第四尊大师奖杯，对偶

Q1 Arts and Humanities

Advances in the History of Rhetoric Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI:10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412

R. Harris

{"title":"第四尊大师奖杯，对偶","authors":"R. Harris","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Four Master Tropes—metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony—are a significant theme in the history of rhetoric, but this grouping is wrong in fundamental ways—irony is not a trope at all properly understood, and the bulk of the arguments in this tradition suggest, along with a few new ones of my own, that the fourth Master Trope should be antithesis.","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"1 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Fourth Master Trope, Antithesis\",\"authors\":\"R. Harris\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Four Master Tropes—metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony—are a significant theme in the history of rhetoric, but this grouping is wrong in fundamental ways—irony is not a trope at all properly understood, and the bulk of the arguments in this tradition suggest, along with a few new ones of my own, that the fourth Master Trope should be antithesis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in the History of Rhetoric\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in the History of Rhetoric\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 5

摘要

四大修辞大师——隐喻、转喻、提喻和反讽——是修辞学史上的一个重要主题，但这种分组在根本上是错误的——反讽根本不是一种被正确理解的修辞，而这一传统中的大部分论点，以及我自己的一些新论点都表明，第四大修辞大师应该是对喻。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The Fourth Master Trope, Antithesis

ABSTRACT The Four Master Tropes—metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony—are a significant theme in the history of rhetoric, but this grouping is wrong in fundamental ways—irony is not a trope at all properly understood, and the bulk of the arguments in this tradition suggest, along with a few new ones of my own, that the fourth Master Trope should be antithesis.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Advances in the History of Rhetoric Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory

CiteScore

0.30

自引率

0.00%

发文量