English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article provides a comparative analysis of both the Chinese and foreign prosody and explores varied linguistic features of prosody and its significant enlightenment to Chinese poetic development. Jakobson deemed “selection” and “combination” as two basic methods of languages and selected combination through stressed syllabus and poetic combination, meter, syntax, repeated rhyme, etc., to highlight textual linkage. Generated prosody emphasizes cognition of artistic regularities of poetic language forms, stressing the interrelation between prosody forms and linguistic formations. An important aspect of this paper is an analysis of whether alternatives and enduring rhyme schemes are suitable in Chinese. Due to varied linguistic natures, none of the stresses and the enclosing rhyme scheme in English and German, the yin and yang end rhyme in French, the five-seven-character that pays the most attention to the sound-number regularity in Japanese, or the alphabetic writing and the complex tone in Russian can be correctly translated into Chinese. So only by respecting the features of each language can we give fully play to linguistic functions and values.

A Theoretical Analysis of Chinese and Foreign Prosody Comparisons—Case Studies of English, French, German, Japanese, and Russian Poetry