 |
[email protected] |
 |
3275638434 |
 |
 |
| Paper Publishing WeChat |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
A Comparative Study of Conceptual Structures of Metaphor and Metonymy from a Cognitive Perspective
ZHOU Li, LI Man-yu
Full-Text PDF
XML 674 Views
DOI:10.17265/2159-5836/2021.11.008
School of Foreign Language, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510641, China
Metaphor and metonymy are viewed as two different figures of speech in traditional rhetoric, while, in cognitive linguistics, both are both conceptual, spontaneous, and unconscious human activities based on thinking and basic experience in the human brain. In some sense, metaphor and metonymy can be a mode of thinking. A Concept is inseparable from perception and perception is inseparable from thinking. The basic composition of metaphor and metonymy is a concept. That is the way they are associated with. This paper aims to build conceptual structures of metaphor and metonymy from the micro perspective and probe into their working mechanisms. The author also lays out their distinctions in terms of basis, principles, span, and effectiveness through analyzing some examples extracted from literary works.
metaphor, metonymy, difference, conceptual structure, thinking
Journal of Literature and Art Studies, November 2021, Vol. 11, No. 11, 887-894
Dirven, R. (2009). Metonymy and metaphor: Different mental strategies of conceptualisation. Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 75-112). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Dirven, R., & Pörings, R. (Eds.). (2009). Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (Vol. 20). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Hudson, R. A. (1992). Concept, image and symbol: the cognitive basis of grammar. Journal of Linguistics, 28(2), 506-509.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2008). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago press.
Langacker, R. W. (1990). Concept, image and symbol: the cognitive basis of grammar (pp. x+ 395). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter..
Ortony, A. E. (1993). Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wolff, P., & Gentner, D. (2011). Structure‐mapping in metaphor comprehension. Cognitive science, 35(8), 1456-1488.
纪燕. (2015). 隐喻, 在认知中感受语言的魅力. 大学教育科学, (3), I0001-I0001.
束定芳. (2004). 隐喻和换喻的差别与联系. 外国语, (3), 26-34.
束定芳. (1998). 论隐喻的本质及语义特征. 外国语, (6), 11-20.
束定芳. (2000). 论隐喻产生的认知, 心理和语言原因. 外语学刊, (2).
束定芳. (2002). 论隐喻的运作机制. 外语教学与研究: 外国语文双月刊, 34(2), 98-106.
束定芳. (2001). 论隐喻的认知功能. 外语研究, (2), 28-31.
束定芳. (2000). 论隐喻的理解过程及其特点. 外语教学与研究: 外国语文双月刊, (4), 253-260.
张辉, & 卢卫中. (2010). 认知转喻. 上海外语教育出版社.
丁晓宇. (2015). 隐喻与转喻的界面研究——以英语 “fire” 和汉语 “火” 的隐转喻为例. 现代语文: 下旬. 语言研究, (11), 156-157.
徐盛桓. (2014). 隐喻的起因, 发生和建构. 外语教学与研究: 外国语文双月刊, 46(3), 364-374.