轉(zhuǎn)喻的修辭批評研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-10-05 19:32
【摘要】：修辭批評理論是西方修辭學理論中一個重要的組成部分。近年來，國內(nèi)外尤其是國內(nèi)學者對其的研究逐漸呈升溫的趨勢。修辭批評，顧名思義，即是依靠修辭理論對修辭現(xiàn)象進行的批評。而轉(zhuǎn)喻作為一種修辭現(xiàn)象，也應成為修辭批評的對象。同時，轉(zhuǎn)喻理論也是近年來迅速發(fā)展起來的一個研究熱點。學者們分別從不同角度對其進行了較為廣泛的研究。目前在這一方面，國外的研究主要集中在認知語言學框架內(nèi)對其概念的定位、分類以及其在語義、語法、句法、語篇等方面的研究。20世紀80年代初，認知語言學家只是在論述隱喻時順便提到轉(zhuǎn)喻。20世紀90年代開始，，轉(zhuǎn)喻研究才被提上日程。國內(nèi)學者的研究中一部分把轉(zhuǎn)喻作為一種修辭格來看待，另一部分則在認知語言學視域下關(guān)注轉(zhuǎn)喻�？傮w來講，國內(nèi)外的轉(zhuǎn)喻研究的側(cè)面比較廣泛，但都存在研究視域局限（主要集中在轉(zhuǎn)喻的本體性研究和其與語言各層面之間的關(guān)系）、研究思路不夠開闊等問題。國內(nèi)研究尤其傾向于介紹西方的研究成果，缺乏原創(chuàng)性的理論與研究方法。整體來看，國內(nèi)外研究均未提及對轉(zhuǎn)喻的修辭批評研究。鑒于國內(nèi)外在這一領(lǐng)域的研究現(xiàn)狀，本文嘗試從修辭批評視角出發(fā)對轉(zhuǎn)喻進行分析與評價，并將轉(zhuǎn)喻與修辭批評整合出一個新的研究范式——批評轉(zhuǎn)喻分析，在闡述其本位性、可操作性與適用性特征的基礎(chǔ)上構(gòu)建一個合理的、適合分析與評價語篇中的轉(zhuǎn)喻現(xiàn)象的語篇分析模式。 本項研究重點參考定性的研究方法，研究手段采用以語言為主附加文字的描述性分析，通過嚴密論證，以嚴謹?shù)倪壿嬓垣@取效度。批評轉(zhuǎn)喻分析的過程依據(jù)定性的研究中目的性抽樣原則下的具體策略，從語料中選取代表性語篇來驗證分析步驟的可操作性和適用性。此外，本課題主要吸收了古典修辭學、新修辭學、批評性語篇分析、認知語言學、政治學、翻譯學等研究領(lǐng)域中的相關(guān)原理和方法。而對修辭理論的借鑒，本課題始終以西方修辭學為基石，以當代修辭學研究為指引，在繼承與創(chuàng)新并舉中不斷推進研究的深化。 本課題主要在以下幾個方面做出了有意義的創(chuàng)新：1）合理界定了關(guān)鍵術(shù)語“修辭批評”、“批評”、“轉(zhuǎn)喻”、“批評轉(zhuǎn)喻分析”以及“轉(zhuǎn)喻能力”；2）明確了轉(zhuǎn)喻的修辭批評研究的分析步驟；3）首次基于西方修辭學較為系統(tǒng)地對轉(zhuǎn)喻的修辭批評研究步驟進行再定位，從而構(gòu)建出一個層次分明、結(jié)構(gòu)合理的研究范式；4）得出了轉(zhuǎn)喻的修辭批評研究的啟示意義，這對于在英語寫作、閱讀與翻譯中培養(yǎng)學生的轉(zhuǎn)喻能力都具有重要的實踐意義。此外，本課題對“修辭情境”以及“意識形態(tài)”等重要概念進行了深入的辨析，在比較和論證的基礎(chǔ)上都提出了自己具有一定創(chuàng)新意義的觀點。本項研究最主要的創(chuàng)新體現(xiàn)在把西方修辭學中的相關(guān)概念（如“辭屏”、“修辭動機”、“修辭情境”、“修辭勸說”、“同一”等）整合到轉(zhuǎn)喻的修辭批評研究的三個分析步驟中，使批評轉(zhuǎn)喻分析模式逐步清晰化。 本研究在基于修辭批評理論對轉(zhuǎn)喻的分析與評價方面做出了一定的理論突破，將有助于確立批評轉(zhuǎn)喻分析在眾多修辭批評模式中的一席之地，顯示其獨特的理論價值。轉(zhuǎn)喻的修辭批評研究也為語篇分析新模式的構(gòu)建提供了一定的理論參考。本課題還基于批評轉(zhuǎn)喻分析構(gòu)建了轉(zhuǎn)喻能力，并提出了轉(zhuǎn)喻能力的五個重要組成部分，這將為英語寫作教學、閱讀教學以及翻譯教學提供一定的實踐價值，有助于提高學生的語言能力和應用能力。
[Abstract]:The theory of rhetoric criticism is an important part of western rhetoric theory. In recent years, the research of domestic and foreign scholars, especially domestic scholars, has been increasing gradually. The rhetoric criticism, the rhetoric, is the criticism of rhetoric phenomena by means of rhetoric theory. Metonymy, as a rhetorical phenomenon, should also be the subject of rhetoric criticism. At the same time, metonymy theory is a hotspot in recent years. Scholars have studied it from different angles, respectively. At present, the research abroad mainly focuses on the localization and classification of its concept in the framework of cognitive linguistics, and its research on semantics, grammar, syntax, language and so on. The cognitive linguist is only referring to metonymy in the discussion of metaphor. In the 1990s, metonymic research was put on the agenda. Part of the study of domestic scholars regards metonymy as a kind of thinking, while others focus on metonymy in the field of cognitive linguistics. Generally speaking, the side of metonymy research at home and abroad is more extensive, but there are limitations of research horizon (mainly focus on the ontological research of metonymy and the relationship between it and language level), and the research thought is not open and so on. Domestic research is especially inclined to introduce the research achievements in the West and lack the original theory and research methods. In the whole, the research on rhetoric of metonymy has not been mentioned at home and abroad. In view of the current situation of research in this field at home and abroad, this paper attempts to analyze and evaluate metonymy from the perspective of rhetoric criticism, and combine the metonymy and rhetoric criticism with a new paradigm of research _ criticism metonymy analysis, which will explain its standard, On the basis of the characteristics of operability and applicability, a reasonable model of discourse analysis suitable for analysis and evaluation of metonymy in discourse is constructed. This study focuses on the qualitative research methods. The research means adopts the descriptive analysis of language-based supplementary characters, and through strict demonstration, we obtain strict logical acquisition. The process of criticizing metonymy analysis is based on the specific strategy under the principle of objective sampling in qualitative research, and a representative text is selected from the corpus to verify the operability and adaptability of the analysis step. In addition, the subject mainly absorbs the related principles in the fields of classical rhetoric, new rhetoric, discourse analysis, cognitive linguistics, political science, and translation studies. As a reference to rhetoric theory, this topic has always been the cornerstone of western rhetoric, which is guided by contemporary rhetoric research, which is being pursued continuously in the development of succession and innovation. deepen. This topic has made meaningful innovation in the following aspects: 1) the key terms of 鈥渞hetoric criticism鈥
本文編號：2254606
[Abstract]:The theory of rhetoric criticism is an important part of western rhetoric theory. In recent years, the research of domestic and foreign scholars, especially domestic scholars, has been increasing gradually. The rhetoric criticism, the rhetoric, is the criticism of rhetoric phenomena by means of rhetoric theory. Metonymy, as a rhetorical phenomenon, should also be the subject of rhetoric criticism. At the same time, metonymy theory is a hotspot in recent years. Scholars have studied it from different angles, respectively. At present, the research abroad mainly focuses on the localization and classification of its concept in the framework of cognitive linguistics, and its research on semantics, grammar, syntax, language and so on. The cognitive linguist is only referring to metonymy in the discussion of metaphor. In the 1990s, metonymic research was put on the agenda. Part of the study of domestic scholars regards metonymy as a kind of thinking, while others focus on metonymy in the field of cognitive linguistics. Generally speaking, the side of metonymy research at home and abroad is more extensive, but there are limitations of research horizon (mainly focus on the ontological research of metonymy and the relationship between it and language level), and the research thought is not open and so on. Domestic research is especially inclined to introduce the research achievements in the West and lack the original theory and research methods. In the whole, the research on rhetoric of metonymy has not been mentioned at home and abroad. In view of the current situation of research in this field at home and abroad, this paper attempts to analyze and evaluate metonymy from the perspective of rhetoric criticism, and combine the metonymy and rhetoric criticism with a new paradigm of research _ criticism metonymy analysis, which will explain its standard, On the basis of the characteristics of operability and applicability, a reasonable model of discourse analysis suitable for analysis and evaluation of metonymy in discourse is constructed. This study focuses on the qualitative research methods. The research means adopts the descriptive analysis of language-based supplementary characters, and through strict demonstration, we obtain strict logical acquisition. The process of criticizing metonymy analysis is based on the specific strategy under the principle of objective sampling in qualitative research, and a representative text is selected from the corpus to verify the operability and adaptability of the analysis step. In addition, the subject mainly absorbs the related principles in the fields of classical rhetoric, new rhetoric, discourse analysis, cognitive linguistics, political science, and translation studies. As a reference to rhetoric theory, this topic has always been the cornerstone of western rhetoric, which is guided by contemporary rhetoric research, which is being pursued continuously in the development of succession and innovation. deepen. This topic has made meaningful innovation in the following aspects: 1) the key terms of 鈥渞hetoric criticism鈥
本文編號：2254606
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/hanyulw/2254606.html
最近更新
教材專著
