{"title":"发现隐喻-什么情况形式可能揭示概念化","authors":"Olga Sokołowska","doi":"10.26881/bp.2019.1.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The figurativeness of language expressions is not always obvious. While in rhetoric such unobtrusiveness may be a welcome quality, in linguistic studies, which have proved the important epistemological function of metaphor, it is vital that a reliable method for detecting metaphoricity in language be developed. The MIP proposed by the Pragglejaz group of researchers into metaphor, whose main concern is determining whether the sense represented by a given unit in a specific context contrasts or not with its basic, primary, typically “physical” meaning, does not seem to be always reliable since the contrast between a current and a basic meaning is not always evident and may be disputable in the case of words whose meaning is co-determined by context, as, e.g., the sense of the noun collectors in the phrase collectors of stories referring to the Grimm brothers. This method is also likely allow for the so-called grammatical metaphors, identified by Panther and Thornburg (2009) going unnoticed, since in their case the words involved represent their basic, physical senses. An example of the latter is the peculiar inflection of brand names marked for the masculine gender in Polish. Specifically, this is the issue of obligatory applying the declensional pattern characteristic of masculine animate nouns to masculine brand names referring to commercial products, such as cars, watches, computers, etc. The point is that the accusative case form of such words functioning as objects of verbs like buy, see, have is equal to the genitive, as is normal of animate nouns, rather than to the nominative, which is typical of animate ones – a group, to which brand names, after all, belong. This peculiar behaviour of a specific category of nouns may be interpreted as a symptom of construing their referents in a way in terms of living creatures, which seems to be confirmed by the fact that many owners develop emotional attitudes to objects of personal use. It is the metaphorical construal that seems to determine the grammatical form of certain nouns referring to them.","PeriodicalId":345953,"journal":{"name":"Beyond Philology An International Journal of Linguistics, Literary Studies and English Language Teaching","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detecting metaphor – what case forms may reveal about a conceptualization\",\"authors\":\"Olga Sokołowska\",\"doi\":\"10.26881/bp.2019.1.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The figurativeness of language expressions is not always obvious. While in rhetoric such unobtrusiveness may be a welcome quality, in linguistic studies, which have proved the important epistemological function of metaphor, it is vital that a reliable method for detecting metaphoricity in language be developed. The MIP proposed by the Pragglejaz group of researchers into metaphor, whose main concern is determining whether the sense represented by a given unit in a specific context contrasts or not with its basic, primary, typically “physical” meaning, does not seem to be always reliable since the contrast between a current and a basic meaning is not always evident and may be disputable in the case of words whose meaning is co-determined by context, as, e.g., the sense of the noun collectors in the phrase collectors of stories referring to the Grimm brothers. This method is also likely allow for the so-called grammatical metaphors, identified by Panther and Thornburg (2009) going unnoticed, since in their case the words involved represent their basic, physical senses. An example of the latter is the peculiar inflection of brand names marked for the masculine gender in Polish. Specifically, this is the issue of obligatory applying the declensional pattern characteristic of masculine animate nouns to masculine brand names referring to commercial products, such as cars, watches, computers, etc. The point is that the accusative case form of such words functioning as objects of verbs like buy, see, have is equal to the genitive, as is normal of animate nouns, rather than to the nominative, which is typical of animate ones – a group, to which brand names, after all, belong. This peculiar behaviour of a specific category of nouns may be interpreted as a symptom of construing their referents in a way in terms of living creatures, which seems to be confirmed by the fact that many owners develop emotional attitudes to objects of personal use. It is the metaphorical construal that seems to determine the grammatical form of certain nouns referring to them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":345953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Beyond Philology An International Journal of Linguistics, Literary Studies and English Language Teaching\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Beyond Philology An International Journal of Linguistics, Literary Studies and English Language Teaching\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26881/bp.2019.1.04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Beyond Philology An International Journal of Linguistics, Literary Studies and English Language Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26881/bp.2019.1.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
语言表达的具象性并不总是很明显的。虽然在修辞学中,这种不显眼性可能是一种受欢迎的品质,但在已经证明隐喻重要的认识论功能的语言学研究中,开发一种可靠的方法来检测语言中的隐喻是至关重要的。Pragglejaz研究小组对隐喻提出的MIP,其主要关注的是确定特定语境中给定单位所代表的意义是否与其基本的、主要的、典型的“物理”意义形成对比,似乎并不总是可靠的,因为当前意义和基本意义之间的对比并不总是明显的,并且在意义由语境共同决定的单词的情况下可能存在争议,例如:名词collectors在短语collectors of stories中的意义,指的是格林兄弟。这种方法也可能会让Panther和Thornburg(2009)发现的所谓的语法隐喻被忽视,因为在他们的案例中,所涉及的单词代表了他们基本的身体感官。后者的一个例子是波兰语中标记为男性性别的品牌名称的特殊变化。具体来说,这是一个强制性地将男性动画名词的变化规律特征应用于商业产品(如汽车、手表、电脑等)的男性品牌名称的问题。问题的关键是,这些词的宾格形式作为buy、see、have等动词的宾语,与一般的有生命名词的属格相等,而不是与典型的有生命名词的主格相等,毕竟品牌名称属于这一组。一类特定名词的这种特殊行为可以被解释为一种症状,即在某种程度上用有生命的生物来解释它们的指涉物,这似乎被许多所有者对个人使用的物品产生情感态度的事实所证实。似乎是隐喻性的解释决定了指代它们的某些名词的语法形式。
Detecting metaphor – what case forms may reveal about a conceptualization
The figurativeness of language expressions is not always obvious. While in rhetoric such unobtrusiveness may be a welcome quality, in linguistic studies, which have proved the important epistemological function of metaphor, it is vital that a reliable method for detecting metaphoricity in language be developed. The MIP proposed by the Pragglejaz group of researchers into metaphor, whose main concern is determining whether the sense represented by a given unit in a specific context contrasts or not with its basic, primary, typically “physical” meaning, does not seem to be always reliable since the contrast between a current and a basic meaning is not always evident and may be disputable in the case of words whose meaning is co-determined by context, as, e.g., the sense of the noun collectors in the phrase collectors of stories referring to the Grimm brothers. This method is also likely allow for the so-called grammatical metaphors, identified by Panther and Thornburg (2009) going unnoticed, since in their case the words involved represent their basic, physical senses. An example of the latter is the peculiar inflection of brand names marked for the masculine gender in Polish. Specifically, this is the issue of obligatory applying the declensional pattern characteristic of masculine animate nouns to masculine brand names referring to commercial products, such as cars, watches, computers, etc. The point is that the accusative case form of such words functioning as objects of verbs like buy, see, have is equal to the genitive, as is normal of animate nouns, rather than to the nominative, which is typical of animate ones – a group, to which brand names, after all, belong. This peculiar behaviour of a specific category of nouns may be interpreted as a symptom of construing their referents in a way in terms of living creatures, which seems to be confirmed by the fact that many owners develop emotional attitudes to objects of personal use. It is the metaphorical construal that seems to determine the grammatical form of certain nouns referring to them.