英汉隐喻结构对比研究

VIP免费

3.0 陈辉 2024-11-19 4 4 814.71KB 50 页 15积分

侵权投诉

Introduction

In the traditional English teaching practice, the teachers always attach much

importance to the memorizing of words and grammar and the reciting of texts, yet

neglect the exploitation of the potential of human beings’ creativity. In most cases, the

students are passive learners, and they lack the knowledge to explain how the

expression is generated and whether there is any rule governing the generation of the

expressions. On the other hand, many theories in linguistics fail to play a part in

guiding the practice of translation and English learning, and they concern only with the

language itself or other aspects. As a linguistic major who is interested in the field of

English learning and translation, the author has been seeking for the possibilities of

combining the theory with practice and making a comparison between Chinese and

English since the moment she was brought into contact with linguistics.

The cognitive linguistics provides such an opportunity for the author. It is a new

approach to language studying which is based on the point of view that the expressions

of language are decided by our experience of the world and the way we perceive and

conceptualize it. Thus, its description of word meanings is much richer, more natural

and more human than other approaches. And the conceptual integration theory makes

the analysis of the process of the generation of meanings become possible. In this

dissertation the author talks about the problem of metaphor in cognitive linguistics

because it is a way of thinking, a cognitive instrument, and if the mechanism of the

“metaphor” is made clear, most of the linguistic phenomena will be able to be

explained. Besides, the author makes a comparison of metaphorical structure between

Chinese and English by explaining the types of conceptual integration networks in the

part of general metaphors and the hierarchical relations and the basic generation ways

in the part of synaesthetic metaphors in the descriptive languages. This dissertation is

divided into four chapters.

The first chapter pursues the nature of metaphor by looking at the different

understandings of the most influential scholars in the development history of the

metaphor, ranging from Aristotle to Fauconnier and Turner. This will take the author to

a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of their points of view.

Contrastive Studies of the Metaphorical Structures of Chinese And English Languages

The second chapter concentrates on the introduction of the conceptual integration

theory: its theoretical basis, how the CIT works, the optimality principles and the types

of the conceptual integration networks.

The third chapter makes a comparison of the descriptive metaphorical structures

between Chinese and English except for the synaesthetic metaphors with the help of

CIT. And it is carried out at three levels: the compound level, the phrasal level, and the

sentence level. At the compound level, the author mainly talks about the metaphorical

adjective compounds, verb compounds and noun compounds both in Chinese and

English. At the phrasal level the author discusses three kinds of typical metaphorical

phrases in two languages, and in the last part, the metaphorical sentences are classified

as “unmarked metaphors” and “marked metaphors” to probe into the mechanism of the

metaphorical meaning generation.

The fourth chapter is devoted to the “synaesthetic metaphor”. First of all the

author describes the definition of “synaesthetic metaphor” and introduces the present

situation of the study. Secondly, the author gives the examples in both Chinese and

English and carry out the first analysis. Then the author describes the relations between

five senses in both of the two languages in diagrams and discusses the basic ways in

the formation of “synaesthetic metaphor” both at the phrasal level and at the sentence

level, and differentiate between two kinds of “borrowings”.

At the end of the dissertation, concluding remarks have been made with regard to

the previous research and what further research will be done in the future.

To maintain the validity, persuasiveness and liability of my dissertation, all the

data cited in the dissertation come from quite a few sources.

To sum up, the ultimate goal of this dissertation is to make a comparison of the

metaphorical structures between Chinese ad English with the help of relevant theories

so as to guide the English teaching and translation practice.

Chapter One The Nature of Metaphor

§1.1 The Traditional Rhetoric on the Nature of Metaphor

§1.1 .1 Aristotle’s Definition of the Metaphor

Metaphor, originally a rhetoric concept only, derives from the western traditional

rhetoric, and Aristotle is the first person who has a relatively comprehensive discussion

on it. In his poetics Aristotle defines metaphor as:

“隐喻是通过将属于另外一个事物的名称用于某一事物构成的，这一转移可以

是从种到属或从属到种，或从属到属，或根据类推.”(from a secondary resource, 束

定芳，1996:13)

Aristotle believes that the “metaphor” is a kind of transference of meaning

between words (noun to noun, or verb to verb) and there are four kinds of transference

of meaning, namely from “general meaning” to “specific meaning”, from “specific

meaning” to “general meaning”, from “specific meaning” to “specific meaning”, and

the “proportional metaphor”(ibid.). He treats ‘metaphor” as a kind of rhetoric

technique at the word level, which is based on similarity. In fact he has only described

the kind of metaphor which functions through the “borrowing of words” and the other

kind which is based on relational similarity, the so-called “proportional metaphor”.

§1.1 .2 The Superficiality of Aristotle’ View

Aristotle’s description of the metaphor is superficial because he hasn’t explained

the course of the formation of the metaphor. The deep reason may be his

embellishment view of the metaphor.

Aristotle’s comparison theory of metaphor is founded on his own hypothesis that

for every complete meaning there exist two kinds of expressions, the general or basic

expression and the figurative expression. In his opinion, the former is basic and

necessary, while the latter is secondary, ornamental (ibid.). Therefore, the “metaphor”

is “secondary”, “ornamental”, and not important. It is probably the reason that he

didn’t further probe into the “metaphor” phenomena.

Contrastive Studies of the Metaphorical Structures of Chinese And English Languages

§1.1 .3 The Insufficiency of Aristotle’ View

We think that Aristotle’s description of “metaphor”, even as a rhetoric concept is

not sufficient. One reason is that we all know that it occurs in the language nearly at

the every level, but Aristotle only noticed the “metaphor” at the word level. And the

other reason is his isolated, immobile view in the description of the metaphor, which is

also revealed in his hypothesis and the embellishment functional view.

Aristotle separates the metaphor from the so-called basic language in a subjective,

absolute manner, and believes it is a kind of embellishment only. He doesn’t realize the

necessity of metaphor in our daily life—the metaphor is a way of thinking, a kind of

cognitive instrument. We cannot live without metaphor.

His point of view is also proved in his statement of the position of the metaphor.

He believes that the command of metaphor is a unique gift of the poet. He asserts that

“The greatest thing by far is to have a command of metaphor… This alone cannot be

imparted to another; it is the mark of genius, for to make good metaphors implies an

eye for resemblances.”(from a secondary resource, 胡曙中，2002：178) He takes the

“command of metaphor” as the “mark of genius”, the “unique gift of poet” ,yet

neglects that the metaphor is deeply ingrained in the ordinary language, it is

omnipresent.

Another point is that Aristotle didn’t take the social cultural factors into account.

We know some expressions may include metaphor in some contexts, and may not in

other contexts. For example, the sentence “十年媳妇熬成婆”, is not a metaphor

when it describes the fact which happens during the feudal period in China that a

woman becomes the mother-in-law who traditionally has the rights of commanding her

daughter-in-law after ending the ten humiliating years of being the daughter-in-law of

her own mother-in-law, but it is a metaphor in the following case:

（1）十年媳妇熬成婆，违反规划、未经验收的违建房竟然有了产权证

（from a secondary resource，陈汝东， 2004：119）。

In this sentence “十年媳妇熬成婆” referrs to the change of status after a long

time. In other words, if we want to know an expression includes the “metaphor” or not,

Chapter One The Nature of Metaphor

we must consider the contexts, while unfortunately Aristotle took the “metaphor” as a

kind of isolated, immobile phenomena, and didn’t think of the above.

All these prove that his explanation is superficial, and his point of view is isolated

and immobile. Thus we can conclude the Aristotle’s understanding of metaphor is: The

metaphor is a kind of mere rhetorical technique; it is ornamental and showy in nature.

Aristotle’ theory has a profound influence on the development of the western

rhetoric. Although there are still some limitations in his theory, we cannot deny his

great contributions to the research of metaphor because it is him who starts to study

“metaphor” as a subject at that time, especially under the great pressure of his teacher

Plato’s extreme opposition (ibid.).

§1.2 The Modern Metaphor Theory on the Nature of Metaphor

§1.2.1 I. A. Richards

Richards is an important figure after Aristotle in the rhetoric history. It is Richards

who breaks through the limitations of the traditional rhetoric as a rhetoric technique at

the word level and begins to study “metaphor” at the sentence level (束定芳,2000:4).

In The Philosophy of Rhetoric, Richards defines metaphor as: “the use of one reference

to a group of things that are related in a particular way in order to discover a similar

relation in another group.”(from a secondary resource, 胡曙中，2002 ：

176).Undoubtedly comparing with Aristotle’ theory the scope of the metaphor study

has been extended. But what draws people’s attention is far from this.

As to the function and position of the metaphor, Richards has his own ideas. To

refute Aristotle’s view, he says that: The metaphor is not an ornament or

embellishment.…the use of language entails the use of metaphor… all language is

metaphoric … the metaphor is not a unique gift of the poet … the use of metaphor may

be taught…Though some men may have better eyes than others, the differences

between them are in degree only…Everyone who engages in any sort of language

transaction possesses it to some degree (ibid.176-178). Moreover, he asserts that not

only that all language is largely metaphoric, but that all thought is also; not only is

“metaphor the omnipresent principle of language,” but “thinking is [also] radically

文档加载中……请稍候！
如果长时间未打开，您也可以点击刷新试试。

下载文档到电脑，查找使用更方便

15 积分 4人已下载

立即下载 VIP免费下载

摘要：

Introduction1IntroductionInthetraditionalEnglishteachingpractice,theteachersalwaysattachmuchimportancetothememorizingofwordsandgrammarandtherecitingoftexts,yetneglecttheexploitationofthepotentialofhumanbeings’creativity.Inmostcases,thestudentsarepassivelearners,andtheylacktheknowledgetoexplainhowthe...

展开>> 收起<<

英汉隐喻结构对比研究.pdf

共50页,预览5页

还剩页未读，继续阅读

英汉隐喻结构对比研究

相关推荐

开通VIP享超值会员特权

作者详情

相关内容

推荐作者

热门标签

举报选择: