1887

Fictive questions in the Zhuangzi

A cognitive rhetorical study

image of Fictive questions in the <i>Zhuangzi</i>

Rhetoric is intimately related to interaction and cognition. This book explores the cognitive underpinnings of rhetoric by presenting a case study of the rhetorical use of interactional structures, namely expository questions and rhetorical questions, in the classical Chinese tradition. Such questions are generally meant to evoke silent answers in the addressee’s mind, thereby involving a fictive type of interaction. The book analyzes fictive questions as intersubjective mixed viewpoint constructions, involving a viewpoint blend of the perspectives of the writer, the assumed prospective readers, and possibly also that of the discourse characters. The analysis further shows that in addition to attention, other late developing human capacities such as mental simulation and perspective taking also have a pivotal role to play in rhetoric, on the basis of which a simulation-based rhetorical model of persuasion is proposed to account for meaning construction in rhetorical practices. The book will influence our understanding of rhetorical practices outside the Western tradition but within the framework of cognitive semantics.

References

  1. Abrantes, A. M.
    (2009, May 24) Fictive interaction as an instance of theatricality in cognition. 10.2139/ssrn.1409396
    https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1409396 [Google Scholar]
  2. Adams, J. W.
    (2006) The performative nature and function of Isaiah40–55. New York: T & T Clark International.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. (2020) The performative dimensions of rhetorical questions in the Hebrew Bible: Do you not know? Do you not hear?. New York: T & T Clark International. 10.5040/9780567661975
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567661975 [Google Scholar]
  4. Adolphs, R.
    (2006) How do we know the minds of others? Domain-specificity, simulation, and enactive social cognition. Brain Research, 1079(1), 25–35. 10.1016/j.brainres.2005.12.127
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2005.12.127 [Google Scholar]
  5. Aikhenvald, A. Y.
    (2016) Sentence types. In J. Nuyts , & J. van der Auwera (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of modality and mood (pp.141–165). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Ainsworth-Vaughn, N.
    (1994) Is that a rhetorical question? Ambiguity and power in medical discourse. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 4(2), 194–214. 10.1525/jlin.1994.4.2.194
    https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1994.4.2.194 [Google Scholar]
  7. (1998) Claiming power in doctor-patient talk. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Alessio, G. C.
    (2006) The Rhetorical Juvenilia of Cicero and the artes dictaminis. In V. Cox , & J. Ward (Eds.), The rhetoric of Cicero in its medieval and early renaissance commentary tradition (pp.335–364). Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789047404644_013
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047404644_013 [Google Scholar]
  9. Allinson, R. E.
    (1989) Chuang-Tzu for spiritual transformation: An analysis of the inner chapters. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Alsadi, W. , & Howard, M.
    (2021) The multimodal rhetoric of humour in Saudi media cartoons. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781501509902
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501509902 [Google Scholar]
  11. Anderson, R. D.
    (2000) Glossary of Greek rhetorical terms connected to methods of argumentation, figures and tropes from Anaximenes to Quintilian. Leuven: Peeters Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Andrews, R.
    (2013) A theory of contemporary rhetoric. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203129029
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203129029 [Google Scholar]
  13. Andueza, Patricia L.
    (2011) Rhetorical exclamatives in Spanish. Doctoral dissertation. Columbus: The Ohio State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Andueza, Patricia L. & Gutiérrez-Rexach J.
    (2010) Negation and the interpretation of Spanish rhetorical exclamatives. In C. Borgonovo , M. Español-Echevarría , & P. Prévost (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 12th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp.17–25). Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Angier, T. , & Raphals, L.
    (2021) Skill in ancient ethics: The legacy of China, Greece and Rome. London/New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Antović, M.
    (2018a) Schemas, grounds, meaning: On the emergence of musical concepts through conceptual blending. Musicae Scientiae, 22(1), 57–71. 10.1177/1029864917711218
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1029864917711218 [Google Scholar]
  17. Antović, M.
    (2018b) Waging war against oneself: A conceptual blend at the heart of Christian ascetic practice. In P. Chilton , & M. Kopytowska (Eds.), Religion, language, and the human mind (pp.386–406). New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. (2018c) Persuasion in musical multimedia: A conceptual blending theory approach. In J. Pelclová , & W. Lu (Eds.), Persuasion in public discourse (pp.303–327). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.79.14ant
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.79.14ant [Google Scholar]
  19. Anzilotti, G. I.
    (1982) The rhetorical question as an indirect speech device in English and Italian. Canadian Modern Language Review, 38(2), 290–302. 10.3138/cmlr.38.2.290
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.38.2.290 [Google Scholar]
  20. Archer, D.
    (2005) Questions and answers in the English courtroom (1640–1760): A sociopragmatic analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.135
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.135 [Google Scholar]
  21. Aristotle
    Aristotle (2007) On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse ( G. A. Kennedy , Trans.) (2nd edition). New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Athanasiadou, A.
    (1991) The discourse function of questions. Pragmatics, 1(1), 107–122.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Badarneh, M. A.
    (2003) The rhetorical question as a discursive and stylistic device in the Quran. Doctoral dissertation. Phoenix: Arizona State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. (2009) Exploring the use of rhetorical questions in editorial discourse: A case study of Arabic editorials. Text & Talk, 29(6), 639–659. 10.1515/TEXT.2009.033
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2009.033 [Google Scholar]
  25. (2016) Proverbial rhetorical questions in colloquial Jordanian Arabic. Folia Linguistica, 50(1), 207–242. 10.1515/flin‑2016‑0007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2016-0007 [Google Scholar]
  26. Bakhtin, M. M.
    (1975/1981) The dialogic imagination ( M. Holquist Ed. , C. Emerson , & M. Holquist Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. (1979/1986) Speech genres and other late essays ( C. Emerson , & M. Holquist Eds. , V. W. McGee Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Barsalou, L. W.
    (2008) Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645. 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639 [Google Scholar]
  29. Bartels, C.
    (2014) The intonation of English statements and questions: A compositional interpretation. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315053332
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315053332 [Google Scholar]
  30. Baxter, W. H. , & Sagart, L.
    (2014) Old Chinese: A new reconstruction. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199945375.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199945375.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  31. Bechmann, S.
    (2010) Rhetorische Fragen [Rhetorical questions]. Master thesis. Düsseldorf: University of Düsseldorf.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Beekman, J. , & Callow, J.
    (1974) Translating the word of God: With scripture and topical indexes. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Bell, M.
    (1975) Questioning. The Philosophical Quarterly, 25(100), 193–212. 10.2307/2217753
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2217753 [Google Scholar]
  34. Bergen, B.
    (2005) Mental simulation in literal and figurative language understanding. In S. Coulson , & B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Eds.), The literal and nonliteral in language and thought (pp.255–280). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. (2012) Louder than words: The new science of how the mind makes meaning. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Bergen, B. , & Chang, N.
    (2005) Embodied construction grammar in simulation-based language understanding. In J.-O. Östman , &  M. Fried (Eds.), Construction grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions (pp.149–190). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.3.08ber
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.3.08ber [Google Scholar]
  37. Bergen, B. , & Wheeler, K.
    (2010) Grammatical aspect and mental simulation. Brain and Language, 112(3), 150–158. 10.1016/j.bandl.2009.07.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2009.07.002 [Google Scholar]
  38. Berkson, M.
    (1996) Language: The guest of reality – Zhuangzi and Derrida on language, reality, and skillfulness. In P. Kjellberg , & P. J. Ivanhoe (Eds.), Essays on skepticism, relativism, and ethics in the Zhuangzi (pp.97–126). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Berkson, M.
    (2011) Death in the Zhuangzi: Mind, nature, and the art of forgetting. In A. Olberding , & P. J. Ivanhoe (Eds.), Mortality in traditional Chinese thought (pp.191–224). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Biber, D. , Johansson, S. , Leech, G. , Conrad, S. , & Finegan, E.
    (1999) Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Biezma, M. , & Rawlins, K.
    (2017) Rhetorical questions: Severing asking from questioning. In D. Burgdorf , J. Collard , S. Maspong , & B. Stefánsdóttir (Eds.), Proceedings of semantics and linguistic theory27 (pp. 302-322). Washington, DC: LSA Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Bisang, W.
    (2008) Underspecification and the noun/verb distinction: Late archaic Chinese and Khmer. In A. Steube (Ed.), The discourse potential of underspecified structures (pp.55–81). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. (2013) Word-class systems between flexibility and rigidity: An integrative approach. In J. Rijkhoff , & E. van Lier (Eds.). Flexible word classes: Typological studies of underspecified parts of speech (pp.275–302). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199668441.003.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199668441.003.0010 [Google Scholar]
  44. Bitzer, L. F.
    (1969) The rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1(1), 1–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Bizzell, P. , Herzberg, B. , & Reames, R.
    (Eds.) (2020) The rhetorical tradition: Readings from classical times to the present (3rd edition). Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Black, E.
    (1992) Rhetorical questions: Studies of public discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Blair, D.
    (1806) The class book: Or, three hundred and sixty-five reading lessons, adapted to the use of schools; for every day in the year. selected, arranged, and compiled, from the best authors. London: R. Taylor, & Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Blakemore, D.
    (1992) Understanding utterances: An introduction to pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Blondell, R.
    (2002) The play of character in Plato’s dialogues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511482472
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511482472 [Google Scholar]
  50. Bodde, D.
    (1991) Punctuation: Its use in China and elsewhere, Rocznik Orientalistyczny/Yearbook of Oriental Studies, 47(2), 15–23.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Bonifazi, A.
    (2018) Embedded focalization and free indirect speech in Homer as viewpoint blending. In J. Ready & C. Tsagalis (Eds.), Homer in performance: Rhapsodes, narrators, and characters (pp.230–254). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 10.7560/316030‑011
    https://doi.org/10.7560/316030-011 [Google Scholar]
  52. (2022) Dialogic syntax in ancient Greek conversation. In R. F. Person Jr. , R. Wooffitt , & J. P. Rae (Eds.), Bridging the gap between conversation analysis and poetics: Studies in talk-in-interaction and literature twenty-five years after Jefferson (pp.140–179). New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Bonnet, M. , Decety, J. , Jeannerod, M. , & Requin J.
    (1997) Mental simulation of an action modulates the excitability of spinal reflex pathways in man. Cognitive Brain Research, 5(3), 221–228. 10.1016/S0926‑6410(96)00072‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(96)00072-9 [Google Scholar]
  54. Booth, M.
    (2017) Shakespeare and conceptual blending: Cognition, creativity, criticism. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑62187‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62187-6 [Google Scholar]
  55. Borge, S.
    (2013) Questions. In M. Sbisà , & K. Turner (Eds.), Pragmatics of speech actions (pp.411–443). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214383.411
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214383.411 [Google Scholar]
  56. Bowery, A.-M.
    (2007) Know thyself: Socrates as storyteller. In G. A. Scott (Ed.), Philosophy in dialogue: Plato’s many devices (pp.82–110). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. 10.2307/j.ctv47wcmn.8
    https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv47wcmn.8 [Google Scholar]
  57. Brandt, L.
    (2008) A semiotic approach to fictive interaction as a representational strategy in communicative meaning construction. In T. Oakley , & A. Hougaard (Eds.), Mental spaces in discourse and interaction (pp.109–148). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.170.05bra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.170.05bra [Google Scholar]
  58. Brandt, L.
    (2013) The communicative mind: A linguistic exploration of conceptual integration and meaning construction. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Braun, B. , Dehé, N. , Neitsch, J. , Wochner, D. , & Zahner, K.
    (2019) The prosody of rhetorical and information-seeking questions in German. Language and Speech, 62(4), 779–807. 10.1177/0023830918816351
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830918816351 [Google Scholar]
  60. Brier, N. M.
    (2015) Enhancing self-control in adolescents: Treatment strategies derived from psychological science. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Brown, J.
    (1993) A palaeographer’s view: The selected writings of Julian Brown ( J. Bately , M. P. Brown , & J. Roberts Eds.). London: Harvey Miller Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Brown, P. , & Levinson, S. C.
    (1978/1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  63. Brueggemann, W. A.
    (1973) Jeremiah’s use of rhetorical questions. Journal of Biblical Literature, 92(3), 358–374. 10.2307/3263577
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3263577 [Google Scholar]
  64. Brunyé, T. T. , Ditman, T. , Mahoney, C. R. , Augustyn, J. S. , & Taylor, H. A.
    (2009) When you and I share perspectives: Pronouns modulate perspective taking during narrative comprehension. Psychological Science, 20(1), 27–32. 10.1111/j.1467‑9280.2008.02249.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02249.x [Google Scholar]
  65. Brunyé, T. T. , Ditman, T. , Mahoney, C. R. , Walters, E. K. , & Taylor, H. A.
    (2010) You heard it here first: Readers mentally simulate described sounds. Acta Psychologica, 135(2), 209–215. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.06.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.06.008 [Google Scholar]
  66. Burke, K.
    (1966) Definition of man. In K. Burke (Ed.), Language as symbolic action: Essays on life, literature, and method (pp. 3–24). Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. (1969) A rhetoric of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Bussmann, H.
    (2006) Routledge dictionary of language and linguistics ( G. P. Trauth , & K. Kazzazi Trans. & Eds.). New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203980057
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203980057 [Google Scholar]
  69. Campbell, K. K. , Huxman, S. S. , & Burkholder, T. A.
    (2014) The rhetorical act: Thinking, speaking and writing critically (5th edition). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Cao, Ch.
    (1982/2007)  Zhuangzi qianzhu [The annotated book of the Zhuangzi]. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Cao, X.
    (1998) Lun daojia shenmei guannian zhong de xiucilun neihan [On the rhetorical implication of the Daoist aesthetic view]. Rhetoric Learning, 1, 10–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Carlson, S. M. , Mandell, D. J. , & Williams, L.
    (2004) Executive function and theory of mind: Stability and prediction from ages 2 to 3. Developmental psychology, 40(6), 1105-1122.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Carroll, J.
    (2020) Imagination, the brain’s default mode network, and imaginative verbal artifacts. In J. Carroll , M. Clasen , & E. Jonsson (Eds.), Evolutionary perspectives on imaginative culture (pp.31–52). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑46190‑4_2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46190-4_2 [Google Scholar]
  74. Carroll, L.
    (1865/1998) Alice’s adventures in Wonderland and through the looking glass (The centenary edition)( H. Houghton Ed.). London: Penguin Books Limited.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Cerović, M.
    (2016) When suspects ask questions: Rhetorical questions as a challenging device. Journal of Pragmatics, 105, 18–38. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.09.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.09.010 [Google Scholar]
  76. Chai, D.
    (2016) On pillowing one’s skull: Zhuangzi and Heidegger on death, Frontiers of Philosophy in China, 11(3), 483–500.
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Chang, J.
    (2012a) Cong xinli kongjian lilun jiedu gudai duochong laiyuan danyi mubiao toushe yupian zhong de yinyu [Mental space theory and the metaphorical interpretations in classical Chinese discourse with multiple source], Journal of Chinese Language Learning, 9(1), 2–23.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Chang, J.
    (2012b) Xinli kongjian lilun yu zhuangzi yong de yinyu [Mental space theory and the relation of metaphors to ‘usefulness’ in the Zhuangzi]. Language and Linguistics, 13(5), 999–1027.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Chang, S.
    (1982) Non-standard questions: Polarity and contrast. Language Research, 18(1), 157–170.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Chen, G.
    (1983/2007) Zhuangzi jinshi jinyi zuixin xiuding ban[Modern commentaries and translations of Zhuangzi (Newly revised edition)]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Chen, G. L. , & Wang, J.
    (1998) Zhongguo xiucixue tongshi: Xianqin lianghan weijin nanbei chao juan [A complete history of Chinese rhetoric: Pre-Qin, Two Han, Wei, Jin, Southern, and Northern dynasties]. Changchun: Jilin Education Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Chen, H.
    (2003) Cong dao de guannian xingtai kan zhuangzi de xiuci lixiang [On Zhuangzi’s rhetorical ideal from his conceptulization of Dao]. Journal of Hebei Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 26(1), 46–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Chen, M.
    (1992) Hanyu jiaxing yiwenju yanjiu [A study on no-genuine interrogative sentences in Mandarin]. Journal of Nanjing Normal University (Social Science Edition), 4, 78–83.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Chen, P. Q.
    (1983) Zhongguo gudai yuyanshi [A History of Fables in Ancient China]. Changsha: Hunan Education Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Chen, P.
    (2001) Zhuangzi de yuyanguan ji dui xiandai xiuci d qishi [Zhuangzi’s view of language and its implication for modern rhetoric]. Journal of Language and Literature Studies, 5, 61–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Chen, Q.
    (2009) Yujing cha yu zhuangzi de xiuci renzhi [Context gap and the cognition of Zhuangzi’s rhetoric]. Journal of Yangtze University (Social Sciences Edition), 32(4), 151–152.
    [Google Scholar]
  87. (2010a) Shuo buke shuo: Zhuangzi de huayu yanshuo celüe [Speak about the unspeakable: The discourse strategy of Zhuangzi]. Journal of Putian University (Social Sciences Edition), 32(4), 151–152.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. (2010b)  Zhuangzi xiuci yanjiu [A study on the rhetoric in the Zhuangzi]. Changchun: Jilin University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Chen, W.
    (1932/2008) Xiucixue fafan [Introduction to rhetoric]. Shanghai: Fudan University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Chen, X. , Feng, M. , & Xu, R.
    (2013) Xianqin wenxian xinxi chuli [Pre-Qin document information processing]. Beijing: World Publishing Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Chou, F.
    (1961) Zhongguo gudai yufa zaoju bian shang [A historical grammar of ancient Chinese Part 1: Syntax]. Taipei: Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Chou, Y.
    (2011) Zhuangzi qiwulun jiegou yanjiu: Lun qi wenju xingshi yinyu ji yuyan [Research into the structure of Zhuangzi “Qiwulu”: Question form, metaphor and allegory]. Master thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan University.
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Cicero, M. T.
    (1954) Cicero Ad C. Herennium de ratione dicendi:(Rhetorica ad Herennium) ( H. Caplan , Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Cienki, A.
    (2008) Looking at analyses of mental spaces and blending/Looking at and experiencing discourse in interaction. In T. Oakley , & A. Hougaard (Eds.), Mental spaces in discourse and interaction (pp.235–245). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.170.09cie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.170.09cie [Google Scholar]
  95. Cienki, A.
    (2015) Spoken language usage event. Language and Cognition, 7(4), 499–514. 10.1017/langcog.2015.20
    https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2015.20 [Google Scholar]
  96. Cienki, A. , & Giansante, G.
    (2014) Conversational framing in televised political discourse: A comparison from the 2008 elections in the United States and Italy. Journal of Language and Politics, 13(2), 255–288. 10.1075/jlp.13.2.04cie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.13.2.04cie [Google Scholar]
  97. Claridge, C.
    (2005) Questions in early modern English pamphlets. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 6(1), 133–168. 10.1075/jhp.6.1.07cla
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.6.1.07cla [Google Scholar]
  98. Clark, H. H.
    (1992) Arenas of language use. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  99. (1996) Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620539
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620539 [Google Scholar]
  100. Clark, H. H. , & Gerrig, R. J.
    (1990) Quotations as demonstrations. Language, 66, 764-805.
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Classe, O.
    (2000) Encyclopedia of literary translation into English: A-L. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers. 10.4324/9780203825501
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203825501 [Google Scholar]
  102. Cole, S. N. , Smith, D. M. , Ragan, K. , Suurmond, R. , & Armitage, C. J.
    (2021) Synthesizing the effects of mental simulation on behavior change: Systematic review and multilevel meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28(5), 1514–1537. 10.3758/s13423‑021‑01880‑6
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-01880-6 [Google Scholar]
  103. Colston, H. L.
    (2021) Cognitive linguistics and figurative language. In W. Xu , & J. R. Taylor (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp.408–420). New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781351034708‑28
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351034708-28 [Google Scholar]
  104. Combs, S. C.
    (2004) The useless-/usefulness of argumentation: The Dao of disputation. Argumentation and Advocacy, 41(2), 58–71. 10.1080/00028533.2004.11821619
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2004.11821619 [Google Scholar]
  105. (2005) The Dao of rhetoric. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Comrie, B.
    (1984) Russian. In W. Chisholm , L. T. Milic , & J. A. C. Greppin (Eds.), Interrogativity: A colloquium on the grammar, typology and pragmatics of questions in seven diverse languages, Cleveland, Ohio, October 5th 1981–May 3rd 1982 (pp.7–46). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.4.03com
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.4.03com [Google Scholar]
  107. Connolly, T.
    (2011) Perspectivism as a way of knowing in the Zhuangzi . Dao, 10(4), 487–505. 10.1007/s11712‑011‑9246‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11712-011-9246-x [Google Scholar]
  108. Conrad, R.
    (1982) Rhetorische Fragen [Rhetorical questions]. Zeitschrift für Slawistik, 27(3), 420–428. 10.1524/slaw.1982.27.16.420
    https://doi.org/10.1524/slaw.1982.27.16.420 [Google Scholar]
  109. Cooren, F.
    (2010) Action and agency in dialogue: Passion, incarnation and ventriloquism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ds.6
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.6 [Google Scholar]
  110. (2012) Communication theory at the center: Ventriloquism and the communicative constitution of reality. Journal of Communication, 62(1), 1–20. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2011.01622.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01622.x [Google Scholar]
  111. Cope, E. M.
    (1867) An introduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric. London: Macmillan & Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Coulson, S.
    (2001) Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  113. (2005) Sarcasm and the space structuring model. In S. Coulson , & B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Eds.), The literal and nonliteral in language and thought (pp.129–144). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Coulson, S. , & Oakley, T.
    (2000) Blending basics. Cognitive Linguistics, 11(3–4), 175–196. 10.1515/cogl.2001.014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2001.014 [Google Scholar]
  115. (2006) Purple persuasion: Deliberative rhetoric and conceptual blending. In J. Luchjenbroers (Ed.), Cognitive linguistics investigations: Across languages, fields and philosophical boundaries (pp.47–65). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.15.06cou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.15.06cou [Google Scholar]
  116. Coulson, S. , & Pascual, E.
    (2006) For the sake of argument: Mourning the unborn and reviving the dead through conceptual blending. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 4(1), 153–181. 10.1075/arcl.4.07cou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.4.07cou [Google Scholar]
  117. Coutinho, S.
    (2015) Conceptual analyses of theZhuangzi. In X. Liu (Ed.), Dao companion to Daoist philosophy (pp.159–191). Dordrecht: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Creel, H. G.
    (1982) What is Taoism?: And other studies in Chinese cultural history. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Curme, G. O.
    (1931) Syntax. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Cutrer, M.
    (1994) Time and tense in narratives and everyday language. Doctoral dissertation. San Diego, CA: University of California, San Diego.
    [Google Scholar]
  121. D’Argembeau, A. , Ruby, P. , Collette, F.
    , (2007) Distinct regions of the medial prefrontal cortex are associated with self-referential processing and perspective taking. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(6), 935–944. 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.6.935
    https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2007.19.6.935 [Google Scholar]
  122. Dai, W.
    (1986) Daojia xiuci sixiang jiqi lishi diwei [The Daoist Rhetorical Thought and its historical]. Seeking Truth, 2, 75–77+57.
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Dancygier, B.
    (2006) What can blending do for you?Language & Literature, 15(1), 5–15. 10.1177/0963947006060549
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947006060549 [Google Scholar]
  124. (2008) Personal pronouns, blending, and narrative viewpoint. In A. Tyler , Y. Kim , & ‎M. Takada (Eds.), Language in the context of use: Discourse and cognitive approaches to language (pp.167–182). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  125. (2012) The language of stories: A cognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  126. Dancygier, B. , & Sweetser, E.
    (2012) Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139084727
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139084727 [Google Scholar]
  127. Dancygier, B. , & Vandelanotte, L.
    (Eds.) (2017) Special issue: Viewpoint phenomena in multimodal communication. Cognitive Linguistics, 28(3), 371–598. 10.1515/cog‑2017‑0075
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2017-0075 [Google Scholar]
  128. Dancygier, B. , Lu, W. , & Verhagen, A.
    (2016) Viewpoint and the fabric of meaning. Form and use of viewpoint tools across languages and modalities. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110365467
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110365467 [Google Scholar]
  129. Davis, D.
    (2008) Identification: Burke and Freud on who you are. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 38(2), 123–147. 10.1080/02773940701779785
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02773940701779785 [Google Scholar]
  130. de Regt, L. J.
    (1994) Functions and implications of rhetorical questions in the Book of Job. In R. D. Bergen (Ed.), Biblical Hebrew and discourse linguistics (pp.361–373). Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  131. de Regt, L. J.
    (1996) Discourse implications of rhetorical questions in Job, Deuteronomy and the Minor Prophets. In L. J. de Regt , J. de Waard , & J. P. Fokkelman (Eds.), Literary structure and rhetorical strategies in the Hebrew Bible (pp. 51-78). Assen: Van Gorcum.
    [Google Scholar]
  132. Decety, J.
    (1996) Do imagined and executed actions share the same neural substrate?Cognitive Brain Research, 3(2), 87–93. 10.1016/0926‑6410(95)00033‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0926-6410(95)00033-X [Google Scholar]
  133. (2005) Perspective taking as the royal avenue to empathy. In B. F. Malle , &  S. D. Hodges (Eds.), Other minds: How humans bridge the divide between self and others (pp.143–157). New York/London: The Guilford Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  134. Decety, J. , & Grèzes, J.
    (1999) Neural mechanisms subserving the perception of human actions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(5), 172–178. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(99)01312‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01312-1 [Google Scholar]
  135. Decety, J. , & Ingvar, D. H.
    (1990) Brain structures participating in mental simulation of motor behavior: A neuropsychological interpretation. Acta Psychologica, 73(1), 13–34. 10.1016/0001‑6918(90)90056‑L
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(90)90056-L [Google Scholar]
  136. Dehé, N. , & Braun, B.
    (2020a) The intonation of information-seeking and rhetorical questions in Icelandic. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 32(1), 1–42. 10.1017/S1470542719000114
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1470542719000114 [Google Scholar]
  137. Dehé, N. , & Braun, B.
    (2020b) The prosody of rhetorical questions in English. English Language & Linguistics, 24(4), 607–635. 10.1017/S1360674319000157
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674319000157 [Google Scholar]
  138. Demetrius
    Demetrius (1995) On style ( Doreen C. Innes Ed. & Trans., based on William Rhys Roberts). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  139. Deng, Ch
    . (2010) Zhuangzi qiwulun yiwenju xiuci fenxi [Rhetorical analysis of interrogatives in Zhuangzi’s chapter Qiwulun], Journal of Chuzhou University, 12(4), 1–3.
    [Google Scholar]
  140. Ditman, T. , Brunyé, T. T. , Mahoney, C. R. , & Taylor, H. A.
    (2010) Simulating an enactment effect: Pronouns guide action simulation during narrative comprehension. Cognition, 115(1), 172–178. 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.10.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.10.014 [Google Scholar]
  141. Dixon, P.
    (1971). Rhetoric. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  142. Driver, J. L.
    (1988) Vain questions. In  M. Meyer (Ed.), Questions and questioning (pp.243–253). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  143. Du Bois, J. W.
    (2014) Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 359–410. 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0024
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0024 [Google Scholar]
  144. Du Bois, J. W. , & Giora, R
    (2014) From cognitive-functional linguistics to dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 351–357. 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0023
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0023 [Google Scholar]
  145. Egg, M.
    (2007) Meaning and use of rhetorical questions. In M. Aloni , P. Dekker , & F. Roelofsen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th Amsterdam Colloquium (pp.73–78). Amsterdam: ILLC/Department of Philosophy, University of Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  146. Eno, R.
    (1996) Cook Ding’s Dao and the limits of philosophy. In P. Kjellberg , & P. J. Ivanhoe (Eds.), Essays on skepticism, relativism, and ethics in the Zhuangzi (pp.127–151). Albany: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  147. Enos, T.
    (Ed.) (2013) Encyclopedia of rhetoric and composition: Communication from ancient times to the information age. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315058009
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315058009 [Google Scholar]
  148. Escalas, J. E.
    (2004) Imagine yourself in the product: Mental simulation, narrative transportation, and persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 33(2), 37–48. 10.1080/00913367.2004.10639163
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2004.10639163 [Google Scholar]
  149. Escandell-Vidal, V.
    (1998) Intonation and procedural encoding: The case of Spanish interrogatives. In V. Rouchota , & A. H. Jucker (Eds.), Current issues in relevance theory (pp.169–204). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.58.09esc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.58.09esc [Google Scholar]
  150. Estes, D.
    (2013) The questions of Jesus in John: Logic, rhetoric and persuasive discourse. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004240292
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004240292 [Google Scholar]
  151. (2017) Questions and rhetoric in the Greek New Testament: An essential reference resource for exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
    [Google Scholar]
  152. Evans, V. , & Green, M.
    (2006) Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  153. Fahnestock, J.
    (2005) Rhetoric in the age of cognitive science. In R. Graff , A. E. Walzer , & J. Atwill (Eds.), The viability of the rhetorical tradition (pp.159–179). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  154. (2009) Quid pro nobis. Rhetorical stylistics for argument analysis. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Examining argumentation in context. fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering (131–152). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  155. Fairclough, N.
    (1994) Conversationalization of public discourse and the authority of the consumer. In N. Abercrombie , R. Keat , & N. Whiteley (Eds.), The authority of the consumer (253–268). London/New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  156. Fantin, J. D.
    (2010) The Greek imperative mood in the New Testament: A cognitive and communicative approach. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑1‑4539‑0049‑9
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-1-4539-0049-9 [Google Scholar]
  157. Farnsworth, W.
    (2011) Farnsworth’s classical English rhetoric. Boston, MA: David R. Godine Publisher.
    [Google Scholar]
  158. Fauconnier, G.
    (1985/1994) Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  159. (1997) Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139174220
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174220 [Google Scholar]
  160. (1999) Methods and generalizations. In T. Janssen , & G. Redeker (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Foundations, scope, and methodology (pp. 95–129). The Hague: Mouton De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  161. (2007) Mental spaces. In D. Geeraerts , & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp.351–376). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  162. (2010) Ten lectures on cognitive construction of meaning. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  163. Fauconnier, G. , & Turner, M.
    (1994) Conceptual projection and middle spaces. UCSD cognitive science technical report 9401. 10.2139/ssrn.1290862
    https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1290862 [Google Scholar]
  164. (1996) Blending as a central process of grammar. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse, and language (pp.113–130). Stanford: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  165. (1998) Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 22(2), 133–187. 10.1207/s15516709cog2202_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2202_1 [Google Scholar]
  166. (2002) The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  167. Faul, L. , Jacques, P. L. S. , DeRosa, J. T. , Parikh, N. , & De Brigard, F.
    (2020) Differential contribution of anterior and posterior midline regions during mental simulation of counterfactual and perspective shifts in autobiographical memories. Neuroimage, 215, 116843. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116843
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116843 [Google Scholar]
  168. Fillmore, C.
    (1982) Frame semantics. InThe Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp.111–137). Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  169. Fonseca, P. , Pascual E. , & Oakley, T.
    2020. “Hi, Mr. President!”: Fictive interaction blends as a unifying rhetorical strategy in satire. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 18(1), 183–216. 10.1075/rcl.00056.fon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00056.fon [Google Scholar]
  170. Forsyth, M.
    (2013) The elements of eloquence: How to turn the perfect English phrase. London: Icon Books Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  171. Frank, J.
    (1990) You call that a rhetorical question?: Forms and functions of rhetorical questions in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(5), 723–738. 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90003‑V
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90003-V [Google Scholar]
  172. Frank, S. L. , & Vigliocco, G.
    (2011) Sentence comprehension as mental simulation: An information-theoretic perspective. Information, 2(4), 672–696. 10.3390/info2040672
    https://doi.org/10.3390/info2040672 [Google Scholar]
  173. Fraser, B.
    (1998) Contrastive discourse markers in English. In A. H. Jucker , & Y. Ziv (Eds.), Discourse markers: Descriptions and theory (pp.301–326). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.57.15fra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.57.15fra [Google Scholar]
  174. Freeborn, D. , French, P. , & Langford, D.
    (1993) Variety in written English: An introduction to the study of language (2nd edition). London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  175. Fu, H.
    (2007) Shiwen xuda yu zhiwen buda: Shewen de liangzhong teshu leixing [Questions with non-genuine answers and questions with no answers: Two special types of rhetorical questions]. Journal of Zhejiang Shuren University, 7(6), 121–124.
    [Google Scholar]
  176. Fung, Y.
    (1948/1997) A short history of Chinese philosophy ( D. Bodde Ed.). New York: The Free Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  177. Fung, Y.
    (Trans.) (1964) Chuang-Tsŭ: A new selected translation with an exposition of the philosophy of Kuo Hsiang (2nd edition). New York: Paragon Book Reprint Corp.
    [Google Scholar]
  178. Galambos, I.
    (2014) Punctuation marks in medieval Chinese manuscripts. In J. Quenzer , D. Bondarev , & J.-U. Sobisch (Eds.), Manuscript cultures: Mapping the field (pp.341–357). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110225631.341
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110225631.341 [Google Scholar]
  179. Ge, Z.
    (2014) An intellectual history of China, volume one: Knowledge, thought, and belief before the seventh century CE ( M. S. Duke & J. Chiu-Duke , Trans.). Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789047425076
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047425076 [Google Scholar]
  180. Geeraerts, D.
    (2021) Second-order empathy, pragmatic ambiguity, and irony. In A. Soares da Silva (Ed.), Figurative language – Intersubjectivity and usage (pp.19–40). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ftl.11.01gee
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.11.01gee [Google Scholar]
  181. Gerrig, R. J.
    (1993) Experiencing narrative worlds: On the psychological activities of reading. New Haven: Yale University Press. 10.12987/9780300159240
    https://doi.org/10.12987/9780300159240 [Google Scholar]
  182. Gibbons, M.
    (2018) A neurorhetoric of incongruity. Poroi: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Rhetorical Analysis & Invention, 13(2). 10.13008/2151‑2957.1248
    https://doi.org/10.13008/2151-2957.1248 [Google Scholar]
  183. Gibbs , R. W. Jr. , & Matlock T.
    (2008) Metaphor, imagination, and simulation: Psycholinguistic evidence. In R. W. Gibbs Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp.161–176). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.011
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.011 [Google Scholar]
  184. Gibbs, R. W., Jr. , & Okonski, L.
    (2022) Allegory and bodily imagination. In V. Brljak (Ed.), Allegory studies: Contemporary perspectives (pp.213–234). New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003183341‑10
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003183341-10 [Google Scholar]
  185. Giles, H. A.
    (1889) Chuang Tzŭ: Mystic, moralist, and social reformer. London: Ernard Quaritch.
    [Google Scholar]
  186. Givón, T.
    (1983) Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3 [Google Scholar]
  187. Glenberg, A. M. , & Kaschak, M. P.
    (2002) Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(3), 558–565. 10.3758/BF03196313
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196313 [Google Scholar]
  188. Goffman, E.
    (1963) Behavior in public places. New York: The Free Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  189. Goldberg, A. E. , & Del Giudice, A.
    (2005) Subject-auxiliary inversion: A natural category. The Linguistic Review, (22), 411–428. 10.1515/tlir.2005.22.2‑4.411
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.2005.22.2-4.411 [Google Scholar]
  190. Goldman, A. I.
    (2006) Simulating minds: The philosophy, psychology, and neuroscience of mindreading. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/0195138929.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/0195138929.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  191. Gómez Ramírez, D. A. J.
    (2020) Artificial mathematical intelligence: Cognitive, (meta)mathematical, physical, and philosophical foundations. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑50273‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50273-7 [Google Scholar]
  192. Gomola, A.
    (2018) Conceptual blending in early Christian discourse: A cognitive linguistic analysis of pastoral metaphors in patristic literature. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110582970
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110582970 [Google Scholar]
  193. Gordejuela, A.
    (2021) Flashbacks in film: A cognitive and multimodal analysis. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003153573
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003153573 [Google Scholar]
  194. Gowans, C. W.
    (2021) Self-cultivation philosophies in ancient India, Greece, and China. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780190941024.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190941024.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  195. Grady, J.
    (2000) Cognitive mechanisms of conceptual integration. Cognitive Linguistics, 11(3–4), 335–345. 10.1515/cogl.2001.019
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2001.019 [Google Scholar]
  196. Graham, A. C.
    (1979/1990) How much of Chuang Tzu did Chuang Tzu write?In A. C. Graham (Ed.), Studies in Chinese philosophy and philosophical literature (pp.283–321). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  197. Graham, A. C.
    (1989) Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical argument in ancient China. La Salle, IL: Open Court Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  198. Graziani, R.
    (2021) Fiction and philosophy in the Zhuangzi: An introduction to early Chinese Taoist thought. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  199. Green, M. C.
    (2004) Transportation into narrative worlds: The role of prior knowledge and perceived realism. Discourse Processes, 38(2), 247–266. 10.1207/s15326950dp3802_5
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3802_5 [Google Scholar]
  200. Green, M. C. , & Brock, T. C.
    (2000) The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701–721. 10.1037/0022‑3514.79.5.701
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701 [Google Scholar]
  201. (2002) In the mind’s eye: Transportation-imagery model of narrative persuasion. In M. C. Green , J. J. Strange , & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp.315–341). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  202. Green, M. C. , & Donahue, J. K.
    (2009) Simulated worlds: Transportation into narratives. In K. D. Markman , W. M. P. Klein , & J. A. Suhr (Eds.), Handbook of imagination and mental simulation (pp.241–256). New York: Psychology Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  203. Grésillon, A.
    (1980) Zum linguistischen Status rhetorischer Fragen [On the linguistic status of rhetorical questions]. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik, 8(3), 273–289. 10.1515/zfgl.1980.8.3.273
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgl.1980.8.3.273 [Google Scholar]
  204. Grice, H. P.
    (1975) Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole , & H. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts (pp.41–58). New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  205. Grimm, J.
    (1890) Deutsche Grammatik von Jacob Grimm[German Grammar by Jacob Grimm] (Part 3). Gütersloh: Bertelsmann.
    [Google Scholar]
  206. Gruber, D.
    (2013) The neuroscience of rhetoric: Identification, mirror neurons, and making the many appear. In J. Jack (Ed.), Neurorhetorics (pp.37–53). New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  207. Gruber, D. , Jack, J. , Keranen, L. , McKenzie, J. M. , & Morris, M. B.
    (2011) Rhetoric and the neurosciences: Engagement and exploration. Poroi: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Rhetorical Analysis & Invention, 7(1). 10.13008/2151‑2957.1084
    https://doi.org/10.13008/2151-2957.1084 [Google Scholar]
  208. Günther, F.
    (2016) Constructions in cognitive contexts: Why individuals matter in linguistic relativity research. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110461343
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110461343 [Google Scholar]
  209. Guo, J.
    (1997) Fanwenju de yuyi yuyong tedian [The semantic and pragmatic characteristics of rhetorical questions]. Zhongguo Yuwen, 2, 111–121.
    [Google Scholar]
  210. Guo, Q.
    (1894/2013) Zhuangzi jishi [Collected interpretations of the Zhuangzi ] ( X. Y. Wang Collated). Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  211. Gutiérrez-Rexach, J.
    (1998) Rhetorical questions, relevance and scales. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, (11), 139–156. 10.14198/raei.1998.11.11
    https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.1998.11.11 [Google Scholar]
  212. Gwynne, R. W.
    (2014) Logic, rhetoric and legal reasoning in the Qur’an: God’s arguments. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203343081
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203343081 [Google Scholar]
  213. Hala, S. , Hug, S. , & Henderson, A.
    (2003) Executive function and false-belief understanding in preschool children: Two tasks are harder than one. Journal of Cognition and Development, 4(3), 275–298. 10.1207/S15327647JCD0403_03
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327647JCD0403_03 [Google Scholar]
  214. Halmari, H. , & Virtanen, T.
    (2005) Persuasion across genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.130
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.130 [Google Scholar]
  215. Han, C.
    (2002) Interpreting interrogatives as rhetorical questions. Lingua, 112(3), 201–229. 10.1016/S0024‑3841(01)00044‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(01)00044-4 [Google Scholar]
  216. Han, L.
    (2005) Hanyu xiuci jiqiao jiaocheng [A course on rhetorical devices in Chinese]. Beijing: Huawen Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  217. Hansen, C.
    (1992) A Daoist theory of Chinese thought: A philosophical interpretation. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  218. (2003) Guru or skeptic? Relativistic skepticism in the Zhuangzi . In S. Cook (Ed.), Hiding the world in the world: Uneven discourses on the Zhuangzi (pp.128–162). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  219. Hao, C.
    (2009) Zhuangzi neipian zhong xiuci wenju de yuanhuayu tezheng ji gongneng [The meta-discursive characteristics and functions of rhetorical questions in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 1, 70–77.
    [Google Scholar]
  220. Harbsmeier, C.
    (1998) Science and civilisation in China, Vol. 7, Part 1: Language and logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  221. (1999) Chinese rhetoric. T’oung Pao, 85, 114–126. 10.1163/1568532992630524
    https://doi.org/10.1163/1568532992630524 [Google Scholar]
  222. Harbus, A.
    (2012) Cognitive approaches to old English poetry. Cambridge: DS Brewer.
    [Google Scholar]
  223. Hartmann, C.
    (1986) Yü-yen. In W. H. Nienhauser, Jr. (Ed.), The Indiana companion to traditional Chinese literature, Vol. 1 (pp. 946–949). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  224. Hauk, O. , Johnsrude, I. , & Pulvermüller, F.
    (2004) Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41(2), 301–307. 10.1016/S0896‑6273(03)00838‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(03)00838-9 [Google Scholar]
  225. Haverkate, H.
    (1997) Indirectness in speech acts from a diachronic perspective: Some evolutionary aspects of rhetorical questions in Spanish dialogue. In J. Gvozdanović (Ed.), Language change and functional explanations. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 219–246. 10.1515/9783110813753.219
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110813753.219 [Google Scholar]
  226. Hawreliak, J.
    (2018) Multimodal semiotics and rhetoric in videogames. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315159492
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315159492 [Google Scholar]
  227. Hayes, E.
    (2008) The pragmatics of perception and cognition in MT Jeremiah 1: 1–6: 30: A cognitive linguistics approach. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110211221
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110211221 [Google Scholar]
  228. Heisey, D. R.
    (1998) Perspectives on classical Chinese theories of rhetoric. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Chinese Communication Society. Taipei. Retrieved April 30, 2015 fromccs.nccu.edu.tw/paperdetail.asp?HP_ID=961.
    [Google Scholar]
  229. Herman, D.
    (2002) Story logic: Problems and possibilities of narrative. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  230. Herman, V.
    (1999) Deictic projection and conceptual blending in epistolarity. Poetics Today, 20(3), 523–541.
    [Google Scholar]
  231. Herrick, J. A.
    (2021) History and theory of rhetoric: An introduction (7th edition). New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  232. Hogan, K. , & Speakman, J.
    (2006) Covert persuasion: Psychological tactics and tricks to win the game. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  233. Hogan, P. C.
    (2013) How authors’ minds make stories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139540629
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139540629 [Google Scholar]
  234. Howe, B.
    (2006) Because you bear this name: Conceptual metaphor and the moral meaning of 1 Peter. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/ej.9789004150959.i‑398
    https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004150959.i-398 [Google Scholar]
  235. Howe, B. , & Green, J. B.
    (2014) Cognitive linguistic explorations in Biblical studies. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110350135
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110350135 [Google Scholar]
  236. Hoyle, R. A.
    (2008) Scenarios, discourse, and translation: The scenario theory of cognitive linguistics, its relevance for analysing New Testament Greek and modern Parkari texts, and its implications for translation theory. Dallas, TX: SIL International.
    [Google Scholar]
  237. Hu, X.
    (1999) Fanwenju de zhiyue yinsu [The discursive constraining factors of rhetorical questions]. Chinese Teaching in the World, 1, 46–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  238. Huang, M.
    (1982) Zhuangzi xiuci shoufa chutan [A tentative investigation of the use of rhetorical devices in the Zhuangzi]. Rhetoric Learning, 4, 21–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  239. Huddleston, R. , & Pullum, G. K.
    (2002) The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316423530
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530 [Google Scholar]
  240. Hudson, R. A.
    (1975) The meaning of questions. Language, 51(1), 1–31. 10.2307/413148
    https://doi.org/10.2307/413148 [Google Scholar]
  241. Hyland, K.
    (2005) Metadiscourse. London/New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  242. Ilie, C.
    (1994) What else can I tell you?: A pragmatic study of English rhetorical questions as discursive and argumentative acts. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.
    [Google Scholar]
  243. (1999) Question-response argumentation in talk shows. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(8), 975–999. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00056‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00056-9 [Google Scholar]
  244. (2009) Rhetorical questions. In L. Cummings (Ed.), The Routledge pragmatics encyclopedia (pp.405–408). London/New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  245. (2015) Questions and questioning. In K. Tracy , C. Ilie , & T. Sandel (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction (Vol.3, pp.1257–1271). Boston, MA: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi202
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi202 [Google Scholar]
  246. (2017) Questioning the questionable: Arguments and counter-arguments in political accountability interviews. In C. Ilie , & G. Garzone (Eds.), Argumentation across communities of practice: Multi-disciplinary perspectives (73–98). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.10.05ile
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.10.05ile [Google Scholar]
  247. (2021) Questions we (inter)act with: Interrelatedness of questions and answers in discourse. In C. Ilie (Ed.), Questioning and answering practices across contexts and cultures (1–31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.323.01ili
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.323.01ili [Google Scholar]
  248. Ivanhoe, P. J.
    (1993) Zhuangzi on skepticism, skill, and the ineffable Dao. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 61(4), 639–654. 10.1093/jaarel/LXI.4.639
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/LXI.4.639 [Google Scholar]
  249. Jack, J.
    (2010) What are neurorhetorics?Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 40(5), 405–410. 10.1080/02773945.2010.519758
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02773945.2010.519758 [Google Scholar]
  250. (Ed.) (2013) Neurorhetorics. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203720127
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203720127 [Google Scholar]
  251. (2019) Raveling the brain: Toward a transdisciplinary neurorhetoric. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Press. 10.26818/9780814214039
    https://doi.org/10.26818/9780814214039 [Google Scholar]
  252. Jack, J. , & Appelbaum, L. G.
    (2010) “This is your brain on rhetoric”: Research directions for neurorhetorics. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 40(5), 411–437. 10.1080/02773945.2010.516303
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02773945.2010.516303 [Google Scholar]
  253. Jao, Tsung-I.
    (1993) Tianwen wenti de yuanliu: Fawen wenxue zhi tantao [On the source of the style of Heavenly Questions: A discussion on questioning literature]. InFanxue ji[Collection of Sanskrit studies] (pp.27–60). Shanghai: Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  254. Jensen, J. V.
    (1987) Rhetorical emphases of Taoism. Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, 5(3), 219–229. 10.1525/rh.1987.5.3.219
    https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1987.5.3.219 [Google Scholar]
  255. (1992) Values and practices in Asian argumentation. Argumentation and Advocacy, 28(4), 153–166. 10.1080/00028533.1992.11951544
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.1992.11951544 [Google Scholar]
  256. Ji, Sh
    . (1986) Guhanyu xiuci[Classical Chinese rhetoric]. Changchun: Jilin Culture and History Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  257. Jiménez, O.
    (2022) Metaphors in the narrative of Ephesians 2: 11–22: Motion towards maximal proximity and higher status. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004505735
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004505735 [Google Scholar]
  258. Jochim, C.
    (1998) Just say no to “no self” in Zhuangzi. In R. T. Ames (Ed.), Wandering at ease in the Zhuangzi (pp.35–74). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  259. Jones, R. H.
    (2016) Philosophy of mysticism: Raids on the ineffable. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  260. Kahn, C. H.
    (1998) Plato and the Socratic dialogue: The philosophical use of a literary form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  261. Kamp, A. H.
    (2004) Inner worlds: A cognitive-linguistic approach to the Book of Jonah. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004494534
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004494534 [Google Scholar]
  262. Kantor, H.-R.
    (2010) ‘Right words are like the reverse’ – The Daoist rhetoric and the linguistic strategy in early Chinese Buddhism. Asian Philosophy, 20(3), 283–307. 10.1080/09552367.2010.511027
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2010.511027 [Google Scholar]
  263. Kao, K. S. Y.
    (1986) Rhetoric. In W. H. Nienhauser (Ed.), The Indiana companion to traditional Chinese literature (pp.121–137). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  264. Kappes, H. B. , & Morewedge, C. K.
    (2016) Mental simulation as substitute for experience. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(7), 405–420. 10.1111/spc3.12257
    https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12257 [Google Scholar]
  265. Karhanová, K.
    (2005) Rhetorical questions in polemical media dialogue. In A. Betten , &  M. Dannerer (Eds.), Dialogue analysis IX: Dialogue in literature and the media, Part 2: Media: Selected papers from the 9th IADA Conference, Salzburg 2003 (pp.203–214). Tübingen: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783110946055.203
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110946055.203 [Google Scholar]
  266. Kegel, J.
    (2012) »Wollt ihr den totalen krieg?«: Eine semiotische und linguistische gesamtanalyse der Rede Goebbels’ im Berliner sportpalast am 18. Februar 1943 [“Do you want total war?” A semiotic and linguistic overall analysis of Goebbel’s spech in the Sportpalast of Berlin on February 18, 1943]. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  267. Kennedy, G. A.
    (1963) The art of persuasion in ancient Greece. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  268. Kennedy, G. A.
    (1972) The art of rhetoric in the Roman world: A history of rhetoric. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  269. (1984) New Testament interpretation through rhetorical criticism. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. 10.5149/9781469616254_Kennedy
    https://doi.org/10.5149/9781469616254_Kennedy [Google Scholar]
  270. (1992) A hoot in the dark: The evolution of general rhetoric. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 25(1), 1–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  271. (1994) A new history of classical rhetoric. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  272. (1998) Comparative rhetoric: An historical and cross-cultural introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  273. Kiefer, F.
    (1980) Yes-no questions as wh-questions. In J. Searle , F. Kiefer , & M. Bierwisch (Eds.), Speech act theory and pragmatics (pp.97–119). Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company. 10.1007/978‑94‑009‑8964‑1_5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8964-1_5 [Google Scholar]
  274. Kleinke, S.
    (2012) Responses to rhetorical questions in English and German Internet public news groups. Functions of Language, 19(2), 174–200. 10.1075/fol.19.2.02kle
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.19.2.02kle [Google Scholar]
  275. Knaul, L.
    (1982) Lost Chuang-Tzu passages. Society for the Study of Chinese Religions Bulletin, 10(1), 53–79. 10.1179/073776982805308368
    https://doi.org/10.1179/073776982805308368 [Google Scholar]
  276. Kohn, L.
    (1992) Early Chinese mysticism: Philosophy and soteriology in the Taoist tradition. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 10.1515/9781400844463
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400844463 [Google Scholar]
  277. (2016) Zhuangzi: Text and context. Raleigh, NC: Lulu Press, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  278. Koshik, I.
    (2002) A conversation analytic study of Yes/No questions which convey reversed polarity assertions. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(12), 1851–1877. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00057‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00057-7 [Google Scholar]
  279. Koshik, I.
    (2005) Beyond rhetorical questions: Assertive questions in everyday interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.16
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.16 [Google Scholar]
  280. Kövecses, Z.
    (2015) Where metaphors come from: Reconsidering context in metaphor. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190224868.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190224868.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  281. Królak, E.
    (2008) Fictive interaction: Its functions and usage in discourse. Doctoral dissertation. Warsaw: University of Warsaw.
    [Google Scholar]
  282. Kroll, P. W.
    (2017) A student’s dictionary of classical and medieval Chinese (Revised edition). Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004488991
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004488991 [Google Scholar]
  283. Kuntz, J. K.
    (1997) The form, location, and function of rhetorical questions in Deutero-Isaiah. In C. C. Broyles , &  C. A. Evans (Eds.), Writing and reading the Scroll of Isaiah (Vol.1, pp.121–141). Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  284. (2009) Making a statement: Rhetorical questions in the Hebrew Psalter. In J. H. Ellens , &  J. T. Greene (Eds.), Probing the frontiers of Biblical studies (pp.156–178). Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  285. Labuschagne, C. J.
    (1966) The incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  286. Lai, K. , & Chiu, W. W.
    (Eds.) (2019) Skill and mastery: Philosophical stories from the Zhuangzi. London/New York: Rowman & Littlefield International.
    [Google Scholar]
  287. Lakoff, G.
    (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  288. (1996) Sorry, I’m not myself today: The metaphor system for conceptualizing the self. In G. Fauconnier , & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Spaces, worlds and grammar (pp.91–123). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  289. Lakoff, G. , & Johnson, M.
    (1999) Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  290. Langacker, R. W.
    (1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  291. (1991) Foundations of cognitive grammar: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  292. (1999) Virtual reality. Studies in the Linguistic Science, 29(2), 77–103.
    [Google Scholar]
  293. (2001) Discourse in cognitive grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 12(2), 143–188. 10.1515/cogl.12.2.143
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.12.2.143 [Google Scholar]
  294. (2008) Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  295. (2012) Interactive cognition: Toward a unified account of structure, processing, and discourse. International Journal of Cognitive Linguistics, 3(2), 95–125.
    [Google Scholar]
  296. (2016) Toward an integrated view of structure, processing, and discourse. In G. Drożdż (Ed.), Studies in lexicogrammar: Theory and applications (pp.23–53). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.54.02lan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.54.02lan [Google Scholar]
  297. Lanham, R. A.
    (1991) A handlist of rhetorical terms (2nd edition). Berkeley: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520912045
    https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520912045 [Google Scholar]
  298. (1993) The electronic word: Democracy, technology, and the arts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  299. Lausberg, H.
    (1998) Handbook of literary rhetoric: A foundation for literary study ( M. T. Bliss , A. Jansen , & D. E. Orton , Trans. , D. E. Orton , & R. D. Anderson Eds.). Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  300. Lee, J.
    (2015) The rhetoric of transformation: The arts of persuasion in the Zhuangzi . In L. Kohn (Ed.), New visions of the Zhuangzi (pp.134–144). St. Petersburg, FL: Three Pines Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  301. Legge, J.
    (Trans.) (1891a) The Tāo Teh King; The writings of Kwang-Ӡze Books I-XVII. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  302. (Trans.) (1891b) The writings of Kwang-Ӡze Books XVIII-XXXIII. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  303. Leong, A. C. H.
    (2021) A cognitive semantic study of Biblical Hebrew: The root šlm for completeness-balance. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004469778
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004469778 [Google Scholar]
  304. Li, C. N. , & Thompson S. A.
    (1976) Subject and topic: A new typology of language. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp.457–489). New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  305. Li, F.
    (1997) Fanwenshi shewen [A study on rhetorical questions with answers]. Rhetoric Learning, 3, 25–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  306. Li, H.
    (2005) Zhuangzi xiuci qianxi [A tentative analysis of rhetoric in the Zhuangzi]. Journal of Gansu Radio & Television University, 15(3), 28–31.
    [Google Scholar]
  307. Li, M.
    (2016) Zhuangzi neipian yiwen daici yanjiu [A study on the interrogative pronouns in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi]. Journal of Shangqiu Vocational and Technical College, 15(3), 88–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  308. Li, M. Y.
    (2010) Xianqin lianghan tezhishi fanwenju yanjiu [A study on rhetorical wh-questions in Pre-Qin and Han Dynasties]. Doctoral dissertation. Changchun: Jilin University.
    [Google Scholar]
  309. Li, Y.
    (1990) Fanwenju de goucheng jiqi lijie [The formation and comprehension of rhetorical questions]. Yindu Journal, 3, 91–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  310. Li, S. , Ding, L. , & Zhang, Y.
    (1988) Guhanyu yufa xiuci cidian [Dictionary of classical Chinese grammar and rhetoric]. Jinan: Mingtian Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  311. Libby, L. K. , & Eibach, R. P.
    (2011) Visual perspective in mental imagery: A representational tool that functions in judgment, emotion, and self-insight. In M. P. Zanna , & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol.44, pp.185–245). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑385522‑0.00004‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385522-0.00004-4 [Google Scholar]
  312. Lin, W.
    (2000) Zhuangzi neipian xiuci tanze [An exploration of rhetoric in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi ]. Master thesis. Taipei: Taiwan Normal University.
    [Google Scholar]
  313. Lin, X.
    (1981) Shanggu hanyu de yudiao wenti [Tones in archaic Chinese]. Journal of Southwest University (Social Sciences Edition), 2, 107–113.
    [Google Scholar]
  314. Lipson, C. S. , & Binkley, R. A.
    (Eds.) (2004) Rhetoric before and beyond the Greeks. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  315. (Eds.) (2009) Ancient non-Greek rhetorics. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  316. Liu, Ch
    . (2005) Zhuangzi zhong de yiwen daici ‘he’, ‘shui’, ‘shu’ [Interrogative pronouns “he” “shui” and “shu” in the Zhuangzi]. Journal of Anyang Normal University, 4, 41–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  317. Liu, D.
    (2010a) Cong yufa goushi dao xiuci goushi (shang) [From grammatical constructions to rhetorical constructions (I)]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 3, 7–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  318. (2010b) Cong yufa goushi dao xiuci goushi (xia)[From grammatical constructions to rhetorical constructions (II)]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 4, 14–23.
    [Google Scholar]
  319. Liu, F.
    (2011) Xiandai hanyu fanwenju de biaoji yanjiu [A study on markers of rhetorical questions in Mandarin]. Master thesis. Shenyang: Shenyang Normal University.
    [Google Scholar]
  320. Liu, N. , & Bergen, B.
    (2016) When do language comprehenders mentally simulate locations?. Cognitive Linguistics, 27(2), 181–203. 10.1515/cog‑2015‑0123
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2015-0123 [Google Scholar]
  321. Liu, X.
    (2015) Textual issues in theZhuangzi. In X. Liu (Ed.), Dao companion to Daoist philosophy (pp.129–157). Dordrecht: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  322. Liu, Y.
    (2014) Xiandai hanyu huihua zhong de fanwenju yanjiu: Yi fouding fanwenju he tezhi fanwenju weili [A study of rhetorical questions in Mandarin conversations: Taking reversed-polarity rhetorical questions and rhetorical wh-questions as examples]. Shanghai: Xuelin Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  323. Liu, Y. , & Tao, H.
    (2011) Hanyu tanhua zhong fouding fanwenju de shili lichang gongneng ji leixing [Indexing evaluative stances with negative rhetorical interrogatives in Mandarin conversation]. Zhongguo Yuwen, 2, 110–120.
    [Google Scholar]
  324. Liu, Zh
    . (2002) Fauconnier’s Conceptual Blending Theory: Interpretation and challenges. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 10, 8–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  325. Lloyd, K.
    (Ed.) (2020) The Routledge handbook of comparative world rhetorics: Studies in the history, application, and teaching of rhetorics beyond traditional Greco-Roman contexts. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  326. Lo, Y. K.
    (2022) The Authorship of theZhuangzi. In K. Chong (Ed.), Dao companion to the philosophy of the Zhuangzi (43–97). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  327. Long, A.
    (2008) Plato’s dialogues and a common rationale for dialogue form. In S. Goldhill (Ed.), The end of dialogue in antiquity (45–59). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  328. Longinus
    Longinus (1965) On the sublime. InClassical literary criticism ( T. S. Dorsch Trans.) (97–158). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  329. Lou, G. , & Zeng, Z.
    (1987) Shitan fanwenju de xiuci gongneng [A tentative discussion on the rhetorical functions of reversed-polarity questions]. Rhetoric Learning, 3, 50–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  330. Lu, C.
    (2000) Fanwenju de yuyi fenxi ji yu yuti de shiying guanxi [The semantic analysis of rhetorical questions and its adaptation to genres]. Rhetoric Learning, 3, 13–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  331. Lü, Sh
    . (1982) Zhongguo wenfa yaolüe[Essentials of Chinese grammar]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  332. Lu, X.
    (1998) Rhetoric in ancient China, fifth to third century, BCE: A comparison with classical Greek rhetoric. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  333. (2000) The influence of classical Chinese rhetoric on contemporary Chinese political communication and social relations. In D. R. Heisey (Ed.), Chinese perspectives in rhetoric and communication (pp.3–24). Stamford, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  334. (2005) Luxun quanji jiu: Zhongguo xiaoshuo shi le han wenxueshi gangyao [Complete works of Lu Xun, Vol. 9: A brief history of Chinese fiction & Outline of the history of Chinese literature]. Beijing: People’s Literature Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  335. (2019) Contestation of rhetoric within the Chinese tradition: An overview of Confucian moralistic rhetoric, Daoist transcendental rhetoric, and Mohist utilitarian rhetoric. Advances in the History of Rhetoric, 22(2), 125–138. 10.1080/15362426.2019.1618052
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618052 [Google Scholar]
  336. (2020) The intersection between intercultural communication and comparative rhetoric studies: A review and case studies. In K. Lloyd (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of comparative world rhetorics (pp.34–48). New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780367809768‑4
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367809768-4 [Google Scholar]
  337. Lu, X. Y. , & Gao, W.
    (2016) Xiuci zhutijian lilun de liangge jiben wenti [Two basic issues of an intersubjective theory of rhetoric]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 1, 37–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  338. Lunceford, B.
    (2007) The science of orality: Implications for rhetorical theory. The Review of Communication, 7(1), 83–102. 10.1080/15358590701211142
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15358590701211142 [Google Scholar]
  339. (2017) Where is the body in digital rhetoric?In A. Hess , & A. Davisson (Eds.), Theorizing digital rhetoric (pp.140–152). New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315203645‑13
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315203645-13 [Google Scholar]
  340. Luo, X.
    (2001) Zhuangzi de xiuciguan: Mei zai ziran pusu [The rhetorical view of Zhuangzi: The beauty of naturalness and simplicity]. Rhetoric Learning, 5, 6–7.
    [Google Scholar]
  341. MacDonald, G. , & Packer, D. J.
    (2009) Persuasion. In H. T. Reis , & S. Sprecher (Eds.), Encyclopedia of human relationships (Vol.2, pp.1231–1234). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  342. Mack, P.
    (2002) Elizabethan rhetoric: Theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511490620
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490620 [Google Scholar]
  343. (2011) A History of renaissance rhetoric 1380–1620. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199597284.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199597284.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  344. Mair, V. H.
    (1986) Chuang Tzu. In W.H. Nienhauser, Jr. (Ed.), The Indiana companion to traditional Chinese literature, Vol. 2 (pp. 20–26). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  345. Mair, V. H.
    (2000) The Zhuangzi and its impact. In L. Kohn (Ed.), Daoism handbook (pp.30–52). Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  346. (Trans.) (1994) Wandering on the way: Early Taoist tales and parables of Chuang Tzu. New York: Bantam Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  347. Major, J. S.
    (2014) Tool metaphors in the Huainanzi and other early texts. In S. A. Queen , & M. Puett (Eds.), The Huainanzi and textual production in early China (pp.151–198). Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  348. Mak, M. , & Willems, R. M.
    (2021) Mental simulation during literary reading. In D. Kuiken , & A. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Handbook of empirical literary studies (pp.63–84). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110645958‑004
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110645958-004 [Google Scholar]
  349. Mandelblit, N. , & Fauconnier, G.
    (2000) How I got myself arrested. Underspecificity in grammatical blends as a source for constructional ambiguity. In A. Foolen , & F. van der Leek (Eds.), Constructions in cognitive linguistics: Selected papers from the Fifth International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, 1997 (pp.167–189). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.178.11man
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.178.11man [Google Scholar]
  350. Mao, L.
    (2007) Studying the Chinese rhetorical tradition in the present: Re-presenting the native’s point of view. College English, 69(3), 216-237.
    [Google Scholar]
  351. Markman, K. D. , Klein, W. M. P. , & Suhr, J. A.
    (2012) Handbook of imagination and mental simulation. New York/Hove: Psychology Press. 10.4324/9780203809846
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203809846 [Google Scholar]
  352. Maxwell, K. R.
    (2007) Hearing between the lines: The audience as fellow-worker in Luke-Acts and its literary milieu. Doctoral dissertation. Waco, TX: Baylor University.
    [Google Scholar]
  353. Maynard, S. K.
    (1995) Interrogatives that seek no answers: Exploring the expressiveness of rhetorical interrogatives in Japanese. Linguistics, 33(3), 501–530. 10.1515/ling.1995.33.3.501
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1995.33.3.501 [Google Scholar]
  354. Mazzocco, P. J. , Green, M. C. , Sasota, J. A. , & Jones, N. W.
    (2010) This story is not for everyone: Transportability and narrative persuasion. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1(4), 361–368. 10.1177/1948550610376600
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550610376600 [Google Scholar]
  355. Mead, G. H.
    (1934/1955) Mind, self, and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  356. Meibauer, J.
    (1986) Rhetorische Fragen [Rhetorical questions]. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783111352572
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111352572 [Google Scholar]
  357. Meineck, P. , Short, W. M. , & Devereaux, J.
    (Eds.) (2018) The Routledge handbook of classics and cognitive theory. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315691398
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315691398 [Google Scholar]
  358. Mel’čuk, I.
    (2016) Language: From meaning to text. Brighton, MA: Academic Studies Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  359. Meyers, R. R.
    (2007) With ears to hear: Preaching as self-persuasion. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  360. Miura, I. & Hara N.
    (1995) Production and perception of rhetorical questions in Osaka Japanese. Journal of Phonetics, 23(3): 291–303. 10.1016/S0095‑4470(95)80162‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(95)80162-6 [Google Scholar]
  361. Mocciaro, E. , & Short, W. M.
    (Eds.) (2019) Toward a cognitive classical linguistics: The embodied basis of constructions in Greek and Latin. Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Poland Ltd. 10.1515/9783110616347
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110616347 [Google Scholar]
  362. Moeller, Hans-Georg
    . (2004) Daoism explained: From the dream of the butterfly to the fishnet allegory. Chicago: Open Court.
    [Google Scholar]
  363. Møllgaard, E.
    (2007) An introduction to Daoist thought: Action, language, and ethics in Zhuangzi. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203944820
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203944820 [Google Scholar]
  364. Morris, E. P.
    (1890) The sentence-question in Plautus and Terence: Concluding paper. The American Journal of Philology, 11(2), 145–181. 10.2307/288011
    https://doi.org/10.2307/288011 [Google Scholar]
  365. Moshavi, A.
    (2009) Two types of argumentation involving rhetorical questions in Biblical Hebrew dialogue. Biblica, 90(1), 32–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  366. (2010) Rhetorical question or assertion? The pragmatics of אלר in Biblical Hebrew. Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society, 32, 91–105.
    [Google Scholar]
  367. (2011) Can a positive rhetorical question have a positive answer in the Bible?Journal of Semitic Studies, 56(2), 253–273. 10.1093/jss/fgr003
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jss/fgr003 [Google Scholar]
  368. (2013) The communicative functions of content (“wh”) questions in classical Biblical Hebrew prose. Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages, 39(2), 69–87.
    [Google Scholar]
  369. (2014) What can I say? Implications and communicative functions of rhetorical “WH” questions in classical Biblical Hebrew prose. Vetus Testamentum, 64(1), 93–108. 10.1163/15685330‑12301139
    https://doi.org/10.1163/15685330-12301139 [Google Scholar]
  370. (2015) Between dialectic and rhetoric: Rhetorical questions expressing premises in Biblical prose argumentation. Vetus Testamentum, 65(1), 136–151. 10.1163/15685330‑12341182
    https://doi.org/10.1163/15685330-12341182 [Google Scholar]
  371. Mou, Z.
    (1999) Zhuangzi qiwulun yili yanxi [An analysis of Zhuangz’s Theory of Equalizing All Things]. Taipei: Shulin Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  372. Nie, L.
    (2001) Fanwen de fei lingxing daju [A study on the non-zero answers to rhetorical questions]. Rhetoric Learning, 5, 18–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  373. Nienhauser Jr., W. H.
    (Ed.) (1986) The Indiana companion to traditional Chinese literature, Vol. 1. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  374. Nienkamp, J.
    (2001) Internal rhetorics: Toward a history and theory of self-persuasion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  375. Nijk, A. A.
    (2019) Bridging the gap between the near and the far: Displacement and representation. Cognitive Linguistics, 30(2), 327–350. 10.1515/cog‑2018‑0042
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2018-0042 [Google Scholar]
  376. (2022) Tense-switching in classical Greek: A cognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009042970
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009042970 [Google Scholar]
  377. Nikiforidou, K. , Marmaridou, S. , & Mikros, G. K.
    (2014) What’s in a dialogic construction? A constructional approach to polysemy and the grammar of challenge. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(4), 655–699. 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0060
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0060 [Google Scholar]
  378. Ning, D.
    (2008) Weili kezhu jiaxiang chouda: Zhuangzi duihua wenti lunxi [Making Up the Interlocution and Constructing the Unique Context: Analyses of the Dialogic Styles in the Zhuangzi]. Journal of Guizhou Normal University (Social Sciences Edition), 6, 74–76.
    [Google Scholar]
  379. Noordman, L. G. M. , & de Blijzer, F.
    (2000) On the processing of causal relations. In E. Couper-Kuhlen , & B. Kortmann (Eds.), Cause, condition, concession and contrast: Cognitive and discourse perspectives (pp.35–56). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219043.1.35
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219043.1.35 [Google Scholar]
  380. Oakley, T.
    (1998) Conceptual blending, narrative discourse, and rhetoric. Cognitive Linguistics, 9(4), 321–360. 10.1515/cogl.1998.9.4.321
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1998.9.4.321 [Google Scholar]
  381. (2009a) Mental Spaces. In F. Brisard , J.-O. Östman , & J. Verschueren (Eds.), Grammar, meaning and pragmatics (pp.161–178). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hoph.5.10oak
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hoph.5.10oak [Google Scholar]
  382. (2009b) From attention to meaning: Explorations in semiotics, linguistics, and rhetoric. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0782‑1
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0782-1 [Google Scholar]
  383. (2011) Attention and rhetoric. In C. Meyer , & F. Girke (Eds.), The rhetorical emergence of culture (pp.282–303). New York: Berghahn.
    [Google Scholar]
  384. (2017) Multimodal rhetoric: Fictive interaction strategies in political discourse. Linguistics Vanguard, 3 (s1). 10.1515/lingvan‑2016‑0046
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0046 [Google Scholar]
  385. (2020) Rhetorical minds: Meditations on the cognitive science of persuasion. New York: Berghahn. 10.2307/j.ctv1tbhqr2
    https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1tbhqr2 [Google Scholar]
  386. Oakley, T. , & Hougaard A.
    (2008) Mental spaces in discourse and interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.170
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.170 [Google Scholar]
  387. Oakley, T. , & Pascual, E.
    (2017) Blending theory and its application in semantics and discourse studies. In B. Dancygier (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp.423–448). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316339732.027
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339732.027 [Google Scholar]
  388. Oakley, T. , & Tobin, V.
    (2014) The whole is sometimes less than the sum of its parts: Toward a theory of document acts. Language and Cognition, 6(1), 79–110. 10.1017/langcog.2013.6
    https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2013.6 [Google Scholar]
  389. Oliver, R. T.
    (1961) The rhetorical implications of Taoism. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 47(1), 27–35. 10.1080/00335636109382453
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00335636109382453 [Google Scholar]
  390. (1971) Communication and culture in ancient India and China. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  391. Ong, W. J.
    (1982/2002) Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  392. Pagán Cánovas, C.
    (2010) Erotic emissions in Greek poetry: A generic integration network. Cognitive Semiotics, 6(s1), 7–32. 10.1515/cogsem.2010.6.spring2010.7
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem.2010.6.spring2010.7 [Google Scholar]
  393. (2011) The genesis of the arrows of love: Diachronic conceptual integration in Greek mythology. American Journal of Philology, 132(4), 553–579. 10.1353/ajp.2011.0044
    https://doi.org/10.1353/ajp.2011.0044 [Google Scholar]
  394. (2015) Cognitive patterns in Greek poetic metaphors of emotion: A diachronic approach. In J. E. Díaz-Vera (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy across time and cultures: Perspectives on the sociohistorical linguistics of figurative language (pp.295–318). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110335453.295
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110335453.295 [Google Scholar]
  395. Pagán Cánovas, C. , & Turner, M.
    (2016) Generic integration templates for fictive communication. In E. Pascual & S. Sandler (Eds.), The conversation frame: Forms and functions of fictive interaction (pp.45–62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.55.03pag
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.55.03pag [Google Scholar]
  396. Pally, R.
    (2012) Neurobiology of the parent-child relationship. In M. H. Etezady , & M. Davis (Eds.), Clinical perspectives on reflective parenting: Keeping the child’s mind in mind (pp.75–96). Lanham, MD: Jason Aronson.
    [Google Scholar]
  397. Pang, K. S.
    (2005) “This is the linguist in me speaking”: Constructions to talk about the self talking. Functions of Language, 12(1), 1–38. 10.1075/fol.12.1.02pan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.12.1.02pan [Google Scholar]
  398. Park, G. J.
    (2017) The rhetorical question in Ruth 1: 17b. Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages, 43(1), 87–103.
    [Google Scholar]
  399. Pascual, E.
    (2002) Imaginary trialogues: Conceptual blending and fictive interaction in criminal courts. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  400. (2006a) Fictive interaction within the sentence: A communicative type of fictivity in grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(2), 245–267. 10.1515/COG.2006.006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2006.006 [Google Scholar]
  401. (2006b) Questions in legal monologues: Fictive interaction as argumentative strategy in a murder trial. Text & Talk, 26(3), 383–402. 10.1515/TEXT.2006.014a
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2006.014a [Google Scholar]
  402. (2008a) Text for context, trial for trialogue: An ethnographic study of a fictive interaction blend. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6(1), 50–82. 10.1075/arcl.6.04pas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.6.04pas [Google Scholar]
  403. (2008b) Fictive interaction blends in everyday life and courtroom settings. In T. Oakley , & A. Hougaard (Eds.), Mental spaces in discourse and interaction (pp.86–114). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.170.04pas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.170.04pas [Google Scholar]
  404. (2009) “I was in that room!”: Conceptual integration of content and context in a writer’s vs. a prosecutor’s description of a murder. In V. Evans , & S. Pourcel (Eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics (pp.499–516). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.24.29pas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.24.29pas [Google Scholar]
  405. (2014) Fictive interaction: The conversation frame in thought, language, and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.47
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.47 [Google Scholar]
  406. Pascual, E. , & Królak, E.
    (2018) The ‘listen to characters thinking’ novel: Fictive interaction as narrative strategy in English literary bestsellers and their Polish and Spanish translations. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 16(2), 399–430. 10.1075/rcl.00016.pas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00016.pas [Google Scholar]
  407. Pascual, E. , & Oakley, T.
    (2017) Fictive interaction. In B. Dancygier (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp.347–360). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316339732.022
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339732.022 [Google Scholar]
  408. Pascual, E. , & Sandler, S.
    (Eds.) (2016) The conversation frame: Forms and functions of fictive interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.55
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.55 [Google Scholar]
  409. Peacham, H.
    (1577) The garden of eloquence. London: H. Jackson.
    [Google Scholar]
  410. Perelman, C. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L.
    (1969) The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation ( J. Wilkinson , & P. Weaver Trans.). Notre Dame/London: University of Notre Dame Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  411. Plato
    Plato (1997) Complete works ( J. M. Cooper Ed.). Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  412. Pleshakova, A.
    (2016) Meta-parody in contemporary Russian media: Viewpoint blending behind Dmitry Bykov’s 2009 poem “Infectious”. Lege Artis, 1(1), 202–274. 10.1515/lart‑2016‑0005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lart-2016-0005 [Google Scholar]
  413. Pope, E. N.
    (1972) Questions and answers in English. Doctoral dissertation. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    [Google Scholar]
  414. Prince, D. T.
    (2016) “Why do you seek the living among the dead?” Rhetorical questions in the Lukan resurrection narrative. Journal of Biblical Literature, 135(1), 123–139. 10.15699/jbl.1351.2016.3050
    https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1351.2016.3050 [Google Scholar]
  415. Progovac, L.
    (1994) Negative and positive polarity: A binding approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511554308
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511554308 [Google Scholar]
  416. Puett, M.
    (2013) Philosophy and literature in early China. In V. H. Mair (Ed.), The Columbia history of Chinese literature (pp.70–85). New York: Columbia University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  417. Pulleyblank, E. G.
    (1995) Outline of classical Chinese grammar. Vancouver: UBC Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  418. Pulvermüller, F.
    (2005) Brain mechanisms linking language and action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(7), 576–582. 10.1038/nrn1706
    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1706 [Google Scholar]
  419. Qiu, H.
    (2006) Zhuangzi zhogn jizhong jushi de yanjiu [A study on several syntactic patterns in the Zhuangzi ]. Master thesis. Urumqi: Xinjiang University.
    [Google Scholar]
  420. Quintilian
    Quintilian (1902) Quintilian’s institutes of oratory: Or, Education of an orator in twelve books (Vol.2) ( J. S. Watson Trans.). London: George Bell & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  421. Quintilian
    Quintilian (2001) The orator’s education (5vols). ( D. Russell Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  422. Quirk, R. , Greenbaum, S. , Leech, G. , & Svartvik, J.
    (1985) A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  423. Rasmussen, J. E.
    (1999) Selected papers on Indo-European linguistics (Vol.2). Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  424. Recanati, F.
    (1995) Le présent épistolair: Une perspective cognitive [The epistolary present: A cognitive perspective]. L’Information Grammaticale, 66, 38–44. 10.3406/igram.1995.3046
    https://doi.org/10.3406/igram.1995.3046 [Google Scholar]
  425. Reich, K. A.
    (2011) Figuring Jesus: The power of rhetorical figures of speech in the Gospel of Luke. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/ej.9789004201859.i‑176
    https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004201859.i-176 [Google Scholar]
  426. Richardson, D. C. , Spivey, M. J. , Barsalou, L. W. , & McRae, K.
    (2003) Spatial representations activated during real-time comprehension of verbs. Cognitive Science, 27(5), 767–780. 10.1207/s15516709cog2705_4
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2705_4 [Google Scholar]
  427. Robar, E.
    (2014) The verb and the paragraph in Biblical Hebrew: A cognitive-linguistic approach. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  428. Rosch, E. H.
    (1973) Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 4(3), 328–350. 10.1016/0010‑0285(73)90017‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90017-0 [Google Scholar]
  429. Roth, H. D.
    (2008) Zhuangzi. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2008 edition) ( E. N. Zalta Ed.). Retrieved November 20, 2012, fromplato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/zhuangzi/.
    [Google Scholar]
  430. Roth, M. , Decety, J. , Raybaudi, M. , Massarelli, R. , Delon-Martin, C. , Segebarth, C. , … Jeannerod, M.
    (1996) Possible involvement of primary motor cortex in mentally simulated movement: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroreport, 7(7), 1280–1284. 10.1097/00001756‑199605170‑00012
    https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-199605170-00012 [Google Scholar]
  431. Ruby, P. , & Decety, J.
    (2001) Effect of subjective perspective taking during simulation of action: A PET investigation of agency. Nature Neuroscience, 4(5), 546–550. 10.1038/87510
    https://doi.org/10.1038/87510 [Google Scholar]
  432. (2003) What you believe versus what you think they believe: A neuroimaging study of conceptual perspective-taking. European Journal of Neuroscience, 17(11), 2475–2480. 10.1046/j.1460‑9568.2003.02673.x
    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1460-9568.2003.02673.x [Google Scholar]
  433. (2004) How would you feel versus how do you think she would feel? A neuroimaging study of perspective-taking with social emotions. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16(6), 988–999. 10.1162/0898929041502661
    https://doi.org/10.1162/0898929041502661 [Google Scholar]
  434. Sadock, J. M.
    (1974) Toward a linguistic theory of speech acts. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  435. Sadock, J. M. , & Zwicky, A. M.
    (1985) Speech act distinctions in syntax. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (pp.155–196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  436. Samson, D. , Apperly, I. A. , Kathirgamanathan, U. , & Humphreys, G. W.
    (2005) Seeing it my way: A case of a selective deficit in inhibiting self-perspective. Brain, 128(5), 1102–1111. 10.1093/brain/awh464
    https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awh464 [Google Scholar]
  437. Sanders, J.
    (2010) Intertwined voices: Journalists’ modes of representing source information in journalistic subgenres. English Text Construction, 3(2), 226–249. 10.1075/etc.3.2.06san
    https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.3.2.06san [Google Scholar]
  438. Sankoff, G. & Brown. P.
    (1976) The origins of syntax in discourse: A case study of Tok Pisin relatives. Language, 52, 631–666. 10.2307/412723
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412723 [Google Scholar]
  439. Santos Mendes, J. V.
    (2005) The semantics-pragmatics of route directions. Doctoral dissertation. Hamburg: University of Hamburg.
    [Google Scholar]
  440. Schaffer, D.
    (2005) Can rhetorical questions function as retorts?: Is the Pope Catholic?Journal of Pragmatics, 37(4), 433–460. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(03)00198‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00198-X [Google Scholar]
  441. Schegloff, E. A. , & Sacks, H.
    (1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8(4), 289–327. 10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289
    https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289 [Google Scholar]
  442. Schmidt-Radefeldt, J.
    (1977) On so-called ‘rhetorical’ questions. Journal of Pragmatics, 1(4), 375–392. 10.1016/0378‑2166(77)90029‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(77)90029-7 [Google Scholar]
  443. Schneider, R. , & Hartner, M.
    (2012) Blending and the study of narrative: Approaches and applications. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110291230
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110291230 [Google Scholar]
  444. Schulze, M.
    (1978) Rhetorical questions in Sunwar. In J. E. Grimes (Ed.), Papers on discourse (pp.349–361). Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  445. Schwitalla, J.
    (1984) Textliche und kommunikative funktionen rhetorischer Fragen [The textual and communicative functions of rhetorical questions]. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik, 12, 131–155. 10.1515/zfgl.1984.12.2.131
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgl.1984.12.2.131 [Google Scholar]
  446. Schwitzgebel, E.
    (1996) Zhuangzi’s attitude toward language and his skepticism. In P. Kjellberg , & P. J. Ivanhoe (Eds.), Essays on skepticism, relativism, and ethics in the Zhuangzi (pp.68–96). Albany: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  447. Scorolli, C.
    (2014) Embodiment and language. In L. Shapiro (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of embodied cognition (pp.127–138). New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  448. Searle, J. R.
    (1975) Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole , & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. 3: Speech acts (pp.59–82). New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004368811_004
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_004 [Google Scholar]
  449. Seyed-Gohrab, A. A.
    (2011) Metaphor and imagery in Persian poetry. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  450. Shao, J.
    (1996/2014) Xiandai hanyu yiwenju yanjiu zengdingben [A study on interrogatives in modern Chinese (Updated edition)]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  451. (2013) Yiwenju de jiegou leixing yu fanwenju de zhuanhua guanxi yanjiu [A study on the relationship between the structural types of interrogatives and their transformation into rhetorical questions]. Chinese Language Learning, 2, 3–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  452. Shen, W.
    (2013) Zhuangzi neipian yuyan quanshi: Yi qiwulun wei zhongxin [Studying the language of the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi: Analysis based on ‘Qi-Wu Theory’ as the core focus]. Doctoral dissertation. Hsinchu: National Tsing Hua University.
    [Google Scholar]
  453. Shih, V. Y-C.
    (1959) Introduction. In Hs. Liu, The literary mind and the carving of dragons ( V. Y-C. Shih Trans.)(pp.xi–xlvi). New York: Columbia University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  454. Sinha, C.
    (2009) Language as a biocultural niche and social institution. In V. Evans , & S. Pourcel (Eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics (pp.289–310). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.24.20sin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.24.20sin [Google Scholar]
  455. Sinding, M.
    (2005) “Genera Mixta”: Conceptual blending and mixed genres in “Ulysses”. New Literary History, 36(4), 589–619. 10.1353/nlh.2006.0009
    https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.2006.0009 [Google Scholar]
  456. Short, W. M.
    (Ed.) (2016) Embodiment in Latin semantics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.174
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.174 [Google Scholar]
  457. Siddiqui, A. H.
    (1977) The syntax and semantics of questions in English, Hindi and Urdu: A study in applied linguistics. Doctoral dissertation. Columbus: The Ohio State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  458. Sikri, R.
    (2015) The cut that cures: Therapeutic methods in the Platonic Dialogues and Zhuangzi Neipian. Doctoral dissertation. Chicago: DePaul University.
    [Google Scholar]
  459. Siemund, P.
    (2001) Interrogative construction. In M. Haspelmath (Ed.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook (pp.1010–1028). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  460. Slingerland, E. G.
    (2005) Conceptual blending, somatic marking, and normativity: A case example from ancient Chinese. Cognitive Linguistics, 16(3), 557–584. 10.1515/cogl.2005.16.3.557
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2005.16.3.557 [Google Scholar]
  461. Smith, J. L.
    (1987) Rhetorical questions in Waama. Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere, 12, 37–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  462. Smith, M. J.
    (1982) Persuasion and human action: A review and critique of social influence theories. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    [Google Scholar]
  463. Smyth, H. W.
    (1920) A Greek grammar for colleges. New York: American Book Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  464. Soares da Silva, A.
    (Ed.) (2021) Figurative language: Intersubjectivity and usage. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ftl.11
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.11 [Google Scholar]
  465. Stanfield, R. A. , & Zwaan, R. A.
    (2001) The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science, 12(2), 153–156. 10.1111/1467‑9280.00326
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00326 [Google Scholar]
  466. Steinmann, M.
    (1973) The speech-act hypothesis and the rhetorical question [Abstract]. Newsletter: Rhetoric Society of America, 3(2), 6–7.
    [Google Scholar]
  467. Strange, J. J. , & Leung, C. C.
    (1999) How anecdotal accounts in news and in fiction can influence judgments of a social problem’s urgency, causes, and cures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(4), 436–449. 10.1177/0146167299025004004
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167299025004004 [Google Scholar]
  468. Strecker, I. A. , & Tyler, S. A.
    (Eds.) (2009) Culture & rhetoric. New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  469. Streeck, J.
    (2002) Grammars, words, and embodied meanings: On the uses and evolution of so and like . Journal of Communication, 52(3), 581–596. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2002.tb02563.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02563.x [Google Scholar]
  470. Sturm, A.
    (2020) Theory of mind in translation. Berlin: Frank & Timme GmbH.
    [Google Scholar]
  471. Suhr, C.
    (2006) Early modern English witchcraft pamphlets: The use of reported speech for interaction with semiliterate audiences. In I. Taavitsainen , J. Härmä , & J. Korhonen (Eds.), Dialogic language use (pp.27–47). Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
    [Google Scholar]
  472. Sweetser, E.
    (1990) From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620904
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904 [Google Scholar]
  473. Talmy, L.
    (1996/2000) Fictive motion in language and ‘ception’. InToward a cognitive semantics: Concept structuring systems (pp.99–175). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  474. Tan, M. A.
    (2023) A dictionary of high frequency function words in literary Chinese. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003347217
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003347217 [Google Scholar]
  475. Tan, X.
    (2016) Guangyi xiucixue san cenmian: Zhutijian guanxi ji xiangguan wenti [On the three levels of broad-sense rhetorics: Intersubjective relationships and relevant issues], Contemporary Rhetoric, 1, 20–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  476. Tan, X. , & Zhu, L.
    (2001) Guangyi xiucixue [Broad-sense rhetorics]. Hefei: Anhui Education Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  477. Tang, S. , & Huang, J.
    (1989) Hanyu xiucige dacidian [Dictionary of Chinese figures of speech]. Beijing: China International Broadcasting Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  478. Tang, Y.
    (1923) Xiuci ge [Figures of speech]. Shanghai: The Commercial Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  479. Tang, Z.
    (1982/2013) Shanggu yin shouce zengdingben [Handbook of old Chinese phonology (Updated edition)]. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  480. Taylor, J. R.
    (2003) Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory (3rd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  481. Taylor, S. E. , & Schneider, S. K.
    (1989) Coping and the simulation of events. Social Cognition, 7(2), 174–194. 10.1521/soco.1989.7.2.174
    https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1989.7.2.174 [Google Scholar]
  482. TeSelle, S. M.
    (1975) Speaking in parables: A study in metaphor and theology. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  483. Tobin, V.
    (2014) Readers as overhearers and texts as objects: Joint attention in reading communities. Scripta, 18(34), 179–198.
    [Google Scholar]
  484. Tomasino, B. , Nobile, M. , Re, M. , Bellina, M. , Garzitto, M. , Arrigoni, F. , . . . Brambilla, P.
    (2018) The mental simulation of state/psychological verbs in the adolescent brain: An fMRI study. Brain and Cognition, 123, 34-46.
    [Google Scholar]
  485. Tsai, C.
    (1993) Frozen rhetorical questions. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, 28(1), 49–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  486. Tseronis, A. , & Forceville, C.
    (Eds.) (2017) Multimodal argumentation and rhetoric in media genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.14 [Google Scholar]
  487. Tu, Zh
    . (2003) Lun zhuangzi de xiuci lilun yu shijian [On the rhetorical theory and practice in the Zhuangzi ]. Master thesis. Changchun: Northeast Normal University.
    [Google Scholar]
  488. Turner, M.
    (2010) Ten lectures on mind and language ( F. Li , Y. Ding , & Y. Gao Eds.). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  489. (2014) The origin of ideas: Blending, creativity and the human spark. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  490. Unger, U.
    (1994) Rhetorik des klassischen Chinesisch [Rhetoric of classical Chinese]. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  491. Van der Meer, L. , Groenewold, N. A. , Nolen, W. A. , Pijnenborg, M. , & Aleman, A.
    (2011) Inhibit yourself and understand the other: Neural basis of distinct processes underlying theory of mind. Neuroimage, 56(4), 2364–2374. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.03.053
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.03.053 [Google Scholar]
  492. Van Els, P. , & Sabattini, E.
    (2012) Introduction: Political rhetoric in early China. Extrême-Orient Extrême-Occident, (34), 5–14. 10.4000/extremeorient.247
    https://doi.org/10.4000/extremeorient.247 [Google Scholar]
  493. Van Emde Boas, E.
    (2005) Ποῖον τὸν µῦθον ἔειπες: Rhetorical questions in ancient Greek. Master thesis. Amsterdam: VU Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  494. Van Krieken, K. , Hoeken, H. & Sanders, J.
    (2017) Evoking and measuring identification with narrative characters – A linguistic cues framework. Frontiers in Psychology, (8), 1190. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01190
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01190 [Google Scholar]
  495. Van Krieken, K. , Sanders, J. , & Sweetser, E.
    (2019) Linguistic and cognitive representation of time and viewpoint in narrative discourse. Cognitive Linguistics, 30(2), 243–251. 10.1515/cog‑2018‑0107
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2018-0107 [Google Scholar]
  496. Van W. Cronjé, J.
    (1992) The stratagem of the rhetorical question in Galatians 4: 9–10 as a means towards persuasion. Neotestamentica, 26(2), 417–424.
    [Google Scholar]
  497. Vandelanotte, L. , & Dancygier, B.
    (2017) Special issue: Multimodal artefacts and the texture of viewpoint. Journal of Pragmatics, 122, 1–106. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.011 [Google Scholar]
  498. Veltman, F.
    (1999) Conditionals. In K. Brown & J. Miller (Eds.), Concise encyclopedia of grammatical categories (pp.85–87). Oxford: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  499. Verhagen, A.
    (2005) Constructions of intersubjectivity: Discourse, syntax, and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  500. Verhagen, A.
    (2008) Intersubjectivity and the architecture of the language system. In J. Zlatev , T. P. Racine , C. Sinha , & E. Itkonen (Eds.), The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity (pp.307–331). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.12.17ver
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.12.17ver [Google Scholar]
  501. Verhagen, A.
    (2015) Grammar and cooperative communication. In E. Dąbrowska , & D. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp.232–252). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110292022‑012
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110292022-012 [Google Scholar]
  502. Viganò, E.
    (2023) Moral choices for our future selves: An empirical theory of prudential perception and a moral theory of prudence. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  503. Vis, K.
    (2011) Subjectivity in news discourse: A corpus linguistic analysis of informalization. Doctoral dissertation. Amsterdam: VU Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  504. Vis, K. , Sanders, J. & Spooren, W.
    (2012) Diachronic changes in subjectivity and stance – A corpus linguistic study of Dutch news texts. Discourse, Context and Media, 1(2–3), 95–102. 10.1016/j.dcm.2012.09.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2012.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  505. Volkmann, R.
    (1874) Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Römer in systematischer Übersicht [The rhetoric of the Greeks and Romans in a systematic overview]. Leipzig: BG Teubner.
    [Google Scholar]
  506. Von der Gabelentz, G.
    (1881) Chinesische Grammatik: Mit ausschluss des niederen Stiles und der heutigen Umgangssprache [Chinese Grammar: With the exclusion of the informal and current colloquial speech]. Leipzig: T. O. WEIGEL.
    [Google Scholar]
  507. Vorauer, J. D. , & Michael Ross, M.
    (1999) Self-awareness and feeling transparent: Failing to suppress one’s self. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(5), 415–440. 10.1006/jesp.1999.1388
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1999.1388 [Google Scholar]
  508. Vrubliauskaitė, A.
    (2014) Language in Zhuangzi: How to say without saying?International Journal of Area Studies, 9(1), 75–90. 10.2478/ijas‑2014‑0005
    https://doi.org/10.2478/ijas-2014-0005 [Google Scholar]
  509. Wang, B.
    (2013) Zhuangzi zhexue [The philosophy of Chuang Tzu] (2nd edition). Beijing: Peking University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  510. Wang, H.
    (2015) Guhanyu fanchou cidian: Yiwen juan [Dictionary of classical Chinese categories: Interrogatives]. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  511. Wang, J. , & Calder, B. J.
    (2006) Media transportation and advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(2), 151–162. 10.1086/506296
    https://doi.org/10.1086/506296 [Google Scholar]
  512. Wang, L.
    (1985) Zhongguo xiandai yufa [A modern Chinese grammar]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  513. Wang, M.
    (1987) Shiwen zhiwen buda de shewenju [A tentative discussion on non-answer-seeking interrogatives]. Chinese Language Learning, 4, 54–55.
    [Google Scholar]
  514. Wang, R.
    (Trans.) (1999) Zhuangzi [The Zhuangzi ]. Changsha: Hunan People’s Publishing House; Beijing: Foreign Language Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  515. Wang, Sh
    . (2007) Zhuangji jiaoquan liangjuanben [Collation and annotation of the Zhuangzi (2 Vols.)]. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  516. Wang, S. Y.
    (2006) Zhuzi yulei wenju xitong yanjiu [A study on the interrogative system in the Quotations of Zhu Xi]. Master thesis. Fuzhou: Fujian Normal University.
    [Google Scholar]
  517. Wang, Sh. , & Han, M.
    (1993) Laozhuang cidian [Dictionary of Laozi and Zhuangzi]. Jinan: Shandong Education Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  518. Wang, W.
    (1993) Xianqin zhuzi xiuciguan bijiao [A comparative study of the rhetorical views of Pre-Qin masters]. Journal of Yunmeng, 1, 66–69.
    [Google Scholar]
  519. Wang, X.
    (2004) Hanyu xiuci xiudingban [Chinese rhetoric (Revised edition)]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  520. Wang, Y.
    (2003) Linguistic strategies in Daoist Zhuangzi and Chan Buddhism: The other way of speaking. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203451144
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203451144 [Google Scholar]
  521. Wardlaw, T. R.
    (2008) Conceptualizing words for God within the Pentateuch: A cognitive-semantic investigation in literary context. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  522. Watson, B.
    (1983) Foreword. In V. H. Mair (Ed.), Experimental essays on Chuang-Tzu (pp.ix–xiv). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. 10.1515/9780824847005‑001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9780824847005-001 [Google Scholar]
  523. (Trans.) (1968/2013) The complete works of Zhuangzi. New York: Columbia University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  524. Watson, R. S.
    (2020) אִם‎… הֲ‎: A rhetorical question anticipating a negative answer. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 44(3), 437–455. 10.1177/0309089219862826
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0309089219862826 [Google Scholar]
  525. Wayne, E. A.
    (1991) Logic and language in the Chuang Tzu. Asian Philosophy, 1(1), 61–76. 10.1080/09552369108575336
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09552369108575336 [Google Scholar]
  526. (2000) Zhuangzi, mysticism, and the rejection of distinctions. Sino-Platonic Papers, No.100. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
    [Google Scholar]
  527. Weiss, A. L.
    (2006) Figurative language in Biblical prose narrative: Metaphor in the Book of Samuel. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789047408581
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047408581 [Google Scholar]
  528. Wheeler, C. , Green, M. C. , & Brock, T. C.
    (1999) Fictional narratives change beliefs: Replications of Prentice, Gerrig, and Bailis (1997) with mixed corroboration. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6(1), 136–141. 10.3758/BF03210821
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210821 [Google Scholar]
  529. Widder, W. L.
    (2014) “To teach” in ancient Israel: A cognitive linguistic study of a Biblical Hebrew lexical set. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110335781
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110335781 [Google Scholar]
  530. William, J. M.
    (2017) Cognitive approaches to German historical film: Seeing is not believing. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑39318‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39318-6 [Google Scholar]
  531. Wilson, D. , & Sperber, D.
    (1988) Mood and the analysis of non-declarative sentences. In J. Dancy , J. M. E. Moravcsik , & C. C. W. Taylor (Eds.), Human agency: Language, duty, and value. Philosophical essays in honor of J. O. Urmson (pp.77–101). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  532. Winans, J. A.
    (1920) Public speaking. New York: The Century Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  533. Winter, B.
    (2019) Sensory linguistics: Language, perception and metaphor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.20
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.20 [Google Scholar]
  534. Wochner, D.
    (2022) Prosody meets pragmatics: A comparison of rhetorical questions, information-seeking questions, exclamatives, and assertions. Doctoral dissertation. Konstanz: University of Konstanz.
    [Google Scholar]
  535. Wochner, D. , Schlegel, J. , Dehé, N. , & Braun, B.
    (2015) The prosodic marking of rhetorical questions in German. Paper presented at the Interspeech 2015: 16th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association. Dresden. 10.21437/Interspeech.2015‑26
    https://doi.org/10.21437/Interspeech.2015-26 [Google Scholar]
  536. Wong, D. B.
    (2006) Natural moralities: A defense of pluralistic relativism. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  537. Wong, M. C.
    (2020) Rhetorical question strategies in electoral debates: An analysis of United States and Hong Kong political discourse. Doctoral dissertation. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
    [Google Scholar]
  538. Wong, S. M.-C. , & Yap, F. H.
    (2015) “Did Obamacare create new jobs?” – An analysis of Mitt Romney’s use of rhetorical questions in the 2012 US presidential election campaign. Text & Talk, 35(5), 643–668. 10.1515/text‑2015‑0018
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2015-0018 [Google Scholar]
  539. Woźny, J.
    (2018) The role of conceptual integration and simple dynamic scenarios in the meaning construction of the mapping in mathematics. Cognitive Studies| Études cognitives, (18), 1–8. 10.11649/cs.1723
    https://doi.org/10.11649/cs.1723 [Google Scholar]
  540. Wu, G.
    (Ed.) (2002) Chinese characters dictionary with English annotations. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  541. Wu, H. , & Graban, T. S.
    (Eds.) (2022) Global rhetorical traditions. Anderson, SC: Parlor Press LLC.
    [Google Scholar]
  542. Wu, K.-M.
    (1982) Chuang Tzu: World philosopher at play. New York: Crossroad.
    [Google Scholar]
  543. (1988) Goblet words, dwelling words, opalescent words – Philosophical methodology of Chuang Tzu. Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 15(1), 1–8. 10.1163/15406253‑01501001
    https://doi.org/10.1163/15406253-01501001 [Google Scholar]
  544. Wu, P. , & Chang, J.
    (2010) Xinli kongjian lilun yu lunyu zhogn de yinyu fenxi [Mental space theory and an analysis of metaphors in the Analects]. Journal of Chinese Language Teaching, 7(1), 97–124.
    [Google Scholar]
  545. Xiang, M.
    (2015) Esther Pascual: Fictive interaction: The conversation frame in thought, language, and discourse. Cognitive Linguistics, 26(4), 709–716. 10.1515/cog‑2015‑0065
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2015-0065 [Google Scholar]
  546. (2016) Real, imaginary, or fictive? Philosophical dialogues in an early Daoist text and its pictorial version. In E. Pascual , & S. Sandler (Eds.), The conversation frame: Forms and functions of fictive interaction (pp.63–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.55.04xia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.55.04xia [Google Scholar]
  547. Xiang, M. , & Ma, B.
    (2020) How can I persuade you without making self-assertions? A cognitive rhetorical analysis of the use of fictive questions in an early Daoist text. In V. da Silva Sinha , A. Moreno-Núñez , & Z. Tian (Eds.), Language, Thought and Identity – Signs of Life (pp.249–273). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/clscc.13.12xia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/clscc.13.12xia [Google Scholar]
  548. Xiang, M. , & Pascual, E.
    (2016) Debate with Zhuangzi: Expository questions as fictive interaction blends in an old Chinese text. Pragmatics, 26(1), 137–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  549. Xiang, M. , Pascual, E. , & Ma, B.
    (2022) Who’s speaking for whom? Rhetorical questions as intersubjective mixed viewpoint constructions in an early Daoist text. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 23(1), 29–53. 10.1075/jhp.18013.xia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.18013.xia [Google Scholar]
  550. Xie, F.
    (1984) Fanwenju yao buyao zuoda? [Is it necessary to answer rhetorical questions?]. Chinese Language Learning, 1, 52.
    [Google Scholar]
  551. Xu, G. Q.
    (2012) The use of eloquence: The Confucian perspective. In C. S. Lipson , & R. A. Binkley (Eds.), Rhetoric before and beyond the Greeks (pp.115–129). Albany: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  552. Xu, H.
    (1985) Shitan fanwenju yuyi xingcheng de zhu yinsu [A tentative discussion on the factors in the formation of the semantics of rhetorical questions]. Journal of Liaoning University (Philosophy & Social Sciences Edition), 3, 66–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  553. Yan, P.
    (2007) Jiwai lunzhi: Lun zhuangzi yuyan de duihua xingshi [Argument with the assistance of extraneous things: On the dialogic form of allegories in the Zhuangzi]. Hubei Social Sciences, 4, 122–124.
    [Google Scholar]
  554. Yang, B. , & He, L.
    (2001) Guhanyu yufa jiqi fazhan xiudingban [A grammar of classical Chinese and its development (Revised edition)]. Beijing: Yuwen Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  555. Yang, G.
    (2017) Zhuangzi de sixiang shijie xiudingban [Zhuangzi’s world of thought (Revised edition)]. Beijing: Sanlian Book Store.
    [Google Scholar]
  556. Yang, M.
    (2006) Zhuangzi xiuci yanjiu [A study on the rhetoric in the Zhuangzi ]. Master thesis. Fuzhou: Fujian Normal University.
    [Google Scholar]
  557. Yang, Zh
    . (2018) Xiuci wenju yu guanlian lilun: Jiyu yuliaoku de xiuci wenju zai dubaishi wenben zhong de yuyong yanjiu [Rhetorical questions and relevance theory: A Corpus-based pragmatic study of rhetorical questions in monologic genres]. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  558. Ye, Ch
    . (1979/2004) Zhuangzi yuyan yanjiu [A study on allegories in the Zhuangzi ]. Taipei: Wenshizhe Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  559. Yi, M.
    (1989/2005) Xianqin yufa xiudingben [A grammar of pre-Qin Chinese (Revised edition)]. Changsha: Hunan University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  560. Yin, Sh
    . (2007) Xiandai hanyu fanwenju teyou de jufa jiegou [The unique syntactic structures of rhetorical questions in modern Chinese]. Journal of Hunan University of Science and Technology (Social Sciences Edition), 10(3), 101–105.
    [Google Scholar]
  561. . (2008) Xiandai hanyu fanwneju yingda xitong kaocha [Investigation of the system of answers to rhetorical questions in modern Chinese]. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies, 3, 37–44.
    [Google Scholar]
  562. . (2009) Xiandai hanyu fanwenju yanjiu [A study on rhetorical questions in modern Chinese]. Harbin: Heilongjiang University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  563. Yoo, S.-S. , Freeman, D. K. , McCarthy III, J. J. , & Jolesz, F. A.
    (2003) Neural substrates of tactile imagery: A functional MRI study. Neuroreport, 14(4), 581–585. 10.1097/00001756‑200303240‑00011
    https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-200303240-00011 [Google Scholar]
  564. Yu, G.
    (1984) Fanwenju de xingzhi yu zuoyong [The nature and functions of rhetorical questions]. Zhongguo Yuwen, 6, 419–425.
    [Google Scholar]
  565. Yu, T.
    (2007) Xiandai hanyu fanwenju yanjiu [A study on rhetorical questions in modern Chinese]. Doctoral dissertation. Beijing: Minzu University of China.
    [Google Scholar]
  566. Zahner-Ritter, K. , Chen, Y. , Dehé, N. , & Braun, B.
    (2022) The prosodic marking of rhetorical questions in Standard Chinese. Journal of Phonetics, 95, 101190. 10.1016/j.wocn.2022.101190
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2022.101190 [Google Scholar]
  567. Zhang, C.
    (2012) Mozi jian’ai he Zhuangzi qiwulun zuhewen de yuyong bijiao [A pragmatic comparison of the use of successive questions in Mozi’s chapter ‘Universal Love’ and Zhuangzi’s chapter Qiwulun]. Contemporary Rhetoric, 5, 63–69.
    [Google Scholar]
  568. Zhang, G.
    (1963) Xiandai hanyu xiucixue [Modern Chinese rhetoric]. Tianjin: Tianjin People’s Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  569. Zhang, L.
    (2005) Zhuangzi neipian fanwenju de yuyi fenxi [A semantic analysis of rhetorical questions in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi]. Journal of Lanzhou University of Arts and Science (Social Sciences Edition), 21(3), 35–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  570. (2006a) Shixi zhuangzi yiwenju de wenyu [A tentative analysis of the interrogative range of questions in the Zhuangzi], Hunan Agricultural Machinery, 3, 84–87.
    [Google Scholar]
  571. (2006b) Zhuangzi yuyan zhong de teshu wenda fangshi [On the special question-answer sequences in the Zhuangzian allegories]. Journal of Gansu Political Science and Law Institute, 4, 134–135.
    [Google Scholar]
  572. (2007) Zhuangzi neipian fanwenju de yuyi yuyong fenxi [Semantic and pragmatic analysis of rhetorical questions in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi]. Modern Chinese, 7, 43–44.
    [Google Scholar]
  573. Zhang, M.
    (1948/2007) Zhuangzi xinshi [A new interpretation of the Zhuangzi ]. Beijing: New World Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  574. Zhang, X.
    (2002) ‘Shu’ zuo jushou zhuangyu biao fanwen de yizhong jushi [The use of a syntactic pattern as rhetorical question with ‘shu’ as the sentence-initial adverbial]. Studies in Language and Linguistics, 1, 38–40.
    [Google Scholar]
  575. Zhao, P.
    (2012) Toward an intersubjective rhetoric of empathy in intercultural communication: A rereading of Morris Young’sMinor Re/Visions. Rhetoric Review, 31(1), 60–77. 10.1080/07350198.2012.630959
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07350198.2012.630959 [Google Scholar]
  576. Zhao, P.
    (2017) Zhutijianxing xiuci lilun goujian [Constructing an intersubjective rhetorical theory]. Journal of Central South University (Social Sciences Edition), 23(1), 194–200.
    [Google Scholar]
  577. Zhengzhang, Sh.
    (2013) Shanggu yinxi [Old Chinese phonology], (2nd edition). Shanghai: Shanghai Education Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  578. Zhou, Z.
    (1991) Zhongguo xiuci xueshi [History of Chinese rhetoric]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  579. Zhu, D.
    (1984) Yufa jiangyi [Lecture notes on grammar]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  580. Zhu, L.
    (2016) Guangyi xiucixue biaoda jieshou zhuti ji zhutijian guanxi [The expression of broad-sense rhetoric: The expression-reception subjects and intersubjectivity], Contemporary Rhetoric, 1, 3–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  581. Zhu, X.
    (1995) Daju de yuyi leixing [The semantic types of answers to questions]. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies, 3, 47–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  582. (1996) Shilun liangzhong leixing de daju [A tentative discussion on two types of answers to questions]. Journal of Jiangsu Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sicences Edition), 2, 121–124.
    [Google Scholar]
  583. Zhu, Z.
    (1985) Guhanyu xiuci lihua [Illustration of rhetorical figures in classical Chinese]. Wuhan: Hubei Education Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  584. Zima, E. , & Brône, G.
    (2015) Cognitive linguistics and interactional discourse: Time to enter into dialogue. Language & Cognition, 7(4), 485–498. 10.1017/langcog.2015.19
    https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2015.19 [Google Scholar]
  585. Ziporyn, B.
    (2003) How many are the ten thousand things and I? Relativism, mysticism, and the privileging of oneness in the ‘Inner Chapters’. In S. Cook (Ed.), Hiding the world in the world: Uneven discourses on the Zhuangzi (pp.33–63). Albany: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  586. Zlatev, J.
    (2007) Intersubjectivity, mimetic schemas and the emergence of language. Intellectica, 46(2–3), 123–152. 10.3406/intel.2007.1281
    https://doi.org/10.3406/intel.2007.1281 [Google Scholar]
  587. (2008) The dialectics of consciousness and language. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 15(6), 5–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  588. Zlatev, J. , Racine, T. P. , Sinha, C. , & Itkonen, E.
    (Eds.) (2008) The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.12
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.12 [Google Scholar]
  589. Zong, T. , & Wang, W.
    (1994)  Zhongxi gudian xiuci xueshuo yitong lun: Yi chunqiu zhanguo he gu xila luoma weili [On the similarities and differences between Chinese and Western classical rhetorical theories: Taking the Spring and Autumn period and the Warring States period and Ancient Greece and Rome as examples]. Research in Ancient Chinese Language, 1, 49–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  590. Zwaan, R. A.
    (2004) The immersed experiencer: Toward an embodied theory of language comprehension. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 44, 35–62. 10.1016/S0079‑7421(03)44002‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(03)44002-4 [Google Scholar]
  591. Zwarts, F.
    (1996) A hierarchy of negative expressions. In H. Wansing (Ed.), Negation: A notion in focus (pp.169–194). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110876802.169
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110876802.169 [Google Scholar]
/content/books/9789027250032
Loading
/content/books/9789027250032
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal -contentType:Chapter
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027250032
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error