Exemplification in Russian and Elsewhere: Cognitive Mechanism, Linguistic
Means, and Discursive Functioning
Although exemplification belongs to the same class of interdomain operations
as metaphor and analogy, nothing like a long-term boom (as in case of metaphor)
or active interest (in case of analogy) has never been witnessed in case of
exemplification neither in linguistics nor in cognitive science. The reason
is twofold. First, exemplification is rather special and limited (in terms of
genre) linguistic and cognitive operation as compared to omnipresent structural
metaphor. Second, exemplification, due to special marking, seems to be a rather
obvious and superficial phenomenon, and its study does not guarantee a joy of
linguistic (if not philological) discovery as metaphor does. (The position of
analogy in both senses is intermediate). Nevertheless, exemplification certainly
deserves a special investigation.
A comprehensive description of exemplification as a linguistic and cognitive
category involves at least the following research enterprises:
1. A study of the cognitive mechanism of exemplification (types and dynamics
of communicants' knowledge and intentions; epistemic statuses of knowledge and
means of their transformation; cognitive regimes of exemplification - building,
reminding, direct presentation).
2. A study in semantics of exemplification understood as matching of cognitive
mechanisms of exemplification into idiosyncratic language systems. This results
in (a) a typology of exemplification and (b) a semantic description of various
exemplificatory markers, from least marked naprimer 'for example' to rather
idiosyncratic units.
3. A study in pragmatic of exemplification, i. e. a description of felicity
conditions of exemplification treated as a specific speech act, as well as of
communicative regimes of exemplification - monologue and dialogue. By the way,
exemplification is a rare type of speech act to which a direct characterization
in terms of felicity/infelicity can be applied (cf. Russ. udachnyi/neudachnyi
primer, lit. 'felicitous/infelicitous example').
4. A study of discursive role of exemplification, i. e. their participation
in the development of textual macrostructures and their ability to produce and
meet expectations. In particular, the role of exemplification in a dialog is
analysed, which is important since raison d'être of exemplification is
a desire to communicate in a situation of more than standard dependence of the
addressee's understanding.
5. A study of genre preferences demonstrated by exemplification (different
types of texts differs in a relative prominence of exemplification in them).
Prototypical exemplification (best represented by unmarked naprimer or byt'
primerom - the latter allows for explicit reference to an exemplificatory set
and qualitative charcterization of example) meets the following conditions:
a) a relevant set from which an example is picked up contains more than one
element;
b) an element suggested as an example, is distinguished from other elements
and selected deliberately;
c) an example is cognitively more accessible than an utterance it illustrates
(better accessibility may have different forms: an example may be significantly,
structurally, or referentially simpler, or belong to a better known domain);
d) an example is more specific than an utterance it illustrates;
e) an example belongs to the real world.
Deviations from this conditions give rise to a typology of exemplificatory
markers. For instance, Russ. xot' (used as an exemplificatory marker) picks
up a random element and states that, contrary to expectation, it can be considered
as an example.
In pragmatic terms, interpreting and supporting exemplification should be
distinguished; and within interpreting, presentational, defining (with subtypes),
and illustrative types.
A detailed typology of exemplificatory markers together with their cognitive
characteristics is discussed in the paper.