umu.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publications (5 of 5) Show all publications
Hartman, J. (2019). Conditionals in therapy and counseling sessions: therapists' and clients' uses of what-if constructions. Journal of Pragmatics, 140, 112-126
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Conditionals in therapy and counseling sessions: therapists' and clients' uses of what-if constructions
2019 (English)In: Journal of Pragmatics, ISSN 0378-2166, E-ISSN 1879-1387, Vol. 140, p. 112-126Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Based on transcribed spoken data, this study explores therapists’ and clients’ uses of what-if constructions in therapy and counseling sessions. It seeks to establish how these constructions are used, whether there are usage differences between these two groups of speakers, and, if so, how such differences can be explained. The study concludes that both therapists and clients use what if, but they do so to satisfy different communicative needs. Clients primarily use what if to convey worry and doubt (What if don’t like it there?), whereas therapists use what if to summarize and reconstrue their clients' worries and to present alternative perspectives and entertain potential consequences (What if you gave up your guilt?). Both groups of speakers use what if to prompt (re)enactment of scenarios, often in connection with metarepresented speech and thought (I was like, “What if he is here?”). The study offers linguistic support for clinical observations concerning the prevalence of what-if reasoning in anxiety disorders, and additionally illustrates how therapists use language to trigger reality-distancing in their clients. Through a systematic application of Chilton’s Deictic Space Theory, the study demonstrates the utility of a cognitive linguistic approach to the consideration of interactive spoken data.

Keywords
conditional constructions, what if, therapy, contrastive construal, Deictic Space Theory
National Category
General Language Studies and Linguistics
Research subject
Linguistics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-153775 (URN)10.1016/j.pragma.2018.12.003 (DOI)
Available from: 2018-12-03 Created: 2018-12-03 Last updated: 2019-01-28Bibliographically approved
Hartman, J. (2018). Constructions of contrast in spoken testimonials on Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Language and Cognition, 10(1), 83-109
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Constructions of contrast in spoken testimonials on Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
2018 (English)In: Language and Cognition, ISSN 1866-9808, E-ISSN 1866-9859, Vol. 10, no 1, p. 83-109Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Spoken testimonials on Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) constitute the data for this study, which considers contrastive construal as evoked by conditional constructions (if, unless, what if) and antonymous uses of lexical items (bad–good, guilt–innocence). Unlike conditional language use for the expression of hypothetical scenarios, doubt, and catastrophizing, antonyms have not been a focus of OCD research. In the data, antonymous lexical items establish experiential dichotomies (e.g., good–bad, guilt–innocence, cause–prevent) that reinforce and specify the nature of evoked contrast. Meaning making in the data, it is proposed, evokes contrastive construal according to bundles of integrated quality dimensions such as MODALITY, MORALITY, and EMOTION that make up incompatible conceptions of reality. Tied to contrast in the data is also the notion of balance, and contrast is considered alongside force-dynamic actions that are experienced as effecting balance. While the overriding concerns for the study are linguistic–conceptual, the study’s findings can have implications for research on OCD and a cognitive semantic perspective can potentially complement both content- and process-oriented psychological approaches to this disorder.

Keywords
conditional constructions, antonyms, contrastive construal, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
National Category
General Language Studies and Linguistics
Research subject
Linguistics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-153779 (URN)10.1017/langcog.2017.18 (DOI)000429073300004 ()2-s2.0-85044301747 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-12-03 Created: 2018-12-03 Last updated: 2018-12-11Bibliographically approved
Hartman, J. & Paradis, C. (2018). Emotive and sensory simulation through comparative construal. Metaphor and Symbol, 33(2), 123-143
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Emotive and sensory simulation through comparative construal
2018 (English)In: Metaphor and Symbol, ISSN 1092-6488, E-ISSN 1532-7868, Vol. 33, no 2, p. 123-143Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Using authentic textual data from written personal narratives, we investigate how individuals with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, and Tourette Syndrome mediate their emotive and sensory experiences through language. Our study reveals that experiential comparisons of different kinds (Trying not to tic is like trying not to blink) feature prominently as means of conveying such experiences. We identify a number of meaning domains that are recruited in correspondences between sources and targets, including MOTION and FORCE, and detail how sensory modalities, bodily sensations, and emotions are exploited to evoke emotive/sensory responses in readers. We conclude that comparative construal is a significant communicative strategy precisely because it elicits familiar situational meanings capable of evoking vicarious experiences in readers. By considering texts from actual uses of language in natural situations, our research sheds new light on how emotive/sensory experiences are conveyed through language and furthers our understanding of means of effecting emotive/sensory descriptions beyond individual words. An explanatory framework for comparative construal is proposed—a three-dimensional similarity space—which accounts for such construal in terms of the nature of correspondences between sources and targets and intersubjective evaluation in the form of experiential, embodied simulation.

National Category
General Language Studies and Linguistics
Research subject
Linguistics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-153778 (URN)10.1080/10926488.2018.1434945 (DOI)
Available from: 2018-12-03 Created: 2018-12-03 Last updated: 2018-12-12Bibliographically approved
Hartman, J. (2017). Premonitory urges and Touretting volcanoes: force construal in personal narratives on Tourette Syndrome. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 15(1), 155-183
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Premonitory urges and Touretting volcanoes: force construal in personal narratives on Tourette Syndrome
2017 (English)In: Review of Cognitive Linguistics, ISSN 1877-9751, E-ISSN 1877-976X, Vol. 15, no 1, p. 155-183Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Causative meaning including, but not limited to, causation, prevention, and enabling is realized in language use through force construal. Force is explored in this article through consideration of narratives on Tourette Syndrome, a disorder that is largely characterized by its constitutive actions (vocal or motor tics). To account for force construal, the article proposes a merger of a vector model for the description of force in language and cognition and a lexical semantic model of ontologies and construals. Force is accounted for in terms of a number of configurations (CAUSE, ENABLE, PREVENT, WITHSTAND, and DESPITE) that are realized through construal operations. This merger of explanatory models allows nuanced and flexible description of forceful meaning in actual language use.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2017
Keywords
force construal, vectors, causation, causative configurations, Tourette Syndrome
National Category
General Language Studies and Linguistics
Research subject
Linguistics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-153780 (URN)10.1075/rcl.15.1.07har (DOI)000410519700007 ()
Available from: 2018-12-03 Created: 2018-12-03 Last updated: 2018-12-14Bibliographically approved
Hartman, J. (2016). A meaning potential approach to lexical meaning: the case of bit. English Language and Linguistics, 20(1), 85-106
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A meaning potential approach to lexical meaning: the case of bit
2016 (English)In: English Language and Linguistics, ISSN 1360-6743, E-ISSN 1469-4379, Vol. 20, no 1, p. 85-106Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This article offers a description of a particular lexical item, the English word bit, from a meaning potential perspective making use of the framework Lexical meaning as ontologies and construals (LOC). The lexical semantics for bit is described not in terms of meanings per se, but rather in terms of potential for cueing conceptual structures of varying schematicity, put to use through a range of cognitive processes, or construals. The article concludes that some conceptual structures are quite fundamental to bit’s use and that their construal is highly flexible and contextually sensitive. The semantic structures evoked by bit are realized through particular communicative and discursive settings, and these semantic structures provide the raw material for all its situated meanings in response to communicative demands. Ultimately, a meaning potential perspective, in particular the model for describing and explaining lexical meaning adopted in this article, facilitates a rich and explicatory description of bit, both as regards its fundamental structures and their construal in attested language use.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cambridge University Press, 2016
National Category
Specific Languages
Research subject
Linguistics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-153781 (URN)10.1017/S1360674315000283 (DOI)000387497200004 ()
Available from: 2018-12-03 Created: 2018-12-03 Last updated: 2018-12-14Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0001-6800-9050

Search in DiVA

Show all publications