The Application of Cognitive Linguistics in Interpreting Characters’ Psychology in English Literature
Main Article Content
Abstract
The inner thoughts of characters in English literary works are embedded in textual details such as dialogues, actions and environmental descriptions. Traditional literary analysis mostly relies on superficial plotlines and subjective aesthetic judgments, which easily leads to subjectively biased interpretations and vague analytical logic. Centered on universal human cognitive mechanisms, cognitive linguistics encompasses five core sub-theories: Conceptual Metaphor Theory, Mental Space Theory, Figure-Ground Theory, Conceptual Integration Theory and Prototype Theory. Taking human cognitive thinking patterns as an objective tool for text interpretation, this theoretical system can construct a complete analytical path from linguistic symbols to characters’ subconsciousness, emotions and motivations. Based on the core theories of cognitive linguistics, this paper designs a standardized process for analyzing characters’ psychology with case studies of classic British and American novels. Five sets of data tables are adopted to quantitatively compare the interpretative differences between traditional literary analysis and cognitive linguistic analysis, which clearly demonstrate the practical value of cognitive linguistics in capturing implicit emotions of characters, exploring deep-seated psychological motivations and unifying the logic of textual interpretation. Balancing academic rigor and accessible expression, this paper adopts clear subjects for all sentences and short sentences to decompose complex logic, lowering the threshold for understanding professional theories. The research results prove that introducing cognitive linguistics into the analysis of characters in English literature can reduce subjective bias in literary interpretation, and provide an objective, applicable and repeatable analytical paradigm for classroom teaching and literary criticism research of English literature.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
References
K. I. Hossain, “Literature-based language learning: Challenges, and opportunities for English learners,” Ampersand, vol. 13, p. 100201, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.amper.2024.100201.
P. Deane, “Building and Justifying Interpretations of Texts: A Key Practice in the English Language Arts,” vol. 2020, no. 1, pp. 1–53, 2020, doi: 10.1002/ets2.12304.
J. C. Huang, “Learning to write for publication in English through genre-based pedagogy: A case in Taiwan,” System, vol. 45, pp. 175–186, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.system.2014.05.010.
N. Nawi and N. Nor, “The Challenges in the Teaching of English Literature,” Journey: J. Engl. Lang. Pedagog., vol. 6, pp. 130–147, 2023, doi: 10.33503/journey.v6i1.2640.
J. Lange, M. W. Heerdink, and G. A. van Kleef, “Reading emotions, reading people: Emotion perception and inferences drawn from perceived emotions,” Curr. Opin. Psychol., vol. 43, pp. 85–90, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j. copsyc.2021.06.008.
M. A. Gernsbacher, H. H. Goldsmith, and R. R. Robertson, “Do Readers Mentally Represent Characters’ Emotional States?,” Cogn. Emot., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 89–111, 1992, doi: 10.1080/02699939208411061.
W. Deakin, “A Brief (but Timely) History of Literary Criticism,” in Modern Language, Philosophy and Criticism, F. Dilling and I. Witzke, Eds. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 2024, pp. 1–9, doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-30494-1_2.
N. S. G. Abdelrasheed et al., “Statistical Analysis Tools: A Review of Implementation and Effectiveness of Teaching English,” Int. J. Linguist. Lit. Transl., vol. 5, pp. 241–246, 2022, doi: 10.32996/ijllt.2022.5.4.29.
J. Hu, “The Challenge of Traditional Teaching Approach: A Study on the Path to Improve Classroom Teaching Effectiveness Based on Secondary School Students’ Psychology,” Lect. Notes Educ. Psychol. Public Media, vol. 50, pp. 213–219, 2024, doi: 10.54254/2753-7048/50/20240945.
T. Inoue, “Toward an ecological model of language: from cognitive linguistics to ecological semantics,” Lang. Sci., vol. 100, p. 101582, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.langsci.2023.101582.
G. Thierry, “Neurolinguistic Relativity: How Language Flexes Human Perception and Cognition,” Lang. Learn., vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 690–713, 2016, doi: 10.1111/lang.12186.
M. Bhagat, “Understanding Theory, Literary Theory and Literary Criticism,” Int. J. Res. Engl., vol. 6, 2024, doi: 10.33545/26648717.2024.v6.i1 b.161.
C. Xiu, “Integration of Cognitive Linguistics Theories into Foreign Language Teaching,” Front. Humanit. Soc. Sci., vol. 5, pp. 170–178, 2025, doi: 10.54691/1xqd6h31.
Anonymous, “Language models and linguistic theories beyond words,” Nat. Mach. Intell., vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 677–678, 2023, doi: 10.1038/s4 2256-023-00703-8.
C. Zhai, S. Wibowo, and L. D. Li, “The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students’ cognitive abilities: a systematic review,” Smart Learn. Environ., vol. 11, no. 1, p. 28, 2024, doi: 10.1186/s405 61-024-00316-7.