论文标题:从关联理论角度研究转喻的语用功能
A Study of the Pragmatic Functions of Metonymy from the Perspective of Relevance Theory
论文作者
论文导师 陈昌义,论文学位 硕士,论文专业 外国语言学及应用语言学
论文单位 浙江师范大学,点击次数 112,论文页数 74页File Size4001K
2007-10-01论文网 http://www.lw23.com/lunwen_166771437/
metonymy;; cognition;; Relevance Theory;; pragmatic functions
传统修辞学认为转喻是一种修辞现象,现实中两个密切关联的事物名称之间的相互替代就是转喻,是一种语言现象,尤其是文学语言现象。随着认知语言学在过去几十年中的发展,学者们普遍认识到转喻不仅是语言手段,更是一种重要的认知机制,是一种认知和推理的过程。认知语言学家普遍认为转喻的本质是在同一理想化认知模型(ICM)内,用一个概念实体作为工具,为另一个代表认知目标的概念实体提供心理途径的认知过程。 转喻的认识由传统修辞观到认知观的转变极大地拓宽了转喻的覆盖面,人们对于转喻的理解更加深入。然而这一转变并没有完全透彻地阐释转喻现象。转喻的理解机制、语用功能等问题并未得到令人信服的解答。斯波伯和威尔逊(Sperber and Wilson)的关联理论为转喻研究提供了新的视角。 关联理论认为,任何交际都是一种目的性的明示推理交际。该理论的核心是关联原则:任何明示性的交际行为都意味着本交际行为所传递的假设,具有最佳关联性。在交际过程中说话者的话语要尽力使听话人付出最小的努力去理解话语;如果听话者付出了更大的努力去理解话语,必定会有更丰富的语境效果来补偿。 本文以关联理论为框架,结合语料分析,探讨转喻在交际中的各种语用功能。文章选取老舍名剧《茶馆》作为语料来源,依据认知语言学对转喻的定义和论述,列出剧本中所有的转喻表达。对于每一例转喻表达,都将其与非转喻的直白表述进行对比。通过比较,探究转喻表达的独特作用和语用功能,进而对各种语用功能进行分类,并寻求相应的理论阐释。 通过《茶馆》中大量的转喻例证分析,本文得出结论——关联原则可以阐释转喻的使用动机和语用功能:一方面,比起“实事求是”的细致描述,转喻的运用使得话语和明示交际行为更加经济,节省听话者理解话语所付出的努力;另一方面,不少转喻表达属于间接的思想表达方式,这种非直接的表述要求听话者付出更大的努力理解话语,这种“附加”的努力由更丰富的语境效果所补偿,这些丰富的语境效果是转喻话语的另一语用功能。
In traditional rhetoric, metonymy is viewed as a figure of speech that involves a process of substituting the name of one thing for that of another with which it is closely associated in reality. It is thought of as a matter of language, especially literary language. In the last decades, with the advent of cognitive linguistics, it is generally believed by scholars that metonymy is more than a linguistic device; rather it is viewed as an important cognitive means, a reasoning and inferential process. Contemporary cognitive linguists generally think metonymy is a cognitive process in which one conceptual entity, the vehicle, provides mental access to another conceptual entity, the target, within the same idealized cognitive model (ICM). The shift of beliefs towards metonymy from rhetorical to cognitive perspective has broadened the scope of metonymy remarkably and people"s understanding of metonymy has deepened significantly. However, the shift has not accounted the phenomenon thoroughly. The issues such as understanding system, pragmatic functions of metonymy and so on have not got their satisfactory answers. Relevance Theory proposed by Sperber and Wilson offers new perspective to study metonymy. According to Relevance Theory, any communication is an ostensive-inferential one with intentions and purposes. The Principle of Relevance, which is the core of the Relevance Theory, holds that every act of ostensive communication communicates a presumption of its own optimal relevance. During the process of communication, communicator should save hearer"s processing efforts as much as possible; extra effort of the hearer to understand the utterance must be offset by some increase in contextual effects. Taking Relevance Theory as its framework, the present study tries to explore and discuss the pragmatic functions of metonymy based on data analysis. Laoshe"s famous play Teahouse was chosen as the data source in the study. The author first identified all the metonymic utterances in the play according to the cognitive definition and cognitive account of the nature of metonymy. And then each metonymic utterance was compared with non-metonymic and literal description of the same proposition in order to find out the unique communicative effects and pragmatic functions of metonymy. At last, the effects and functions were put into different subcategories and theoretical explanations were provided. Through a large amount of analysis of the metonymies in the play Teahouse, the present study found that the motivations and pragmatic functions of metonymy could be explained in the light of the Principle of Relevance: on the one hand, compared with literal and detailed descriptions, the use of metonymy makes the utterance and ostensive-inferential communication more economical, thus saving the processing efforts for the hearer; on the other hand, a large number of metonymies are indirect representations of communicator"s thoughts. The indirectness of the metonymies demands more processing efforts from the hearer compared with literal descriptions of communicator"s thoughts. But these extra efforts are offset by extra contextual effects, which is another pragmatic function of metonymic utterances.
|
