古人根據(jù)他們的經(jīng)驗(yàn),特別是與人體相關(guān)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)來(lái)感知世界。臉作為頭部最顯眼的部分,也是人體的重要組成部分,這促生了其他基于臉部而延伸的概念,而這些概念都體現(xiàn)在詞語(yǔ)的詞匯意義擴(kuò)展中。以往關(guān)于人臉意義的研究主要是從歷時(shí)或某個(gè)共時(shí)角度進(jìn)行的,歸屬于傳統(tǒng)語(yǔ)義學(xué)范疇或歸屬于對(duì)其社會(huì)功能的比較研究。后來(lái),一位中國(guó)學(xué)者Ning Yu(2003)首先使用兩種概念工具轉(zhuǎn)喻和隱喻,從認(rèn)知的角度對(duì)中國(guó)人的“臉/面”與英語(yǔ)“face”進(jìn)行比較研究。轉(zhuǎn)喻和隱喻,在過(guò)去被視為兩種修辭手法,而在20世紀(jì)80年代Lakoff和Johson(1980)的研究以及后來(lái)更多認(rèn)知語(yǔ)言學(xué)家進(jìn)行的研究中,這兩種修辭手段被視為在人們生活中普遍存在的兩種概念工具,不只體現(xiàn)在語(yǔ)言使用方面,還體現(xiàn)在思考和行動(dòng)過(guò)程中。在此之后,為了展示中文“臉/面”和英文“face”的隱喻和轉(zhuǎn)喻用法,許多中國(guó)學(xué)者提供了更多在現(xiàn)實(shí)生活語(yǔ)言中更具體的中英文例子。然而,他們都忽略了一個(gè)更復(fù)雜的情況,即兩個(gè)概念工具交互式地共同作用在中英文“臉/面”或“face”上。根據(jù)Goosens(1990)的觀點(diǎn),他認(rèn)為存在著隱轉(zhuǎn)喻這一情況,主要包含兩類(lèi):來(lái)自轉(zhuǎn)喻的隱喻和隱喻內(nèi)...

【文章頁(yè)數(shù)】：72 頁(yè)

【文章目錄】：
Acknowledgements
Abstract
摘要
Chapter One Introduction
    1.1 Research Background
    1.2 Research Objectives and Significance
    1.3 Research Methodology and Data Collection
    1.4 Organization of the Thesis
Chapter Two Literature Review
    2.1 Diachronic Studies on Lian/Mian and Face
    2.2 Synchronic Studies on Lian/Mian and Face
        2.2.1 Traditional Approaches
            2.2.1.1 Traditional Approach to Intracultural Comparative Study
            2.2.1.2 Traditional Approach to Intercultural Comparative Study
        2.2.2 Cognitive Approach
Chapter Three Theoretical Foundation
    3.1 Metaphor and Metonymy
        3.1.1 Traditional View on Metaphor and Metonymy
        3.1.2 Cognitive Perspectives on Metaphor and Metonymy
            3.1.2.1 The Conceptual Metaphor Theory
            3.1.2.2 Classification of Conceptual Metaphor
            3.1.2.3 The Conceptual Metonymy Theory
            3.1.2.4 Classification of Conceptual Metonymy
        3.1.3 Relations of Metaphor and Metonymy
    3.2 Culture Linguistics
        3.2.1 Analytical Tools of Cultural Linguistics
            3.2.1.1 Cultural Schema
            3.2.1.2 Cultural Category
            3.2.1.3 Cultural Metaphor
Chapter Four Analysis of Chinese Lian/Mian and English Face
    4.1 Metaphoric and Metonymic Lian/Mian in Chinese
        4.1.1 Metonymic Lian/Mian in Chinese
            4.1.1.1 Causation ICM on Face
            4.1.1.2 Thing-and-Part ICM on Face
            4.1.1.3 Correlation ICM on Face
            4.1.1.4 Action ICM on Face
        4.1.2 Metaphorical Lian/Mian in Chinese
            4.1.2.1 Metaphorical Face on its Physical Property
            4.1.2.2 Metaphorical Face on its Social Property
        4.1.3 Metaphtonymic Lian/Mian in Chinese
            4.1.3.1 Metaphor from Metonymy on Face
            4.1.3.2 Metonymy within Metaphor on Face
    4.2 Metaphoric and Metonymic Face in English
        4.2.1 Metonymic Face in English
            4.2.1.1 Causation ICM on Face
            4.2.1.2 Thing-and-Part ICM on Face
            4.2.1.3 Correlation ICM on Face
            4.2.1.4 Action ICM on Face
        4.2.2 Metaphorical Face in English
            4.2.2.1 Metaphorical Face on its Physical Property
            4.2.2.2 Metaphorical Face on its Social Property
        4.2.3 Metaphtonymic Face in English
            4.2.3.1 Metaphor from Metonymy on Face
            4.2.3.2 Metonymy within metaphor on Face
    4.3 Similarities and Differences between Conceptual Face in Chinese and English .
        4.3.1 Similarities between Conceptual Face in Chinese and English
        4.3.2 Differences between Conceptual Face in Chinese and English
            4.3.2.1 Differences in the Metonymic Face
            4.3.2.2 Differences in the Metaphoric Face
            4.3.2.3 Differences in the Metaphtonymic Face
    4.4 Causes of Similarities and Differences
        4.4.1 Causes of Similarities
        4.4.2 Causes of Differences
Chapter Five Conclusion
    5.1 Major Findings and Implication
    5.2 Limitations and Suggestions
References



本文編號(hào)：3734755