【作者】 石磊；

【导师】 刘振前；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 英语语言文学， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 自亚里士多德以来,隐喻多被认为是偏离日常语言字面意义的,而认知语言学家则认为隐喻普遍存在于日常语言中,而且人类的概念体系其本质便是隐喻性的。鉴于传统隐喻观的众多不足,本研究从认知隐喻观的视角审视不同目标域以及不同提示语下中国成人的隐喻产出能力的问题。通过分析中国成人的隐喻产出,研究结果显示了影响人们隐喻产出的众多因素,在理论研究和语言教学应用方面都有重要的意义。本文主要探讨的问题有以下三个:(1)不同的提示语会导致隐喻产出的不同吗?会导致哪些不同?(2)不同的目标域会导致隐喻产出的不同吗?会导致哪些不同?(3)问卷回答者的隐喻产出的概念隐喻有什么特点?本研究的主要发现如下:(1)比喻性的提示语导致更多的隐喻产出。(2)情感隐喻导致更多的隐喻产出。(3)问卷回答者隐喻产出的概念隐喻有如下特点:一、感情目标域的概念隐喻始源域多于动作目标域的;二、概念隐喻的产出深受文化影响:三、隐喻语料中出现大量成语及俗语;四、在感情目标域中存在层级性;五、问卷回答者大量使用动物隐喻;六、从隐喻产出中仅分析出单一类型的概念转喻;七、产出的隐喻进一步阐释了隐喻的身体经验性。本研究带给我们以下三方面的启示:(1)隐喻的定义、范畴等方面需要进行更多较为细致的理论研究;(2)隐喻研究应更多的分析人们的日常使用语言中的隐喻现象;(3)应将隐喻理论的研究成果更多的应用于实际的教学活动中去。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since Aristotle’s era, the concept of metaphor has been falsely understood as separate from everyday language or literal meanings. Cognitive linguists criticized this traditional view of metaphor and studied metaphor from a cognitive perspective, that is, metaphor is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Due to the inadequacy of the traditional metaphor theories and the pragmatic view, the present study adopts the cognitive view of metaphor to explore Chinese adults’ metaphor production ability of emotion and action targets under comparative and nominal instructions. Through analyzing the metaphor production by participants, this study reveals the factors that elicit participants’ metaphor production, how they construct concepts of emotion and action, how Chinese culture influences their conceptual metaphor, etc. Thus, it has significance and implications for both cognitive linguistic theory and language teaching theory and practice.This thesis will address the following three questions: (1) Do different types of instruction influence participants’ productions of metaphor in their native language? If they do, what are the differences? (2) Are there any differences between the metaphor production in the descriptions of emotion and action in native language? If there are, what are they? (3) What are the differences between the conceptual metaphor productions of different target domains? What are these conceptual metaphors’ characteristics? The present study uses an elicitation task to investigate Chinese adults’ ability of metaphor production of emotion and action targets under comparative and nominal instructions.The findings are briefly summarized as follows: (1) Comparative instruction triggers more metaphor production than nominal ones. (2) Emotion targets elicit more metaphor than action ones; (3) Conceptual metaphors that could be analyzed from the participants’ metaphor production have the following characteristics: (a) there are more source domains mapped onto emotion than to action; (b) Chinese culture has influence on participants’ metaphor production; (c) participants frequently use Chinese idioms in both targets under both types of instructions; (d) there exists hierarchy within emotion category; (e) participants frequently use animal metaphor, especially for action target; (f) single type of conceptual metonymy production; (g) metaphor production further shows the embodiment of conceptual metaphor.This study has the following implications: (1) theoretically, more research should be done on the definition and classification of metaphor and metaphor corpora should be built for future study; (2) methodologically, more analysis language of use should be conducted in future research; (3) pedagogically, application of theoretical findings should be enhanced in future study.更多还原