（英语语言文学专业论文）隐喻认知对隐喻翻译的启示.pdf

iv 隐喻认知对隐喻翻译的启示隐喻认知对隐喻翻译的启示 中文摘要中文摘要 2004 级研究生：肖铭燕 导师：柏敬泽教授 学科专业：英语语言文学 研究方向：翻译理论与实践 隐喻研究已经有两千多年的历史了，隐喻历来被纳入修辞学的范畴，被视为是语言的 装饰。随着对隐喻研究的深入，当今，隐喻的研究已经从单纯的修辞学扩展到哲学、语言 学、符号学、语用学、语义学、认知心理学等多学科、多视角的研究。以认知科学为依托 的新兴语言学流派-认知语言学从认知角度对隐喻做出了全新的解释： 隐喻不只是一种修 辞手段，它既是人类语言的普遍现象，也是人类的重要认知方式，一种认知手段。它是人 类将某一领域的经验用来说明或理解另一类领域的经验的一种认知活动。在人类其他的文 化和艺术活动过程中，我们到处都能看到隐喻的存在。认知语言学对隐喻的描写凸现了隐 喻的认知性质。对翻译而言，认知语言学的理论无疑给隐喻的翻译研究提供了一个新的视 角和理论基础。总体而言，传统翻译理论大多是以修辞为取向，从语言形式，文体以及文 化上的差异进行静态的比较，忽视了隐喻的认知性质。而从隐喻的认知特点来分析，翻译 就是将一种文化中语言所表现的认知方式用目的语传递到另一种文化中去的过程，不然翻 译就无法完成传播民族文化的使命。隐喻与翻译紧密相关，既然认知是形成隐喻这种人类 语言普遍现象的基础，避开认知谈隐喻的翻译显然是不科学的。本文探讨了隐喻认知对隐 喻翻译的启示,提出了翻译隐喻的方法选择,全文分为五个部分： 第一章介绍了隐喻的定义，并讨论了隐喻，语言和翻译三者之间的关系。 第二章中，简略回顾了有关隐喻的一些基本理论，例如：比较论，替代论，互动论； 隐喻的分类以及隐喻产生的认知原因。隐喻的认知本质决定了翻译实际上一个心理的认知 过程。 第三章详细介绍了隐喻的认知功能。隐喻是组织人类概念系统和引导人类经验的认知 工具，给人们提供了看待事物的新视角。 第四章从认知的角度重点介绍了翻译的本质和隐喻的认知翻译观。作为一种认知方 式，隐喻具有明显的民族特征和丰富的文化内涵。因此，将英语里的隐喻形象合理汉化， 跨越文化障碍，实现意象的平行迁移，将使译文表达具体生动，富有表现力。文章根据英 汉隐喻的特点,针对性地提出了翻译隐喻的五种方法, 即直译法，转化法，意译法，用明喻 翻译隐喻以及保留原文形象并加注，并讨论了在具体例子中的应用。 第五章对全文进行总结。对于隐喻，译者应恰当运用翻译方法，避免误译。 关键词：关键词：隐喻. 认知. 隐喻的认知功能. 认知翻译观. 翻译方法 v metaphor cognition and its enlightening effect on translating metaphors abstract in english postgraduate: xiao mingyan supervisor: professor bai jingze specialty: english language and literature research focus: translation theory and practice the study of metaphor has a long history of more than two thousand years. traditionally, metaphor was always confined to rhetoric and was viewed as ornamentation of language. nowadays, the research on metaphor has expanded to a broader range of disciplines and become interdisciplinary, such as philosophy, semiotics, linguistics, semantics, pragmatics and cognitive psychology. the new school of linguistic cognitive linguistics, which is based on cognitive science, reveals a brand-new explanation for metaphor: metaphor does not only serve as a decoration, it is a universal phenomenon of human language and an important way of cognition as well. it is a cognitive activity that understand and experience one kind of thing in terms of another. metaphor pervasively exists in the course of our cultural and art activities. the approach of cognitive description towards metaphor has highlighted the cognitive nature of metaphor itself. in terms of translation, the theory of cognitive linguistics has provided a new angle and theoretic base for translation research. generally speaking, most of our traditional translation theories were based on understanding of metaphor as a figure of speech, overlooked the cognitive nature of metaphor and had been focused on static comparisons of differences between linguistic forms, literary styles and cultures. analyzing from the cognitive perspective of metaphor, translation is a kind of cognitive activity that people illustrate or understand the experience of one language community in terms of another, otherwise, translation could not achieve the purpose of cultural communication between nations. metaphor and translation are closely related. now that cognition is the foundation of forming metaphor which is the common core of expressing meaning in all human languages, it is not advisable to talk about rendering metaphor by avoiding cognition. this thesis probes into metaphor cognition and its enlightening effect on translating metaphor and provides five approaches for translating metaphor. the whole paper is divided into five chapters: chapter one introduces the definition of metaphor and the interrelations between metaphor, language and translation. chapter two elaborates the basic theories about metaphor, such as comparison theory, substitution theory and interaction theory. in the later part of this chapter, emphasis is given to discuss the classification of metaphor and cognitive reasons for the production of metaphor. it is the nature of metaphor that determines its translation as a mental cognitive process in essence. vi chapter three focuses on the cognitive functions of metaphor. metaphor is a cognitive tool for forming conceptual system and conceptualizing experience. it has provided a new angle of view for understanding the world. chapter four introduces the essence of translation and cognitive conception of metaphorical translation. as a way of cognition, metaphor is a kind of cultural conduct and contains abundant cultural connotation. translating metaphor in an appropriate way by spanning cultural differences and realizing the images transference can make translation vivid and expressive. according to the features of english and chinese metaphor, the author proposes five approaches for translating metaphor, including literal translation, conversion translation, free translation, transference between metaphor and simile and retaining the original image with explanatory note, and discusses the application in the detailed examples. chapter five draws a conclusion. for translating metaphor, translator should seek the proper translation strategies and avoid mistranslating. key words: metaphor, cognition, cognitive functions of metaphor, cognitive conception of metaphorical translation, translation approaches 论文独创性声明论文独创性声明 本人郑重声明：所提交的学位论文是本人在导师的指导下进行的研究工 作及取得的成果。除文中已经注明引用的内容外，本论文不含其他个人或其 他机构已经发表或撰写过的研究成果。对本文的研究作出重要贡献的个人和 集体，均已在文中以明确方式标明。本人承担本声明的法律责任。 研究生签名： 日期： 论文使用授权声明论文使用授权声明 本人完全了解广西师范大学有关保留、使用学位论文的规定。广西师范 大学、中国科学技术信息研究所、清华大学论文合作部，有权保留本人所送 交学位论文的复印件和电子文档，可以采用影印、缩印或其他复制手段保存 论文。本人电子文档的内容和纸质论文的内容相一致。除在保密期内的保密 论文外，允许论文被查阅和借阅，可以公布（包括刊登）论文的全部或部分 内容。论文的公布（包括刊登）授权广西师范大学学位办办理。 研究生签名： 日期： 导 师签名： 日期： 1 chapter one introduction 1.1 why i choose this field to make a study the study of metaphor has a long history and there are various explanations of metaphor left by history, and at present, the theoretical study of metaphor in the academic field has proceeded from its narrow sense to its broad sense. once, metaphor is treated as a device of poetic imagination and rhetorical flourish. in the year of 1980, american linguists lakoff and johnson initiated the cognitive approach to the study of metaphor in their remarkable book metaphor we live by. the study of metaphor has moved to a new stage, shifting away from the ornamental function of metaphor and the linguistic aspects of metaphor to that of the cognitive nature of metaphor. metaphor is not only a figure of speech, it has been treated as a cognitive activity of understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another. in 1999, the publication of camerson logicians believe that it is a wrong juxtaposition of categories; philosophers maintain that a metaphor is a fundamental feature of language and human languages are, basically speaking, metaphorical; while cognitive 3 scientists assume that metaphor is a basic way people know about the world. my thesis is trying to talk about metaphor in a cognitive sense. in fact, historically, there have existed various explanations about metaphor, and the theoretical studies of metaphor have proceeded from narrow sense to broad sense. traditionally, metaphor was viewed as a matter of language, as a set of extraordinary or figurative linguistic expressions whose meaning is reducible to some set of literal propositions. this view can be traced back to as early as aristotle, who took metaphor as a figure of speech that used the name of one thing to refer to the other. he thought that “the greatest thing by far is to have a command of metaphor” and pointed out that being good at creating metaphor was being good at making comparison between seemingly unlike things to find out resemblance. metaphor can make language more charming and individual and that the use of metaphors should be confined only to poetry writing. he held that the key function of metaphor is modification and all the rhetoric phenomena belong to metaphorical language. his point of view influenced profoundly the western rhetorical study of metaphor in the following two thousand years and more. according to this view, metaphor is primarily decorative and ornamental in nature. it is not necessary; it is just nice. viewed as such, metaphor and its study were confined mostly to literature and rhetoric (lakoff 1986a). however, a new point of view that conceptual system is metaphorical in nature and that metaphor reflects human cognition and thus forms a basis for language and action goes against the traditional views. the rise of this viewpoint and the current multidisciplinary exploration mark a striking phenomenon in modern intellectual history: the transformation of metaphor from a specialized concern of rhetoricians and literary critics to a central concept in the study of human understanding. metaphor is now a concept with multidisciplinary implications. its use has been found “in virtually every aspect of human thought: physical science, biological, business, morality, and even poetry” (johnson 1995:158). as johnson (1993b, 1995) suggests, metaphor is definitional of human beings: “whatever else we are, we humans are metaphorizing animals” (1995: 159). richards pointed out that metaphor is the omnipresent principle of language of human beings. the cognitive approach to metaphor, largely initiated by lakoff and johnsons metaphors we live by (1980), can contribute new insights into translation as well. the central thesis of lakoff and johnson is that metaphor, in its broad sense, is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature. as ernst cassirer puts it that metaphorical thinking is human initial and basic mode of thinking. (ernst cassirer, op. cit.,p.ii.) we can see that the speakers of english use many metaphorical expressions naturally and effortlessly for their normal, everyday purposes when they talk about such concepts as argument, 4 love, social organizations, life, and so on. consider the sentences below: argument is war: i defended my argument. love is a journey: well just have to go our separate ways. theories are buildings: we have to construct a new theory. ideas are food: i cant digest all these facts. social organizations are plants: the company is growing fast. life is a journey: he had a head start in life. most speakers would not in fact even notice that they use metaphor when they use the expression defend in connection with argument, construct in connection with theories, go our separate ways in connection with love, grow in connection with company, digest in connection with ideas and head start in connection with life. for native speakers of english these are some of the most ordinary and natural ways to talk about these subject matters. lakoff and johnson defined that the essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another. (lakeoff the transference being either from genus to species, or from species to genus, or from species to species, or on grounds of analogy i.e. a similar relationship between things.” (poetics,1457b:6-9). in his example, the “evening of life” defines old age in terms of an analogical relation between life and day, which can be expressed in the form of a ratio: old age is to life as evening is to the day (aristotle, 1958: 45). the similarity between life and day is the basis of metaphor. therefore, metaphor is supposed to be a transfer of meaning from one term to another because object b possesses some properties possessed by object a. this theory is based on the following four assumptions: 1) metaphor is used to compare the similarities of two or more objects. as a result, the structure of metaphor is simple: the linguistic expression “a is b” is the same as a corresponding linguistic expression of the form “a is like b” ( lakoff thus metaphor has only an ornamental, decorative value ( ricoeur 1986:20, shu dingfang 1996a). in effect, there are countless metaphors without underlying literal similarity adequate to explain the metaphorical meaning. in addition, similarity can be either objective or subjective and it is related with culture or religion. (shu dingfang 2000d). second, metaphor tends to locate polarity at the level of words or “the level of a segment of discourse”. it bounds itself extremely to limited application and restrains its creative potential. therefore, we can find that the comparison theory has its limitation and weakness. 8 2.1.2 the substitution theory after aristotle, in the 1st century, the famous roman rhetorician quintilian put forth the theory of substitution, of which the comparison view is a special case according to black (1962). this theory holds that a metaphor is where a metaphorical expression is used in place of some equivalent literal expression, thus it regards metaphor as a rhetorical substitution of a literal expression. as to subject a, there can be a metaphorical description b, or a plain one c; so “a is b” can be explained as “a is c”, in which c substitutes for b. the relation between b and c can be synonym, illustration and metaphor, that is, b and c have (a) the same connotation and the same reference; (b) different connotation but the same reference; (c) different connotations and different references. for example, in tom is a lion the word lion is used in place of its equivalent literal expression a courageous man. to sum up, the traditional views regard metaphor as a linguistic phenomenon working at the word rather than sentence level. metaphor constitutes “deviant” uses of words, signaled by the use of words in contexts in which they do not properly apply. thus tom is a lion can be used to say something about tom (e.g. that “he is brave” even though tom is not, in fact, a lion). the use of lion is deviant in the sense that its meaning deviates from its normal or literal meaning, but the metaphorical use can be said to say something true of tom in so far as there are pre-existing similarities between tom and a lion (i.e. with respect to bravery). the requirement of pre-existing similarity implies that what can be said metaphorically can be said literally by invoking the similarities directly, perhaps by use of simile. literal meaning is somehow basic, and metaphor somehow dispensable. thus what is distinctive about the use of metaphor is its rhetorical or emotive force, rather than any cognitive content. at best, metaphor is mere verbal decoration. at worst, it can be vague and misleading. in effect, no matter the comparison theory of aristotle or the substitution theory of quintilian, they all treated metaphor as primarily decorative and ornamental in nature and the function of metaphor is also an additional adornment. at the same time, both of these two theories believe that metaphor is a kind of deviation of regular language rules in terms of its structure and form. 2.1.3 the interaction theory the real breakthrough in the field of metaphor studies came with the publication of richards the philosophy of rhetoric (1936), where the interaction view is put forward. richards regarded metaphor as “the omnipresent principal of language”. he said, “we can not get through three sentences of ordinary fluid discourse without it” (richards 1967:98), that means the functioning of metaphor is to be detected in nowhere else but within ordinary usage of 9 language; for, contrary to aristotles well-known saying that the mastery of metaphor is a gift of genius and cannot be taught, language is “vitally metaphorical”(1936: 90). without metaphor we would not be able to notice any hitherto unknown relations between things. not only is metaphor not a divergence from the ordinary operation of language, but it is “the omnipresent principle of all its free action”(1936: 90). according to richards, “in the simplest formulation, when we use a metaphor we have two thoughts of different things active together and supported by a single word, or phrase, whose meaning is a resultant of their interaction”(ibid.). he broke through the confinement of traditional rhetoric to lexical level by treating metaphor as a semantic phenomenon and studying it at sentence level, and first advanced the concept of “tenor” and “vehicle” and the view of interaction (richard 1967:94), therefore, the meaning of metaphor was generated through the interaction between tenor and vehicle. black(1993:27-28) develops the interaction view by specifying the interaction between the two components of metaphor. he claims that a metaphorical statement has two distinct subjects, i.e. a principal subject and a subsidiary one. these subjects are to be regarded as “systems” rather than isolated words or predicates. blacks work brings along significant progress in clarifying the field of metaphor. by maintaining that metaphor is an omnipresent phenomenon of language and by highlighting the interaction between the two components of metaphor, the interaction view has already begun to recognize the cognitive value of metaphor and has paved the way for the emergence of a brand new cognitive theory. 2.2 main categories and characteristics as what is stated above, metaphor is a kind of cognitive phenomenon, however, one of its main expressive patterns is language and it has several expressive forms. from the perspective of its expressive form, function and effect and cognitive feature, metaphor can be sorted into simile and metaphor, radical metaphor and derivative metaphor, the metaphor based on similarity and the metaphor based on creativity. peter newmark classified metaphors into five types: dead, clich, stock, recent and original metaphors according to the meaning o