EPISTEMIC RHETORIC OF INTERROGATIVES IN POETIC DISCOURSE

Summary. The present article is the attempt to analyse interrogatives in poetic discourse through the prism of epistemic rhetoric. The research focus refers to the features that make interrogative an epistemologically identifiable object. In order to provide the ground for conducting this study a conceptual framework has been built which includes the following parameters: 1) epistemic markers of concrete experience; 2) the direction of schematization; 3) epistemic justification of the immediate experience of tropes and figures of speech, and the perceptual world; 4) the direction of conceptual schematization of iconicity. The analysis unfolds into two sections. The first section provides the ontological view of interrogatives while the second one moves into the socio-cultural analysis.


Introduction
The process of reading, as is well known, is affected by the perceptual principles.In Bakhtin's view, "...we constantly put forward the referential and expressive − that is, intentional − factors as the force that stratifies and differentiates the common literary language, and not the linguistic markers ... markers that are ... signs left behind on the path of the real living project of an intention.<...> These external markers, linguistically observable and fixable, cannot in themselves be understood or studied without understanding the specific conceptualization they have been given by an intention" [Bakhtin 1981:292].
One of the linguistically observable and fixable markers is an interrogative sentence.In linguistic studies the interrogative sentence is represented by four 292 SECTION XXI.PHILOLOGY AND JOURNALISM types --the verbal or Yes--No questions, wh questions, the tag questions, and the alternative questions.In the studies of the social organization of conversation the turn-by--turn focus comes to the fore.Traditionally rhetorical questions are treated as stylistic devices and are classified according to the purposes, as e.g. in [Abioye, 2009].
The importance of the interrogative in shaping literary and critical discourses is acknowledged by M. W. Bannerman in her doctoral thesis by poquoting, in particilar, H.R. Jauss: "As Jauss observes, this concept of the lyric question opens up certain interpretive avenues by dissolving "the implicit answer suggested and affectively enhanced by its rhetorical counterpart, and in the state of suspense thus created, opens an unexpected horizon of possible meaning that the reader must then concretize through his inquiring aesthetic observations.This description of the aesthetic question has the hermeneutic advantage of being available for use with all grammaticle and rhetorical models of the question, models that, in fact, are constantly employed by the lyric" [Bannerman1997 :2].
The study of Modernist poetic questions undertaken by Bannerman resulted in the following conclusions."The first result is the confirmation of its central assumption: that the interrogative is a revealing and utilitarion lens through whivh to read poetry.Poetic questions differ radically from author to author; from one poem to another within a single author's work; even from stanza to stanza within a single poem.The second observation is that poetic questions are frequently framed in terms of an important image.The third aspect of poetic questions is that they are asked by a number of different voices.As for the prospects for further research within the framework of literary hermeneutics, three areas are singled out -comparative, historical, and tropeic" [Bannerman 1997:265-269].
The aim of this study is to conduct the analysis of poetic interrogatives using the research design informed by epistemic rhetoric.
Theory and Method Cognitive grammar seeks an accurate characterization of the structure and organization of linguistic knowledge as an integral part of human cognition.The proper domain of linguistic description, as concrived in cognitive grammar, is conventionable linguistic knowledge.It is assumed that this knowledge takes the form of conventional "units".Among the units that embody linguistic knowledge are "schemas" and "content unit".A schema embodies the generalization which speakers extract from an array of concrete inits.A schematic unit defines a category, representing (at a higher level of abstraction) the content shared by its various instantiations.Conceptual structure is the ongoing flow of cognition: any thought or concept, whether linguistic or nonlinguistic.Semantic structure is specifically linguistic − the form which thoughts must assume for purposes of ready linguistic symbolization [Langacker, 2002:102-105, 108].
Here is Robert Hanna's response to the concept problem: "for me, concepts are (1) abstract structured semantic items with cross-possible-worlds extentions, and also (2) psychological item in the triple sense that they are (a) tokened in some particular conscious mental states, (b) express subjective modes of presentation in affect or emotion, perception, judgement, thought, and intentional action.That is, for me concepts are intentionally-structured mental representation types" [Hanna 2005:252].
СЕКЦІЯ XXI.ФІЛОЛОГІЯ ТА ЖУРНАЛІСТИКА Following Peirce's iconicity, H.Ruthrof considers language as the third space in which iconicity and abstraction take part in schematization, and redefines the linguistic concept as the regulatory side of the motivated signified, in the sense that the concept rules iconic mental materials in terms of directionality, kind, quality, quantity, and the degree of schematization [Ruthrof 2011:124] Ruthrof's assumption that the iconicity of the perceptual world must be closely related to linguistic schematization, since language as the dominant sign system in the communication of reality, might be regarded as methodologically relevant for linguistic hermeneutics.
Thus, following H.Ruthrof, poetic interrogative is defined as the iconic sign which is characterized by the relation of affinity between the general idea of question and its mental modification in real speech which is regulated by the 'aboutness' of language.With regard to the present research, it is suggested that in poetic discourse interrogative construction functions as a Figure with a meaningful energy which is modified by the poet's sensibility, and as such is regarded as an aesthetic sign with an epistemic perspective.
The thesis that rhetoric is epistemic was introduced by Robert L. Scott (1967).[McClanahan, 1996] claims that epistemic rhetoric embodies the dialectical nature of the continual human search for truth and knowledge which includes the search for definitions and in view of the problem offers the following definition: "Epistemic rhetoric is a rhetoric that assumes and teaches that language is the basis for all human understanding of knowledge, whether foundational or anti-foundational, and that effective use and understanding of language leads to the creation or discovery of knowledge, either from or for the self, or from or for the society.Effective use and understanding of epistemic rhetoric would emphasize the dialectical, as well as the formalistic, nature of language and knowledge in relation to the self, society, and what is perceived in reality" [McClanahan, 1996:11].
At the same time McClanahan admits that although his definition of epistemic rhetoric is not definitive, still it reflects the legacy of both foundational and antifoundational beliefs.A foundational definition of epistemic rhetoric may have been dominant in Classical times, but in contemporary times, the dominant usage of epistemic rhetoric reflects an anti-foundational epistemology, which according to J. Petraglia, is completely construed with social constructionism [op. cit] To clarify the notion that rhetoric is epistemic, W. Harpine starts by analysing definitions of rhetoric: 1) rhetoric is persuasion (the ancient Greeks); 2) rhetoric is all persuasive (Kenneth Burke); 3) rhetoric is the study of what is persuasive (Campbell); 4) rhetoric is the possibility of brining reason together with passion so that in action humans may civilize themselves (Scott); 5) rhetoric is description of reality through language (Cherwitz and Hikins).
Harpine makes the observation that "the broader the definition of rhetoric, the less interesting the claim that rhetoric is epistemic becomes" [Harpine, 2004: 7-10;18-19.]According to Barry Brummet (1979), the proposition that "rhetoric is epistemic" asserts a relationship between knowledge and discourse, between how people know and how they communicate.The proposition also asserts a relationship between reality and discourse.Brummet's essay suggests three possible meanings of "rhetoric is epistemic" − methodological, sociological, and ontological.SECTION XXI.PHILOLOGY AND JOURNALISM 1. "Rhetoric is a means to the discovery of truth, a conduit to knowledge.The word discovery is key here; rhetoric discovers a world waiting to be found.Methodological meaning of epistemic rhetoric has two implications for rhetoric as a theoretical discipline. 1) Rhetoric as a discipline has no real subject matter of its own, it is only concerned with making clear the subject matter of other disciplines.2) Rhetoric as a discipline has not changed much since classical times, at least in a formal sense.
2. Rhetoric not only discovers but creates reality and knowledge about reality in the social sphere of ethics, politics, morals, religion, etc.The key to sociological meaning of epistemic rhetoric is bifurcation of reality into material and social realms.The reality of ethical, social, political questions is not merely discovered, it is created in rhetoric.Rhetoric leads to knowledge of social questions because it creates what there is to know in the social realm.
3. Rhetoric is epistemic in an ontological sense.Rhetoric creates all of what there is to know.Discourse creates realities rather than truths about realities.A key concept to understand the ontological view is meaning.For humans reality is always apprehended through the constructs of meaning.Meaning is a dimension of reality, for meanings are created and urged upon others rhetorically.The ontological view implies that rhetoric as a discipline has a co-equal status with any other discipline in that it studies dimensions of experience" [Brummett 1979].
Almost a decade later, Barry Brummett admitted that "the idea of epistemic rhetoric has faded as a scholarly inspiration because its defenders failed to link theoretical principles to actual criticism or analysis of "real life" (however that may be defined) communication.Because there were so few applications of theory to practice, or perhaps because the applications were not compelling enough in and of themselves as reasons to investigate epistemological and rhetorical issues further, epistemic rhetoric lived and is now dying as a predominantly theoretical problematic" [Brummet 1990:69].
In this research the attempt is made to follow the guidelines of epistemic rhetoric formulated by B.Brummett.
As Ch.Caudwell suggests, "the conscious field consists of real objects and subjective attitudes towards them.<...> if poetry orders all these subjective attitudes in the most general way, it arrives at the ego, a single symbol which puts all subjective reality in its grasp" [Caudwell 1964:148].
For the interpretative articulation of understanding as the construction of meaning, Heidegger in Time and Being uses the term "fore-structure of understanding": fore-having, fore-sight, and fore-conception.
The fore-having has to do with the holistic context within which the activities unfold.It is a "circumspective" (i.e.non-reflective) interpretation.
The fore-sight is the particular interest from the perspective of which we interpret.
The fore-conception is the particular language and concepts by which our interpretation is framed and expressed [Rousse, 2021].
Ginev claims that "by devising the integral circle of the interpretative constitution of meaning, one will be able to specify epistemological constraints on the ontic (empirical) level of interpretation.
СЕКЦІЯ XXI.ФІЛОЛОГІЯ ТА ЖУРНАЛІСТИКА <...> Thanks to complementarity between contextualizing interpretation and objectifying predication the contextually operative "hermeneutic as" in the research process forestructures the structure of objectification by means of which something acquires the status of an epistemologically identifiable object" [Ginev 2013:232-234].
Thus, the question arises: What are the requirements for the interrogative to be epistemologically identifiable object?
The conceptual framework for the analysis of poetic interrogatives consists of the following stages.
1.The identification of epistemic marker, i.e. the content unit in the interrogative.Let us take as the example the beginning of D.H. Lawrence's poem The Man In The Street: I met him in the street I said: How do you do? -He said: And who are you when we meet?-The epistemic marker in the first interrogative is you, while in the second, it is who.You and who are content units and as such are epistemic markers.
2. The identification of the direction of schematization, i.e. the intentionality of the interrogative.For example.
If Maudie doesn't love us then why should we be good?D.H.Lawrence Here the direction of schematization is wonder.3. The identification of immediate experience.It includes a) the use of tropes and figures of speech; b) the icons of perceptual world---temporal, spatial, visual, aural, emotional, etc.
4. The identification of the direction of conceptual schematization of iconicity, i.e. how is the content unit of the interrogative conceptually represented in the text?
In order to provide a representative illustration of the conceptual meaning of interrogatives in poetic discourse the data is presented in two sections − ontological and socio-cultural.DISCUSSION Ontological view of interrogatives.
( The epistemic markers are you and Nobody.The direction of schematization is identification.It indicates the sensibility that shifts toward a more impersonal as compared to (1).In fact, the difference between (1) and ( 2) is that in (1) the self is essential, a"self-making-in-a-situation", while in (2) the self is non-existential.
(3) What is love?One name for it is knowledge.
From "Audubon: A Vision" [Love And Knowledge] by R. P. Warren The question "What is ...?" presupposes a particular way of thinking that points one in the direction of essence [Smith 2012:397].The poet's central vision is 'the osmosis of being' --an awakening to the truth, the painful process of achieving wisdom.
The epistemic marker is love.The direction of schematization is identification.For conceptual iconicity let us turn to Marshal Walker's comment: "The vision offered is of a world of tension in which "human filtn" is complemented by "human hope", a beastiality by beauty, the anguish of self-uncertainty by the triumph of selfrealization, all through the redeeming power of imagination by which love is knowledge" [Walker 1989:158 My Shoes by Charles Simic Here the epistemic marker is you.The direction of schematization is wonder about the purpose of reading books.The immediate experience is the reading 'born in mind'; the use of metaphor: "in you ... to read/the Gospel of my life"."The direction of schematic conceptual iconicity is the emotional state regulated by attributive word combinations: "perfect humility", "strange church", and "mute patience".
( Here the epistemic marker is the emotional state − love.The direction of schematization is wonder about the objects of enjoyment.The immediate experience is the figure of speech − enumeration: ''chick', 'chidder-barn', 'grassy chives', 'great moon', 'crickert-impressario', and 'blue bulls'.The items of the list are iconic conceptual schematization of I have loved .
Usually Stevens's list brings about the confusion.Here is Leggett's commentary on it: "The bulk of the poem is given the recovery of desire; here Stevens's buried analogy of the world as obscure text or aphonic song provides access to "something" that must be without a name"[Leggett 2017].
(6) Alone with his heart at last, does the fortunate traveller find In the vague touch of a breeze, the fickle flash of a wave, Proofs that somewhere exists, really, the Good Place, Convincing as those that children find in stones and holes?From A Voyage by W.H. Auden Here the epistemic marker is fortunate traveller.The direction of schematization is discovery.The immediate experience is the figure of speech --suspence, produced by two object clauses introduced by the preposition in.The iconic conceptual schematization is the Good Place.
(7) One circumlocution as used as any Depends, it seems, upon the joke of rhyme For the pure joy; else why should so many Poems which make us cry direct us to Ourselves at our least apt, least kind, least true, Where a blank I loves blankly a blank You? From One Circumlocution by W.H. Auden Here the epistemic marker is Poems.The direction of schematization is doubting the purpose of writing poems.The immediate experience is the figure of speech --anaphoric repetition of least and blank which seems representationally significant in so far as it transforms identification into universal concepts.The direction of conceptual schematization of Poems is sensuous: "the pure joy", "make us cry", "direct us to/Ourselves".
(8) When shall I see the half-moon sink again Behind the black sycamore at the end of the garden?When will the scent of the dim white phlox Creep up the wall to me, and in at my open window?From End Of Another Home Holiday by D.H.Lawrence Here the epistemic marker is time.The direction of schematization is homesickness.The immediate experience is the figure of speech − syntactic parallelism which makes the direction of schematization of iconicity − visual ( "the half-moom sink"), and olfactory ("the scent of the dim white phlox") − representationaly significant.
(9) You that love England, who have an ear for her music, The slow movement of clouds in benediction, Clear arias of light thrilling over her uplands, Over the chores of summer sustained peacefully; Ceaseless the leaves' counterpoint in a west wind lively,!СЕКЦІЯ XXI.ФІЛОЛОГІЯ ТА ЖУРНАЛІСТИКА But was it Ulysses?Or was it only the warmth of the sun On the pillow?The thought kept beating in her like her heart.The two kept beating together.It was only day.
From The World of Meditation by Wallace Stevens Here there are two interrogatives.The epistemic marker is Ulysses.The direction of the first interrogative is wonder about the approach of Ulysses.The immediate experience of the perceptual world is kinetic ("Someone is moving/On the horison").The direction of schematization in the second interrogative is Penelope's doubt about Ulysses arrival.The immediate experience of the perceptual world is thermal ("the warmth of the sun/On her pillow").The direction of schematization of conceptual iconicity: a form of fire, his arms, her necklace, and her belt.
(13) What's that we see from far? the spring of day Bloomed from the east? or fair enjewlled May Blown out of April? or some new Star filled with glory to our view, Reaching at heaven To add a nobler planet to the seven?
Say! Or do we not descry Some goddess in a cloud of tiffany To move, or rather the Emergent Venus from the sea?
From A Nuptial Song by Robert Herrick Here multiple interrogatives togethrer with the irregularity of lines create the atmosphete of great dynamism, and draw attention to the objects of perception.The epistemic marker is see.Visual conceptual iconicity: "the spring of day", "fair enjewlled May", "some new star", "some goddess", "emergent Venus".The direction of schematization is wonder at being abie to discern thr object from far.(14) Dear Cloe, how blubbered is that pretty face?Thy cheek all on fire, and thy hair all uncurl'd!Pr'ythee quit this caprice; and (as old Falstaf says) Let us e'en talk a little like folks of this world.
How canst thou presume, thou hath leave to destroy The beauties, which Venus but lent to thy keeping?Those looks were designed to inspire love and joy: More ord'nary eyes may serve people for weeping.
To be vexed at a trifle or two that I writ, Your judgement at once and my passion you wrong: You take that for fact which will scarce be found wit: Od's life! must one swear to the truth of a song?From To Let Go or to Hold on -? by D. H. Lawrence Here the epistemic marker is to disappear.The immediate experience of perceptual world is temporal − 'the time come'; 'now'.It stands for intelligibility that prevailed in the beginning of the twentieth century and which is also relevant for contemporary world.The immediate experience of simile should also be mentioned as the apt illustration of historical transmogrification of flesh and blood.
The direction of conceptual schematization of iconicity − 'vast revolutions of creative chaos' and 'an improvement on humans'.The direction of schematization is wonder.
(24) Shall I tell you again the new word, the new world of the unborn day?It is Resurrection.
The resurrection of the flesh.For our flesh is dead only egoistically we assert ourselves.
From The New Word by D.H.Lawrence Here the epistemic marker is the new word.The direction of schematization is asking for permission.The immediate experience is a figure of speech --anadiplosis: the new word -the new world; Resurrection --The resurrection.It brings about the direction of schematization which is nomination.The direction of conceptual schematization of iconicity is The resurrection of the flesh.This space from which the forth wall is invariably missing, As on a stage-set or dollhouse, except by staying as we are, In lost profile, facing the stars, with dozens if as yet Unrealized projects, and a strict sense Of time running out, of evening presenting The tractfully folded-over bill?And we fit Rather too easily into it, become transparant, Almost ghosts.
From Pyrography by John Ashbery The epistemic marker is to inhabit space.The direction of schematization is in what way.The immediate experience of the perceptual world: visual ("facing the stars", "become transparent"); temporal ("time running out", "evening presenting").The direction of conceptual schematization of iconicity: "a stage-set", "dollhouse", "ghost".

Conclusion
In this article my aim was to consider poetic interrogative as a cognitive instrument of conceptualization of the poem's content, be it the whole poem or its fragment.The conceptual frame, provided by the ideas of epistemic rhetoric, has helped reveal a number of concepts pertaining to the individual perception of the world, covering different historical periods.
One area of further research concerns the position of the interrogative in the text of the poem.Preliminary analysis shows that the initial position of interrogative in the text produces a much stronger concept as compared to its final position.It should be mentioned in this connection that Yes/No interrogatives have the least power of conceptualization.
Another research focus could be to work out the direction of schematization in detail taking into consideration different views on intentionality.
It would be especially interesting to observe how interrogatives reflect the change of the content of consciousness throughout the ages.

СЕКЦІЯ
XXI. ФІЛОЛОГІЯ ТА ЖУРНАЛІСТИКА (25) How are we to inhabit (23)-? by D. H. Lawrence Here the epistemic marker is have.The immediate experience is possesion which is reinforced by syntactic parallelism based on anaphora.Conceptual schematization of iconicity: money, financial system, industry, industrial system, machines.The direction of schematization is doubt, asking with what purpose?(23)Is the time come for humans now to begin to disappear, leaving it to the vast revolutions of creative chaos to bring forth creatures that are an improvement on humans, as the horse was an improvement on the ichthyosaurus?