（外国语言学及应用语言学专业论文）概念隐喻在文学语篇中的连贯作用研究.pdf

iv 摘 要 学者们对隐喻从不同角度进行了研究。从传统修辞学的角度看，隐喻是一种修辞手法。 在近几十年中， 隐喻成为多学科的研究焦点：语言学，人类学，心理学及教育学。1980 年莱考夫和约翰逊合著的我们赖以生存的隐喻一书的出版标志着当代隐喻理论和认知 方法的开始。他们认为，隐喻在日常生活中是无处不在的，不但在语言中，而且在思想和 行为中，我们赖以进行思考和行动的日常概念系统，在本质上也是隐喻的。他们提出的概 念隐喻理论具有系统性和连贯性的特征。其理论核心阐述了隐喻是人类用其某一领域的经 验来说明或理解另一类领域的经验的认知活动。因此他们认为隐喻不仅是一种语言现象， 而且是一种认知工具。但在以往的众多研究中，多数学者将研究焦点集中在修辞，词汇和 句子层面，很少有人研究隐喻在语篇层面上的连贯功能。致力于语篇研究的诸多学者们对 语篇连贯这一概念持不同看法。韩理德和哈桑认为衔接是语篇连贯的必要条件。凡 戴 克认为语篇连贯体现在两个层面上：局部连贯和整体连贯。局部连贯是指命题之间的语义 关系。整体连贯是指语篇主题和宏观结构所形成的关系。本论文认为语篇连贯体现在两个 层面上：表层连贯和深层连贯。本论文认为概念隐喻理论的系统性和连贯性特征使其具有 语篇连贯功能，因为系统性和连贯性特征为将语言层面的隐喻表达式和深置与人类头脑中 的概念隐喻结合起来提供了可能性。在表层，概念隐喻通过形成衔接链来实现语篇句子间 连贯。在深层，概念隐喻通过引入，改变主题及构成语篇框架来实现宏观结构连贯。 在诸多语篇中，文学语篇含有较多隐喻表达式，这也成为文学语篇难于理解的原因之 一，因此本论文探索了文学语篇中概念隐喻的连贯功能。本文在对概念隐喻的概念，本质， 类型，内部结构特征等方面做了详细阐述基础上，运用这一理论对选出的文学语篇进行分 析。该研究为读者理解隐喻性文学语篇提供了语篇分析新视角，丰富了语篇分析理论。 关键词：概念隐喻；文学语篇；衔接；连贯 ii abstract metaphor has been studied from different perspectives. in the traditional rhetorical view, metaphor is one of the rhetorical devices. in the past few decades, metaphor has become the focus of multi- discipline studies: linguistics, anthropology philosophy, psychology, and education science. in 1980 lakoff the transference being either from genus to species, or from species to species, or on the ground of analogy (aristotle, 1954). the definition is illustrated more specifically by leezenberg (2001, p. 33). from genus to species refers to using a more general term rather than more specific one. from species to genus means to use a specific term to replace more general term. from species to species refers to using a term of a different class. according to ricoeur s analysis, aristotle s metaphor definition has the connotations that metaphor is viewed as a noun phenomenon and as a kind of a displacement of a “ deviated” noun. deviation is a relative concept t o ordinariness and popularity. and metaphor is a kind of deviation. the definition itself contains the classification of metaphor. in rhetoric, he holds that the main advantage of metaphor is that it possesses clarity, sweetness and the exotic. in this book, he also suggests that simile, proverbs 5 and hyperboles are also considered to be metaphors. in a word, the biggest advantage of aristotle s definition is that he discoveries that metaphor is a kind of meaning conversion. and metaphor involves at least two words or things, one of which has been changed meaning in the course of forming metaphor. however, the biggest weakness of aristotle s definition is he confines metaphor to the nouns, and excludes other words; therefore he excludes the possibility of exposing metaphor s utterance characteristic. 2.2 interaction theory according to j. j. a. mooij (1976, p. 72), interaction theory of metaphor was proposed by ancient greek scholar hermogenes in the second century bc. however, it is restated by richards (1936). since then, metaphor theory has stepped into a new period of time when scholars begin to study metaphor from various angles. interaction theory is developed by black. 2.2.1 richards tenor, vehicle and interaction theory in his book the philosophy of rhetoric, richards introduces the terms “ tenor” and “ vehicle” as the two parts of metaphor which are basically similar to target and source domain of the cognitive approach. he argues that these two terms are interactional. the appearance of the “ tenor” and “ vehicle” simultaneously leads to a meaning which is very different from tenor. if there is no interaction between them, the meaning cannot be achieved. he holds that “ vehicle” is not just the ornament of the “ tenor” , but the interaction between two terms can produce more dynamic meanings than one of them. later, he claims that, at the one end, the “ vehicle” probably merely becomes a decoration of the “ tenor” ; at the other end, the “ tenor” probably merely becomes an excuse for the 6 introduction of the “ vehicle” . he points out that all the languages in nature are metaphorical: “ .thought is metaphoric, and proceeds by comparison and the metaphors of language derive there from.” richards first argues that metaphor is not the gift of someone with special talents, but belongs to everyone with normal intelligence. it should be pointed out that richards s approach to metaphor study goes beyond rhetoric. more importantly, his contribution to metaphor interpretation is usually discussed in combination with black s interaction theory. richards theory makes the study of metaphor from the level of lexicon to the level of sentence. 2.2.2 black s focus, frame and interaction theory black (1981) proposes and develops the interaction theory of metaphor based on richards metaphor view. he views the metaphorical word contained in the sentence as “ focus” , the rest as “ frame” . in black s views (1978), “ living” metaphorical meaning which is not part of standard meaning cannot be looked up in the dictionary. usually a new created meaning of metaphor cannot be inferred from the standard lexicon. black (1962, p. 28) formulates his interaction view on metaphor: putting a word or phrase in a new context includes two meanings: one meaning is that the metaphor user replaces a literal expression with a metaphorical one; the other meaning is that such a new context “ imposes extension of meaning upon the focal (i.e. metaphorical) word” (1962, p. 39). for black, metaphor s contribution to language and thought results from the interaction of “ the principle subject” and “ the subsidiary subject” along with its system of associated commonplaces (1962, p. 31). in addition, black argues that metaphor serves as an organization function by highlighting some aspects of metaphor s domains while backgrounding others (1979, pp. 10- 13). another point of black s view is similar to cognitive metaphor theory, that is, metaphor s domains should be regarded as systems rather than isolated things or ideas (1962, p. 44). however, black claims that the interaction theory is superior to other theories, 7 meanwhile he points out its main disadvantage, that is, it lacks the ability to clarify that one thing is regarded as the other thing contained in the theory. 2.3 conceptual metaphor theory from the 1980s onwards, cognitive semanticists such as lakoff second, the conceptual metaphor theory is the only one that allows overlap between linguistics and non- linguistics properties, providing more links for metaphors. based on the considerations above, the conceptual metaphor theory will be elaborated in the following section. 2.3.1 the definition of conceptual metaphor in conceptual metaphor theory, lakoff we gradually form our basic conceptual structures and then employ them to organize our thoughts across a range of abstract domains. in addition, as they come from the concrete spatial world, the majority of image schemata can be represented in very simple diagrams. johnson has identified some of the most basic image schemata: the container schema, the part- whole schema, the link 10 schema, the center- periphery schema and the source- path- goal schema. they are derived from our interactions with the world: we explore physical world by interacting with it; we experience ourselves and other objects as containers with other objects in them or outside of them; we experience physical forces which affect us. these basic physical experiences form image- schemata, which structure a large number of our abstract concepts in a metaphorical way. take the container schema as an example; it structures our spatial experience. and through metaphorical extension, it structures our abstract experiences. based on an image schema of container, we can extend it into non- concrete domains. for instance, one can be “in the house” , but one can also be “ in sight” , “ in danger” , and “ in health” . in these cases, “sight” , “ danger” and “ health” are metaphorically seen as a container. therefore, an image schema is from a concrete domain to an abstract domain. and metaphorical mappings are not all arbitrary but are based on our everyday bodily experience. lakoff when we feel happy, we erect our heads, so erecting posture is with a positive 13 emotional state (lakoff the same wind that carries on vessel into port may blow off another off shore. 15 2.3.4 the characteristics of conceptual metaphor conceptual metaphor is by nature a kind of concept, a thinking pattern and a cognitive process, which obtains characteristics from the target domain and the source domain to realize coherence and systematicity on the conceptual level. this section will explore how the conceptual metaphor achieves coherence and systematicity. 2.3.4.1 coherence of conceptual metaphor coherence of conceptual metaphor means that conceptual metaphor can achieve coherence through metaphorical entailments. a text is coherent because it is formed by concepts with many relationships. and these concepts form a coherent unity. one of the concepts is conceptual metaphor. with respect to coherence of conceptual metaphor, it contains entailments of one conceptual metaphor and coherence between two and more conceptual metaphors. as for entailments of conceptual metaphor, conceptual metaphor is a kind of conceptual thinking pattern which combine features of different domains into one domain. some features are from the source domain, the other features are from the target domain. these features are related to each other. when one entailment of these features is activated, the others are activated. so entailments of conceptual metaphor are by nature a continuum which possesses coherence among its elements. as for coherence between two and more conceptual metaphors, it contains conceptual metaphors which share the same target domain and conceptual metaphors which share the same source domain. the first one means that conceptual metaphors have overlapping entailments. these entailments achieve coherence between conceptual metaphors and their expressions. for example, when we comprehend the concept argument, we usually use conceptual metaphors an 16 argument is a container and an argument is a journey and so on. let s look at the following figure: an argument is a journer an argument is a container other entailments as we make an argument other entailments more of a surface is created as more of a surface is created as more of a surface is created the argument covers more ground the argument gets more content figure: metaphorical entailments between two metaphors (lakoff through these metaphors, some constitutive factors of the reality can be observed. on the other hand, metaphor provides a kind of frame, it confines and sometimes dangerously controls people s world methods in which they live (ortony, 1993). 20 another cognitive function of metaphor is to create new meaning and to express new thoughts. and also the use of conceptual metaphor can give new meaning to our pasts, to our daily activity, and to what we know and believe. and it provides a new insight for people to perceive new things. lakoff some treat it as a product, others see it as a process. 22 consequently, despite a large body of research into coherence, by the end of 1990s, the concept of coherence is still not fully understood, and is still a matter of continuing debate (bublitz, 1999). there is obvious chaos in existing coherence studies. in this section, comments on the coherence theory, cohesion theory and the relationship between coherence and cohesion will be explored. 2.4.1 different studies on coherence coherence is a semantic concept; it refers to the links of the different parts of the utterance in meaning. coherence is still a controversial concept; scholars from different schools define it from different point of views. the scholars who work on the textual coherence include halliday and it is coherent with respect to itself, and therefore cohesive. neither of these two conditions is sufficient without the other, nor does the one by necessity entail the other. (p. 23) these two standards are essential to the coherence of text. “ a consistency in register” means that sentences constructing the discourse belong to the same situation of context. in the theory of systematic- functional linguistics, coherence is a semantic unit, because register and cohesion both belong to semantic concepts. van dijk is another researcher to discuss the notion of coherence systematically. when 23 discussing coherence, in van dijk s view (van dijk, 1977), there are at least two levels of coherences: linear or sequential coherence relation between sentences (local coherence) and global coherence created by macrostructures. the former refers to the semantic relations between propositions, and propositions are expressed by composite sentences and sequences of sentences. these semantic relations are both intentional and extensional, a sequence of sentences can be said to be coherent if they are related in some possible worlds. the latter is created by global textual resources, such as discourse topic, and macrostructures. van dijk focuses on local or global semantic coherence. linear coherence needs macro- control in the form of a theme, a topic, or a point, as they are theoretically reconstructed as macrostructures. in other words, local coherence is to be further defined relative to global coherence. widdowson (1978) first put the coherence into the theory framework. and he sees cohesion as explicit relationship between propositions represented by sentences: and views the coherence as relationship between illocutionary acts, so coherence is a pragmatic concept. brown they provide the all kinds of perspectives for us to study coherence. the thesis holds that textual coherence involves at least two levels: local coherence relation between sentences and global coherence created by macrostructures. the former refers to the semantic relations between propositions and the latter is created by global textual 24 resources, such as discourse topic, and macrostructures. 2.4.2 different studies on cohesion cohesion is an important device to keep the text coherent in meaning. cohesion is the network of lexical, grammatical, and other relations which provide links between various parts of a text. it is visible linguistic phenomenon of the textual surface. the scholars who work on the cohesion research include halliday text is a communicative occurrence which meets with seven standards of textuality which are cohesion, coherence, intentionality, acceptability, informativity, situationality and intertextuality. cohesion and coherence are viewed as the most important bases of texts. with respect to the relationship between coherence and cohesion, so far there have existed a variety of views, the focus of argument is the role played by cohesion in coherence, generally speaking, and there are two different views: the first is that the coherent text must be cohesive, that is, cohesion is the necessary condition of the coherence. halliday but it is not the whole story. in order to achieve coherence, the text must be coherent from the beginning to the end and all kinds of cohesive devices can be permitted within its register sphere. and also the textual coherence can be achieved at two levels: the surface level coherence and the deep level coherence. at the surface level, text achieves the coherence between sentences through forming the cohesive chain. at the deep level, text realizes macrostructure coherence through the semantic or functional relationship of textual deep structure. 28 chapter 3 research design and data collection 3.1 research design the systematicity and coherence of metaphor determine that it has relationship with textual coherence, which can be applied to the text analysis. on the basis of the theoretical discussion, conceptual metaphor is employed to analyze some literature texts. this will be conducted to testify whether this is applicable to genuine literature texts, and produce some meaningful analysis of textual coherence in terms of metaphor. 3.2 research questions the thesis mainly uses conceptual metaphor theory to analyze literature texts to testify textual coherence functions of conceptual metaphor. the thesis will try to explore the following questions: 1. is systematicity and coherence of conceptual metaphor the basis of textual coherence? 2. can conceptual metaphor realize the cohesive function at the surface level of texts? 3. can conceptual metaphor realize the coherent function at the deep level of texts? through the analytic text process, the above questions will be answered in the end. 3.3 data collection first, data is collected from a wide range of literature works. the chosen literature texts involve poems, prose and novels which belong to metaphorical texts. usually these texts are difficult to understand. and if they can not identify conceptual metaphors contained in the text, readers often interpret the text wrongly and even consider that the text is not coherent. this is the 29 reason why the thesis chooses literature texts to testify textual coherence functions of conceptual metaphor. texts are mainly from english and american literature works, chinese literature works which are translated into english and the books on linguistics. after the collection of data, some examples are selected from metaphorical texts. and then, the metaphorical expressions contained in texts are identified according to the linguistic realization of metaphor which is illustrated in chapter 2. that is, the source domain and the target domain are recognized from texts. the target domain is marked by “ _” a