对新闻英语中转喻的语用探索.docx
- 文档编号:7607430
- 上传时间:2023-01-25
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:18
- 大小:36.02KB
对新闻英语中转喻的语用探索.docx
《对新闻英语中转喻的语用探索.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《对新闻英语中转喻的语用探索.docx(18页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
对新闻英语中转喻的语用探索
摘要
Al-Sharafi把转喻定义为一种替代的过程,其中一个词或是一种概念或一物体因邻近或因果关系而用来指代另一个。
正是基于这种对转喻所持有的替代观点,从而发展出了有关转喻的一种语篇理论。
而认知语言学家认为转喻是一种心理映现,是人类一种重要的思维方式,因此我们就可以依靠其来分析语篇中的转喻现象。
尽管一些语言学家就转喻从不同角度进行了研究;但相信从回指角度来研究转喻将会对这些研究尤其是转喻的认知研究起到补充的作用。
包含有替代关系的理想认知模型即被称为转喻模型。
本研究表明在大量的概念系统中存在着许多转喻模型并被广泛应用。
而本文着重研究的类型为,英语新闻语篇中常见的以做出影响或判断为目的而发生的一个成分或次范畴对整个范畴产生的转喻性的替代。
关键词:
转喻新闻英语语用
Abstract
AI-Sharafidefinesmetonymyasaprocessofrepresentationinwhichonewordor conceptorobjectstandsforanotherbycontiguityorcausality.Andbasedonthe representationalviewofmetonymy,atextualtheoryofmetonymycouldbedeveloped. Thecognitivelinguistsdefinemetonymyasamentalreflectionandasmetonymic languageisanimportantthinkingmodeofhumanbeings,itcanbeappliedtointerpreting anaphoraintexts.Althoughsomelinguistshavealreadydonesomeresearcheson anaphorafromvariousperspectives;tointerpretanaphorafromthemetonymic perspectivesurelycanserveasacomplementtotheresearchesonanaphoraespecially fromthecognitiveperspective.
TheIdealizedCognitiveModel(ICM)whichcontainsstands-forrelationsiswhatwe referredasmetonymicmodels.Thestudyhereshowsthattherearemanymetonymic modelsinarichconceptualsystem,andtheyareusedforavarietyofpurposes.Thefocus hereisthatkindinwhichamemberorsubcategorycanstandmetonymicallyforthe wholecategoryforthepurposeofmakinginfluencesorjudgmentswhichisquitepopular inEnglishnewstext.
Keywords:
MetonymyNewsEnglishPragmatics
Contents
Chapter1Introduction1
Chapter2ConceptualNatureofMetonymy2
2.1TheGroundingofMetonymy2
2.1.1ContiguityandIdealizedCognitiveModel2
2.1.2ContiguityandFrames3
2.1.3ContiguityandScenarios4
2.1.4ContiguityandMentalSpaces5
2.2InteractionofMetonymyandMetaphor6
2.2.1DistinguishingMetonymyfromMetaphor6
2.2.2Metaphtonymy7
2.3DistinctionbetweenMetonymyandSynecdoche7
2.3.1TraditionalApproach7
2.3.2CognitiveApproach8
Chapter3TheoryofConceptualMetonymy9
3.1Studiesonmetonymy9
3.1.1Cognitiveviewofmetonymy9
3.1.2Metonymyinthought9
3.1.3Metonymy-producingrelationships11
3.2Metonymicmodels11
3.2.1Metonymyincohesion11
3.2.2Textualmodelofmetonymy12
Chapter4TheExplorationofMetonymyPragmaticFunctioninJournalisticEnglish13
4.1JournalisticEnglish13
4.1.1Studiesonnewsreporting13
4.1.2Comprehensionofnewsreporting14
4.1.3Socialfactorsanddiscourseprocessing15
4.1.4Contextdependency16
4.2MetonymyStudyofJournalisticEnglish17
4.3MetonymicmechanismofanaphorainEnglishnewstexts19
4.3.1MetonymicmechanismofNPanaphora20
4.3.2Metonymicmechanismofpronominalanaphora20
4.3.3Metonymicmechanismofzeroanaphora21
4.4MetonymicinterpretationofanaphorainEnglishnewstests21
4.4.1MetonymicinterpretationofNPanaphorainEnglishnewtexts22
4.4.2MetonymicinterpretationofpronominalanaphorainEnglishnewtexts23
4.4.3MetonymicmechanismofzeroanaphorainEnglishnewtexts24
Chapter5Conclusion25
5.1majorfindings25
5.2limitations25
Reference27
Acknowledgements28
MetonymyinJournalisticEnglishanditsPragmaticFunctions
Chapter1Introduction
Traditionally,metaphorandmetonymyhavebeenregardedasfiguresofspeech.Peoplespeakandwritemetaphoricallyormetonymicallyinordertoachievesomeartisticandrhetoricaleffects,tofulfillcommunicationeloquently,ortoimpressotherswithestheticallypleasingwords.Instantiationsoftheroleofthisembellishmentorenhancementoffigurativelanguagearebynomeansdifficulttofindinanypaperorbookonmetaphorormetonymy.Moreover,thestudyofthetwotropes,inparticular,metaphor,hasexperiencedalonghistoryofconcerninthefieldsofphilosophy,rhetoricandlinguistics,whichcanbetracedbacktoasearlyasAristotle(384-322B.C.).SincethepublicationofLakoffandJohnson'sseminalworkMetaphorsWeLiveByin1980,however,thesituationhasundergonearadicalchange.Metaphorandmetonymyhavebeenrecognizedaspowerfulcognitivetoolsinourcognition(Lakoff&Johnson,1980;Lakoff,1987;Lakoff,1993;Gibbs,1994),andassuch,metaphorandmetonymyshouldbecalledfiguresofthought(Gibbs,1994;Yu,1998).Thecognitiveroleofmetaphorandmetonymyhassparkedagooddealofinterestamongdisciplinesinabroadrangetryingtoembraceorincorporateit:
philosophy,anthropology,psychology,linguistics,science,education,aswellasliterarycriticismandrhetoric.
Nevertheless,incomparisonwiththevastamountofresearchesonmetaphor,thestudiesonmetonymy,whichisnowacknowledgednolesssignificantthanmetaphor,arerelativelyfewereitherrecentlyorinthepast.Asaconsequence,thetheoriesofthestructure,workingmechanism,cognitivenature,andfunctionsofmetonymyareeithersubjectedtometaphortheoriesorscatteredputforward.Inviewofthistheauthorofthedissertationbelievesthatacomprehensiveresearchonthesetopicsis,therefore,ofgreetimportance.
Chapter2ConceptualNatureofMetonymy
2.1TheGroundingofMetonymy
Thenotionof“contiguity”isatthecoreofmosttheoriesofmetonymy.Traditional approacheslocatecontiguityrelationshipsineitherthelinguisticorrealworldwhereas cognitiveapproacheslocatethemintheconceptualworld.Oneoftherepresentative interpretationsofthetraditionalview,accordingtoBlank,isgivenbyStephen Ullmann.Forhim,theunderlyingrelationofmetonymyis“contiguityof senses”,i.e.,anassociationbetween(intra-linguistic)semanticfeaturesoftwowordsand “metonymyarisesbetweenwordsalreadyrelatedtoeachother”.Cognitiveassertion isfirstgivenbyLakoffandJohnson.Theythinkofcontiguityintermsofthewhole rangeofconceptualassociationscommonlyrelatedtoanexpression,astheyclaim, “metonymicconceptsallowustoconceptualizeonethingbymeansofitsrelationto somethingelse”.“Infact,thegroundingofmetonymic conceptsisingeneralmoreobviousthanisthecasewithmetaphoricconcepts,sinceit usuallyinvolvesdirectphysicalorcausalassociation”.Notethatintheiraccountforthegroundingofmetonymy,Lakoff& Johnsonholdaratherbroadsensetothecontiguityrelationshipwhichembracestherelationsbetweenthelinguistic,realand conceptualworldtogether.This viewisrevisedbyLakoff’snewapproachtometonymy----theinterpretationofmetonymywithin anidealizedcognitivemodel.We willdiscussitinthenextsubsection.
2.1.1ContiguityandIdealizedCognitiveModel
Lakoffproposesthat“weorganizedourknowledgebymeansofstructurescalledidealizedcognitivemodels,orICMs”,and“eachICMisacomplexstructuredwhole,agestalt”.TheICMshavethefollowingpropertiesandfunctionsinhuman’scategorizationandcognition:
TheconceptICMismeanttoincludenotonlypeople'sencyclopedicknowledgeofaparticulardomainbutalsotheculturalmodelstheyarepartof.TakeWeekICMasanexample,intheidealizedmodel,theweekisawholewithsevenparts,namely,seven-daycalendarcycleorganizedinalinearsequence;eachpartiscalledaday.BythiscognitivemodelwecanhaveaclearideaofMonday,Tuesday,weekend,etc.However,ourmodelofaweekisidealized.Seven-dayweeksdonotexistobjectivelyinnature.Theyarecreatedbyhumanbeings.Infact,notallcultureshavethesamekindsofWeekICMaswedo.
TheICMdoesnotfittheworldveryprecisely,anditisoversimplifiedinitsbackgroundassumptions.Therearesomesegmentsofsocietywheretheidealizedmodelfitsreasonablywell,namelytheprototypicalmembersofthecategory;andtherearesomesegmentsthattheICMdoesnotfitwell.Insuchacase,theyarenottherepresentativemembersofthecategory.
2.1.2ContiguityandFrames
Framesareconstructswhichwereoriginallydevelopedbyresearchersinthefieldofartificialintelligence,i.e.,thedisciplinethatstudiestheabilityofcomputerstobehavelikehumanbeings.Asanattempttoequipcomputerswiththenecessaryworldknowledge,computerscientistMarvinMinskyfirstlyintroducedthenotionofframeintoartificialintelligence.Hethendefinedaframeas“adata-structureforrepresentingastereotypedsituation”.ThelinguistwhofirstlyintroducedthenotionofframeintothefieldoflinguisticswasCharlesFillmore.
Hedefinedaframeas:
Anysystemoflinguisticchoices----theeasiestcasesbeingcollectionsofwords,butalsoincludingchoicesofgrammaticalrulesorlinguisticcategories----thatcangetassociatedwithprototypicalinstancesofscenes.Bystudyingthedefinitionwecanseethataframewasregardedasanarrayoflinguisticoptionswhichwereassociatedwith“scenes”,anotionrelatedtothetermof“situation”.Inthefirstplace,thetheoreticalframeworkofframespermitsFillmoretoovercomelimitationsoftheclassicaltheoryofcategorization,i.e.,allcategorymembersmusthavethecommonfeatures,andthustomakeagreatcontributiontothestudyoflexicalsemantics.Second,framespermittedhimtoaccountforvariousclausepatternsandsyntacticroles.Startingfromthisfoundationandbyrevisingthisoriginalconceptionofframesaslinguisticconstructs,Fillmorelaterre-interpretsframeswithinacognitiveperspective.Heviewsframesas“cognitivestructuresknowledgeofwhichispresupposedfortheconceptsencodedbythewords”.
Sinceitsfirstapplicationinthefieldcognitivelinguistics,thenotionofframehasbeendevelopedandenrichedbydifferentresearchers.Taylor(1995),forinstance,definesframesas“theknowledgenetworklinkingthemultipledomainsassociatedwithagivenlinguisticform”.AndreasBlank(1999)definesframes,togetherwiths
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 新闻 英语 中转 探索