|本期目录/Table of Contents|

[1]范振强,马瑞洁.交互主观性视域下刻意性隐喻的认知语用机制新解[J].浙江理工大学学报,2019,41-42(社科5):475-482.
 FAN Zhenqiang,MA Ruijie.An intersubjectivitybased interpretation of the explicatures and implicatures of deliberate metaphor[J].Journal of Zhejiang Sci-Tech University,2019,41-42(社科5):475-482.
点击复制

交互主观性视域下刻意性隐喻的认知语用机制新解()
分享到:

浙江理工大学学报[ISSN:1673-3851/CN:33-1338/TS]

卷:
第41-42卷
期数:
2019年社科5期
页码:
475-482
栏目:
出版日期:
2019-09-30

文章信息/Info

Title:
An intersubjectivitybased interpretation of the explicatures and implicatures of deliberate metaphor
文章编号:
1673-3851 (2019) 10-0475-08
作者:
范振强马瑞洁
浙江工商大学外国语学院,杭州 310018
Author(s):
FAN Zhenqiang MA Ruijie
School of Foreign Languages, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou 310018, China
关键词:
隐喻刻意性概念隐喻理论刻意性隐喻理论显义隐义言不尽意
分类号:
H1954
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
隐喻的刻意性正日益成为隐喻界的争鸣焦点:概念隐喻理论(CMT)认为对刻意性隐喻的理解离不开规约化概念隐喻系统的激活,刻意性隐喻理论(DMT)则认为它是一种临时相似点的构建过程。通过引入交互主观性理析,对典型的刻意性隐喻(即新奇隐喻)进行分析,研究发现:第一,CMT和DMT以交互主观性为统一框架可以更全面解释隐喻的全貌:有些刻意性隐喻直接激活CMT的概念隐喻表征系统即可理解;而另外一部分则依靠图式知识的转喻式激活和临时隐喻构建;第二,基于CMT隐喻系统激活的隐喻传递的是显义;基于转喻式临时构建的隐喻(DMT)传递隐义;第三,无论是显义和隐义,刻意性隐喻都呈现“言不尽意”的认知效果,为特定的交际目的服务。

参考文献/References:

[1]Ortony A. Metaphor and Thought[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
[2]Cameron L. Confrontation or complementarity? Metaphor in language and cognitive metaphor theory[J]. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 2007, 5(1): 107-135.
[3]Charteris Black J. Forensic deliberations on ’purposeful metaphor’[J]. Metaphor and the Social World, 2012, 2(1):1-21.
[4]Steen  G. The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a threedimensional model for metaphor[J]. Metaphor and Symbol, 2008, 23(4): 213-241.
[5]Steen  G J. The contemporary theory of metaphor: now new and improved![J]. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 2011, 9(1):26-64.
[6]Steen G. Deliberate metaphor affords conscious metaphorical cognition[J]. Cognitive Semiotics, 2009, 5(12): 179-197.
[7]Steen G. Deliberate metaphor theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues[J]. Intercultural Pragmatics, 2017, 14(1):1-24.
[8]Steen G. Developing, testing and interpreting deliberate metaphor theory[J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2015(90): 67-72.
[9]Gibbs R W. Are ’deliberate’ metaphors really deliberate? A question of human consciousness and action[J]. Metaphor and the Social World, 2011, 1(1): 26-52.
[10]Gibbs R W. Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future?[J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2015(90): 73-76.
[11]Gibbs R W. Metaphor Wars: Conceptual Metaphors in Human Life[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
[12]Xu C, Zhang C, Wu Y. Enlarging the scope of metaphor studies[J]. Intercultural Pragmatics, 2016, 13(3): 439-447.
[13]Hampe B. Metaphor: Embodied Cognition and Discourse[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
[14]孙毅,陈朗.蓄意隐喻理论的学术进路[J]. 现代外语, 2017, 40(5): 715-724.
[15]孙亚,钱玉彬,马婷. 国外隐喻研究现状及发展趋势[J]. 现代外语, 2017, 40(5): 695-704.
[16]王寅. 认知语言学[M]. 上海:上海外语教育出版社, 2007.
[17]Lakoff G, Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
[18]Lakoff G, Turner M. More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989: 67-72.
[19]Goatly A. The Language of Metaphors[M]. London: Routledge, 1997:45.
[20]范振强. 论隐喻理论构建的参照维度及连续统:以“A is B”型隐喻为例[J].西南交通大学学报(社会科学版),2018, 19(3):78-89.
[21]莫嘉琳. 向死而生的隐喻:隐喻性终结后的叙事[M]. 北京:清华大学出版社, 2014:82.
[22]Verhagen A. Constructions of Intersubjectivity: Discourse, Syntax, and Cognition[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
[23]Handl S. Selling and buying, killing and wounding: (Un)conventional metaphors from two different semantic fields[C]//Gola E, Ervas F. Metaphor and Communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2017.
[24]范振强. 具身认知视域下转喻的动态构建机制[M]. 北京:中国书籍出版社, 2014:52.
[25]Sperber D, Wilson D. Relevance: Communication & Cognition[M]. Oxford: Blackwell, 1995.
[26]Blakemore D. Understanding Utterance[M]. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1992:157-158.
[27]Ibáez R D M, Hernández L P. Cognitive operations and pragmatic implication[C]// Panther K U, Thornburg L L. Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2003: 23-49.
[28]Lakoff G, Johnson M. Philosophy in the Flesh[M]. New York: Basic Books, 1999:61-65.
[29]Kvecses Z. Where Metaphors Come From[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015:10.
[30]游晓玲.谈关联理论对隐喻的阐释力:诗歌《如果》中隐喻的认知语用分析[J].湖南科技学院学报, 2010, 31(10):172-174.
[31]周红辉, 周昌乐. 论认知语境动态建构中的隐喻和转喻思维模式[J]. 重庆大学学报(社会科学版), 2009, 15(6): 152-153.
[32]范振强.关联理论视域下的显义和隐义研究:问题与展望[J]. 外语教学, 2015(1): 33-37.
[33]魏在江. 转喻模因的体验性认知基础[J]. 外语学刊, 2015(6): 39-44.
[34]休谟. 人性论[M]. 北京:商务印书馆, 1980:392.
[35]李春艳, 徐海英. 文学视野下的隐喻研究[M]. 长春:吉林大学出版社, 2011:41.
[36]Carston R. Lexical pragmatics, ad hoc concepts and metaphor: A Relevance Theory perspective[J]. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 2010, 22(1): 173-182.
[37]Tendahl M. A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor: Relevance Theory and Cognitive Linguistics[M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
[38]范振强,郭雅欣.概念隐喻新类型中的认知机制探讨:共现性还是相似性[J].江苏理工学院学报, 2018(5): 32-42.
[39]范振强.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[J].天津外国语大学学报, 2015(5):8-13.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期:2019-03-07
网络出版日期:2019-05-16
基金项目:教育部人文社科研究项目(16YJC740015)
作者简介:范振强(1980-),男,山东青岛人,副教授,博士,主要从事认知语言学和语用学方面的研究。
更新日期/Last Update: 2019-11-04