高层转喻视域下夸张的认知语用研究
|
摘要
隐喻、转喻等修辞认知及其交叉研究成为认知语用学研究的热点。夸张作为一种基本的认知模式近年来受到了越来越多的重视,但现有的研究多关注夸张的隐喻机制。高层转喻是国内外认知语言学的一个前沿课题,但现有的国内外高层转喻研究有需要拓展研究的地方。运用高层转喻对夸张生成和理解的认知语用机制进行分析,可以发现:(1)从发话者的角度而言,夸张生成的高层转喻机制有"量标"转喻、"部分整体互代"转喻以及"因果互代"转喻;(2)从受话者角度分析,夸张的理解基于事件域的高层转喻推理;(3)无论是发话者生成夸张还是受话者理解夸张,都是多种源自身体经验的高层转喻合力发挥作用的过程。
The study of the interfaces among rhetorical cognitions such as metonymy and metaphor has become the focus of cognitive pragmatics. Hyperbole,as one of the basic cognitive patterns,has received more attention recently. How ever,hyperbole has been only studied mainly from a metaphorical perspective. On the other hand,high-level metonymy is also a hotspot in cognitive linguistics both at home and abroad,but its scope of application needs to be expanded. Adopting the theory of high-level metonymy,this paper analyzes the generation and comprehension of hyperbole,and finds that,firstly,from the addresser's perspective,hyperbole is generated via "scale metonymy","part-w hole metonymy ",as w ell as "cause-effect metonymy ". Secondly,from the perspective of addressee,the comprehension of hyperbole is based on "event metonymy ". Thirdly,both the generation and comprehension of hyperbole are the results of multiple high-level metonymies operating together,draw ing on our embodied experience.
The study of the interfaces among rhetorical cognitions such as metonymy and metaphor has become the focus of cognitive pragmatics. Hyperbole,as one of the basic cognitive patterns,has received more attention recently. How ever,hyperbole has been only studied mainly from a metaphorical perspective. On the other hand,high-level metonymy is also a hotspot in cognitive linguistics both at home and abroad,but its scope of application needs to be expanded. Adopting the theory of high-level metonymy,this paper analyzes the generation and comprehension of hyperbole,and finds that,firstly,from the addresser's perspective,hyperbole is generated via "scale metonymy","part-w hole metonymy ",as w ell as "cause-effect metonymy ". Secondly,from the perspective of addressee,the comprehension of hyperbole is based on "event metonymy ". Thirdly,both the generation and comprehension of hyperbole are the results of multiple high-level metonymies operating together,draw ing on our embodied experience.
引文
陈香兰2013《语言与高层转喻研究》,北京大学出版社。
范振强2014《具身认知视域下转喻的动态构建机制》,中国书籍出版社。
范振强2015关联理论视域下隐喻的感受意---兼论心智哲学与关联理论的互补性,《天津外国语大学学报》第5期。
蒋勇2004夸张性隐喻的梯级含义功能,《现代外语》第3期。
蒋勇、王志军2017等级含义论对任指词浮现极性特征的解释力,《当代修辞学》第6期。
刘大为2016《比喻、近喻与自喻》,学林出版社。
刘大为2017作为语体变量的情景现场与现场描述语篇中的视点引导结构,《当代修辞学》第6期。
王寅2007《认知语言学》,上海外语教育出版社。
张辉、卢为中2010《认知转喻》,上海外语教育出版社。
Barnden,J.2014 Metaphor,simile,and exaggeration of likeness.Metaphor and Symbol,30(1):41-62.
Barcelona,A.2018 General description of the metonymy database in the Cordoba project,w ith particular attention to the issues of hierarchy,protypicality,and taxonomic domains.In Blanco-Carrión,O,A.Bacelona&R.Pannain(eds.),Conceptual Metonymy,55-73.Amsterdam:Johnson Benjamins.
Blanco-Carrión,O.2018 Conventionality and linguistic domain(s)involved in the characterization of metonymies.In Blanco-Carrión,O,A.Bacelona&R.Pannain(eds.),Conceptual Metonymy,55-73.Amsterdam:Johnson Benjamins.
Brdar-Szbo,R.&M,Brdar 2010“M ummy,I Love you Like a Thousand Ladybirds”:Reflections on the Emergence of Hyperbolic Effects and the Truth of Hyperboles.In A.Burkhardt&B.Nerlich(eds.)Tropical Truths.Berlin:De Gruyter,383-427.
Burgers,C,L.K.Y.Renardeld&G.J.Steen 2018 M etaphor,Hyperbole,and Irony:Uses in Isolation and in Combination in Written Discourse.Journal of Pragmatics,(127):71-83.
Ibá1ez,F.R.M.&O.I.D.Velasco 2001 High-level M etonymy and Linguistic Structure.Atlantis,(1):297~314.
Johnson,M.1987 The Body in the Mind:The Bodily Basis of Meaning,Imagination,and Reason.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Kvecses,Z.2017 Levels of M etaphor.Cognitive Linguistics,(2):1-26.
Lakoff,G.1987 Women,Fire and Dangerous Things.Chicago:Chicago University Press.
Lakoff,G.&M.Johnson 1980 Metaphors We Live by.Chicago:Chicago University Press.
Littlemore,J.2015 Metonymy:Hidden Shortcuts in Language,Thought and Communication.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Panther,K.&L.Thornburg 1999 Metonymy in Language and Thought.Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Panther,K.&L.Thornburg 2000 The Effect for Cause M etonymy in English Grammar.In A.Barcelona(ed.)Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads.Berlin:M outon de Gruyter,215-232.
Radden,G.&Z.K9vecses 1999 Tow ards a Theory of M etonymy.In K.Panther&G.Radden(eds.)Metonymy in Language and Thought.Amsterdam:John Benjamins,21-39.
Ruiz de M endoza,I.F.J.&V.O.I.Diez 2001 High-level M etonymy and Linguistic Structure.Atlantis,19(1):297-314.
Ruiz de M endoza,I.F.J.&J.L.Otal Campo,2002 Metonymy,G rammar,and Communication.Granada:Compares.
Ruiz,J.H.2009 Understanding Tropes.Berlin:Peter Lang.
范振强2014《具身认知视域下转喻的动态构建机制》,中国书籍出版社。
范振强2015关联理论视域下隐喻的感受意---兼论心智哲学与关联理论的互补性,《天津外国语大学学报》第5期。
蒋勇2004夸张性隐喻的梯级含义功能,《现代外语》第3期。
蒋勇、王志军2017等级含义论对任指词浮现极性特征的解释力,《当代修辞学》第6期。
刘大为2016《比喻、近喻与自喻》,学林出版社。
刘大为2017作为语体变量的情景现场与现场描述语篇中的视点引导结构,《当代修辞学》第6期。
王寅2007《认知语言学》,上海外语教育出版社。
张辉、卢为中2010《认知转喻》,上海外语教育出版社。
Barnden,J.2014 Metaphor,simile,and exaggeration of likeness.Metaphor and Symbol,30(1):41-62.
Barcelona,A.2018 General description of the metonymy database in the Cordoba project,w ith particular attention to the issues of hierarchy,protypicality,and taxonomic domains.In Blanco-Carrión,O,A.Bacelona&R.Pannain(eds.),Conceptual Metonymy,55-73.Amsterdam:Johnson Benjamins.
Blanco-Carrión,O.2018 Conventionality and linguistic domain(s)involved in the characterization of metonymies.In Blanco-Carrión,O,A.Bacelona&R.Pannain(eds.),Conceptual Metonymy,55-73.Amsterdam:Johnson Benjamins.
Brdar-Szbo,R.&M,Brdar 2010“M ummy,I Love you Like a Thousand Ladybirds”:Reflections on the Emergence of Hyperbolic Effects and the Truth of Hyperboles.In A.Burkhardt&B.Nerlich(eds.)Tropical Truths.Berlin:De Gruyter,383-427.
Burgers,C,L.K.Y.Renardeld&G.J.Steen 2018 M etaphor,Hyperbole,and Irony:Uses in Isolation and in Combination in Written Discourse.Journal of Pragmatics,(127):71-83.
Ibá1ez,F.R.M.&O.I.D.Velasco 2001 High-level M etonymy and Linguistic Structure.Atlantis,(1):297~314.
Johnson,M.1987 The Body in the Mind:The Bodily Basis of Meaning,Imagination,and Reason.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Kvecses,Z.2017 Levels of M etaphor.Cognitive Linguistics,(2):1-26.
Lakoff,G.1987 Women,Fire and Dangerous Things.Chicago:Chicago University Press.
Lakoff,G.&M.Johnson 1980 Metaphors We Live by.Chicago:Chicago University Press.
Littlemore,J.2015 Metonymy:Hidden Shortcuts in Language,Thought and Communication.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Panther,K.&L.Thornburg 1999 Metonymy in Language and Thought.Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Panther,K.&L.Thornburg 2000 The Effect for Cause M etonymy in English Grammar.In A.Barcelona(ed.)Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads.Berlin:M outon de Gruyter,215-232.
Radden,G.&Z.K9vecses 1999 Tow ards a Theory of M etonymy.In K.Panther&G.Radden(eds.)Metonymy in Language and Thought.Amsterdam:John Benjamins,21-39.
Ruiz de M endoza,I.F.J.&V.O.I.Diez 2001 High-level M etonymy and Linguistic Structure.Atlantis,19(1):297-314.
Ruiz de M endoza,I.F.J.&J.L.Otal Campo,2002 Metonymy,G rammar,and Communication.Granada:Compares.
Ruiz,J.H.2009 Understanding Tropes.Berlin:Peter Lang.