【摘要】：隨著認(rèn)知語言學(xué)的發(fā)展,轉(zhuǎn)喻不再被認(rèn)為是簡單的修辭裝飾,而是作為人類認(rèn)知和推理的一種基本思維方式。轉(zhuǎn)喻思維已經(jīng)成為我們?nèi)粘Ｑ哉Z行為的必要組成。語用推理歷來是語用學(xué)研究的重點(diǎn),其中的主要研究發(fā)現(xiàn)和理論成果有Grice(1975)的合作原則、Levinson(1983)的新格賴斯語用推理機(jī)制以及SperberWilson(1995)的關(guān)聯(lián)理論等。然而,這些語用學(xué)理論并沒有很好地解釋為什么聽話人能夠快速且毫不費(fèi)勁地理解說話人的意圖,也沒有系統(tǒng)深入地探索語用推理模式的本質(zhì)及其認(rèn)知理據(jù)。轉(zhuǎn)喻思維模式能夠有效彌補(bǔ)傳統(tǒng)理論的不足,為言語行為中的語用推理提供基于認(rèn)知視角的解釋框架。 本文借助鄰近關(guān)系、Langacker(1993)的參照點(diǎn)理論和Lakoff(1987)的理想認(rèn)知模型來闡釋轉(zhuǎn)喻的各種生成關(guān)系和認(rèn)知運(yùn)作機(jī)制,以此作為分析轉(zhuǎn)喻語用推理功能研究的理論基礎(chǔ)。鑒于間接言語行為的典型性,轉(zhuǎn)喻的語用推理功能主要根據(jù)PantherThornburg(1999)的言語行為轉(zhuǎn)喻理論來分析間接言語行為的語用推理過程。該理論認(rèn)為轉(zhuǎn)喻是一種“自然推理圖式”,在間接言語行為中,說話人可以借用腳本中的一個(gè)成分段來激活和指代另一成分段或全部行為段,即通過轉(zhuǎn)喻來闡釋間接言語行為及其語用推理過程。考慮到言語交際是一個(gè)動(dòng)態(tài)而非靜態(tài)的互動(dòng)過程,該理論引入了語用參數(shù)和言外ICMs(Idealized Cognitive Models)作為進(jìn)一步完善。此外,空間合成理論從指稱和言語行為兩個(gè)層面分析了轉(zhuǎn)喻對(duì)于語用推理的作用,彌補(bǔ)了傳統(tǒng)言語行為轉(zhuǎn)喻的局限性。因此,從轉(zhuǎn)喻的視角研究間接言語行為可以補(bǔ)充和豐富語用學(xué)理論及相關(guān)的語言研究。本文的研究表明將轉(zhuǎn)喻與語用推理相結(jié)合不僅能夠探明轉(zhuǎn)喻思維的本原性,也能夠?yàn)檎Z用推理提供合理的解釋框架和認(rèn)知理據(jù)。 轉(zhuǎn)喻對(duì)語用推理具有較強(qiáng)的解釋力,有效彌補(bǔ)了傳統(tǒng)理論的不足。此外,兩者的結(jié)合對(duì)人們在語言運(yùn)用中如何更好地運(yùn)用轉(zhuǎn)喻思維和開展互動(dòng)式英語教學(xué)都有一定的借鑒意義。本文從轉(zhuǎn)喻的角度闡釋語用推理機(jī)制,為語用推理研究提供了一個(gè)全新的視角,也有助于啟發(fā)其他學(xué)者關(guān)于轉(zhuǎn)喻應(yīng)用研究的興趣。
[Abstract]:With the development of cognitive linguistics, metonymy is no longer regarded as a simple rhetorical decoration, but as a basic way of thinking of human cognition and reasoning. Metonymy thinking has become a necessary component of our daily speech acts. Pragmatic reasoning has always been the focus of pragmatics, among which the main findings and theoretical results are the new Grace pragmatic reasoning mechanism of Grice (1975)'s cooperative principle, Levinson (1983 and the relevance theory of SperberWilson (1995). However, these pragmatic theories do not explain why hearer can understand the intention of the speaker quickly and effortlessly, nor do they systematically and deeply explore the nature of pragmatic reasoning model and its cognitive motivation. Metonymy mode of thinking can effectively make up for the shortcomings of traditional theories and provide a framework of interpretation based on cognitive perspective for pragmatic reasoning in speech acts. In this paper, the reference point theory of proximity relation, Langacker (1993 and the ideal cognitive model of Lakoff (1987) are used to explain the various generating relationships and cognitive operation mechanisms of metonymy, which can be used as the theoretical basis for the analysis of metaphorical pragmatic reasoning function. In view of the typicality of indirect speech act, the pragmatic reasoning function of metonymy is mainly based on PantherThornburg (1999) 's speech act metonymy theory to analyze the pragmatic reasoning process of indirect speech act. According to this theory, metonymy is a kind of "natural reasoning schema". In indirect speech acts, the speaker can use one segment of the script to activate and refer to the other segment or all the behavior segments. That is to say, indirect speech act and its pragmatic reasoning process are explained by metonymy. Considering that verbal communication is a dynamic rather than static interactive process, the theory introduces pragmatic parameters and ICMs (Idealized Cognitive Models) as further perfection. In addition, spatial synthesis theory analyzes the role of metonymy in pragmatic reasoning from two aspects of reference and speech act, which makes up for the limitations of traditional speech act metonymy. Therefore, the study of indirect speech acts from the perspective of metonymy can complement and enrich pragmatic theories and related linguistic studies. The research in this paper shows that the combination of metonymy and pragmatic reasoning can not only find out the original nature of metonymy thinking, but also provide a reasonable interpretation framework and cognitive motivation for pragmatic reasoning. Metonymy has strong explanatory power to pragmatic inference, which makes up for the deficiency of traditional theory. In addition, the combination of the two has certain reference significance for people to make better use of metonymy thinking and carry out interactive English teaching in language use. This paper explains the pragmatic reasoning mechanism from the perspective of metonymy, which provides a new perspective for the study of pragmatic reasoning and helps to inspire the interest of other scholars in the applied study of metonymy.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：H030

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 沈家煊;轉(zhuǎn)指和轉(zhuǎn)喻[J];當(dāng)代語言學(xué);1999年01期

2 董成如;轉(zhuǎn)喻的認(rèn)知解釋[J];解放軍外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年02期

3 毛帥梅;;論轉(zhuǎn)喻的分類[J];外語學(xué)刊;2009年04期

4 李勇忠;言語行為轉(zhuǎn)喻與話語的深層連貫[J];外語教學(xué);2004年03期

5 李勇忠;轉(zhuǎn)喻的概念本質(zhì)及其語用學(xué)意義[J];外語與外語教學(xué);2005年08期

6 熊學(xué)亮;話語連續(xù)性的圖式分解研究[J];外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2001年03期

7 汪少華;合成空間理論對(duì)隱喻的闡釋力[J];外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2001年03期

8 張輝,周平;轉(zhuǎn)喻與語用推理圖式[J];外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2002年04期

9 蔣勇;特別概念結(jié)構(gòu)的借代功能[J];外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2003年06期

10 魏在江;;概念轉(zhuǎn)喻與語篇銜接——各派分歧、理論背景及實(shí)驗(yàn)支持[J];外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2007年02期

，

本文編號(hào)：2473576