaborate to this end. First, the surplus coding of the poetic expression, the strengthening of the intrasystemic relations between phonemes, syllables, words, phrases, etc., is communicated to the denoted universe and to the elements of signification. The palpable and reiterated qualities that make the parts of the text mirror each other, its self-reflecting capacity, [are] so pervasive that [they] envelop the semantic differentiation in a haze of similarity and sameness. (Johansen 1996: 51)

However, Johansen mentions this in passing, because his main concern is to define and characterize literary discourse through the concept of iconicity. This study offers a detailed account of iconicity as power. Rather than taking the iconic force of language for granted, this study has attempted to trace what contribute to the verbal energy transmitted by iconicity. First and foremost, the integration and interaction of some iconic devices permeating various linguistic levels of the same text embody a powerful verbal effect, in that the iconic meanings are consistently linked and foregrounded and in that the iconic force intensifies. Furthermore, that iconicity is a metalanguage adds to the dynamic force triggered by iconicity, for metalanguage itself is an operation: it involves meaning-making, it analyzes language, and it enables the reader and the writer to bring to the fore the signified of a high-order language. Finally, iconicity catalyses verbal energy which searches persistently for similarities between words and world. By highlighting the qualitative resemblances in the sign-object or sign-reality relationship, iconicity prevents signs from degenerating into feeble mediation or facile representation. In this sense, iconicity elevates signs from being mere signs; it enables signs to mimic or reflect reality, which is in the final

20

Ming- Yu Tseng

analysis neither objective nor subjective, neither inner nor outer, but partakes of both. Iconicity shortens the distance between form and meaning, between words and world. As such, it is an appropriate and powerful means for the revelation of Wordsworths Way and for Zen. National University of Kaohsiung

Notes
1. This article is a revised version of a paper presented at the Third Conference of the International Association of Literary Semantics, 79 April 2002, University of Birmingham, U.K. I am grateful to its participants for comments. Special thanks are due to Professor Michael Toolan for suggesting some useful references. I would also like to express my acknowledgement to the National Science Council of the Republic of China, Taiwan, for its support for the project (NSC 90-2411-H-390-001). 2. Zen is a Japanese term for Chinese Chan, which derives from Sanskrit Dhyana, meaning profound contemplation in a state of higher consciousness. 3. All the citations from The Prelude in this study are from the 1805 edition. They are referred to by the Books where they appear, followed by their line numbers.

References
Anderson, Earl R. (1998). A Grammar of Iconism. Cranbury: Associated University Presses. Barthes, Roland ([1964] 1973). Elements of Semiology. Annette Lavers and Colin Smith (trans.). New York: Hill and Wang. Bierman, Arthur K. (1962). That there are no iconic signs. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 23 (2): 243249. Blyth, R. H. (1942). Zen in English Literature and Oriental Classics. Tokyo: Hokuseido Press. Bolinger, Dwight (1975). Aspects of Language, 2nd ed. New York: Harcourt. Cleary, Thomas (trans.) (1988). Book of Serenity. Boston: Shambhala. Cleary, Thomas and Jonathan C. Cleary (trans.) (1992). The Blue Cliff Record. Boston: Shambhala. Coleridge, Samuel Taylor ([1817] 1983). The Complete Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge 7: Biographia Literaria, 2 vols., James Engell and W. Jackson Bate (eds.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Cooper, William E. and John Robert Ross (1975). Word order. In Papers from the Parasession on Functionalism, R. E. Grossman, L. J. San, and T. J. Vance (eds.), 63111. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. Danesi, Marcel (1994). Messages and Meanings: An Introduction to Semiotics. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press. Davie, Donald (1955). Articulate Energy: An Enquiry into the Syntax of English Poetry. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Davies, Hugh Skyes (1986). Wordsworth and the Worth of Words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Downes, William (2000). The language of felt experience: Emotional, evaluative and intuitive. Language and Literature 9 (2): 99121. Eco, Umberto (1976). A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Fauconnier, Giles (1997). Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fauconnier, Giles and Mark Turner (2002). The Way We Think. New York: Basic Books.

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

21

Fischer, Olga and Max Nnny (1999). Introduction: Iconicity as a creative force in language use. In Form Miming Meaning: Iconicity in Language and Literature, Max Nnny and Olga Fischer (eds.), xvxxxvi. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (eds.) (2001). The Motivated Sign: Iconicity in Language and Literature 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Gibbs, Raymond W. (1994). The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Goatly, Andrew (1997). The Language of Metaphors. London: Routledge. Goodenough, W. (1956). Componential analysis and the study of meaning. Language 32: 195216. Goodman, Nelson (1970). Seven strictures on similarity. In Experience and Theory, Lawrence Foster and J. W. Swanson (eds.), 1929. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. Graham, Joseph F. (1992). Onomatopoetics: Theory of Language and Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Haiman, John (1980). The iconicity of grammar: Isomorphism and motivation. Language 56 (3): 515540. (ed.) (1985). Iconicity in Syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold. Hartman, Geoffrey H. (1985). The unremarkable Wordsworth. In On Signs, Marshall Blonsky (ed.), 321333. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ([1964] 1987). Wordsworths Poetry 17871814. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hiraga, Masako K. (1994). Diagrams and metaphors: Iconic aspects in language. Journal of Pragmatics 22: 521. (1998). Metaphor-icon link in poetic texts: A cognitive approach to iconicity. Journal of the University of the Air 16: 147175. (1999). Blending and an interpretation of haiku: A cognitive approach. Poetics Today 20 (3): 461481. Hjelmslev, Louis ([1943] 1953). Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, F. J. Whitfield (trans.). Baltimore: Waverly Press. Hodge, Robert and Gunther Kress (1988). Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press. Holland, Norman N. (1988). The Brain of Rober Frost: A Cognitive Approach to Literature. London: Routledge. Jakobson, Roman (1960). Closing statement: linguistics and poetics. In Style in Language, Thomas A. Sebeok (ed.), 350377. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ([1965] 1971). Quest for the essence of language. In Selected Writings II, 345359. The Hague: Mouton. Jakobson, Roman and Linda Waugh (1979). The Sound Shape of Language. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Johansen, Jorgen Dines (1996). Iconicity in literature. Semiotica 110 (12): 3755. Kim, Kyong Liong (1996). Caged in Our Own Signs: A Book About Semiotics. Norwood: Ablex. King, Winston L. (1993). Zen and the Way of the Sword: Arming the Samurai Psyche. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Lakoff, George and Mark Turner (1989). More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Langacker, Ronald W. (1990). Concept, Image and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Martin, J. R. (1992). English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Mayerthaler, Willi ([1981] 1988). Morphological Naturalness. Ann Arbor: Karoma.

22

Ming- Yu Tseng

McPhail, Mark Lawrence (1996). Zen in the Art of Rhetoric: An Inquiry into Coherence. Albaby: State University of New York Press. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (1962). Phenomenology of Perception, Colin Smith (trans.). London: Routledge. Merrell, Floyd (2001). Properly minding the sign. Journal of Literary Semantics 30 (2): 95109. Miller, J. Hillis (1985). The Linguistic Moment: From Wordsworth to Stevens. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Mller, Wolfgang G. (2001). Iconicity and rhetoric: A note on the iconic force of rhetorical figures in Shakespeare. In The Motivated Sign: Iconicity in Language and Literature 2, Olga Fischer and Max Nnny (eds.), 305322. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Nnny, Max (2001). Iconic function of long and short lines. In The Motivated Sign: Iconicity in Language and Literature 2, Olga Fischer and Max Nnny (eds.), 157188. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Nnny, Max and Olga Fischer (eds.) (1999). Form Miming Meaning: Iconicity in Language and Literature. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Nth, Winfried (2001). Semiotic foundations of iconicity in language and literature. In The Motivated Sign: Iconicity in Language and Literature 2, Olga Fischer and Max Nnny (eds.), 1728. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Nowakowska-Kempna, I. (1995). Konceptualizacja uczuae w jezyku polskim. Warszawa: Wyzsza Szkola Pedagogiczna. Ortega y Gasset, Jose (1987). Psychological Investigations, Jorge Garcia-Gomez (trans.). New York: Norton. Peirce, Charles Sanders (19311958). Collected Papers, 8 vols. Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss, and Arthur W. Burks (eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Rips, Lance J., Edward J. Shoben, and E. E. Smith (1973). Semantic distance and the verification of semantic relations. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 12: 120. Rudy, John G. (1996). Wordsworth and the Zen Mind: The Poetry of Self-Emptying. Albany: State University of New York Press. Sapir, Edward (1958). Grading: a study in semantics. In Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture and Personality, David G. Mandelbaum (ed.), 122149. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Tabakowska, Elzbieta (1999). Linguistic expression of perceptual relationships: Iconicity as a principle of text organization. In Form Miming Meaning: Iconicity in Language and Literature, Max Nnny and Olga Fischer (eds.), 409422. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Taborsky, Edwina (2001). What is a sign? Journal of Literary Semantics 30 (2): 8394. Thibault, Paul J. (1998). Metalanguage. In Encyclopedia of Semiotics, Paul Bouissac (editor-in-chief), 408411. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Toolan, Michael (1996). Total Speech: An Integrational linguistic Approach to Language. Durham: Duke University Press. Tseng, Ming-yu (1997). Symbolic discourse: Mystical writing as anti-language. Language and Literature 6 (3): 181195. (2002a). On the interplay between speech and writing: Where Wordsworth and Zen discourse meet. Journal of Literary Semantics 31 (2): 171198. (2002b). Expressing the ineffable: Toward a poetics of mystical writing. Social Semiotics 12 (1): 6382. Turner, Mark and Giles Fauconnier (1995). Conceptual integration and formal expression. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 10 (3): 183204. Wimsatt, W. K., Jr. (1954). The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press. Wolfson, Susan J. (1986). The Questioning Presence: Wordsworth, Keats, and the Interrogative Mode in Romantic Poetry. Ithaca: Cornell University press.

Iconicity as power: Wordsworth and Zen discourse

23

Wordsworth, William (19401949). The Poetical Works of William Wordsworth, 5 vols., Ernest de Selincour and Helen Darbishire (eds.). Oxford: Clarendon. (1974). The Prose Works of William Wordsworth, 3 vols., W. J. B. Owen and Jane Worthington Smyser (eds.). Oxford: Clarendon. (1979). The Prelude 1799, 1805, 1850, Jonathan Wordsworth, M. H. Abrams, and Stephen Gill (eds.). New York: W. W. Norton.