明喻和隱喻的異同,一直是心理學界爭論的焦點。比較論、范疇論和概念隱喻論認為他們二者并無差異,而習俗論和適宜論卻強調兩者存在不同。本文贊成異同論,但與習俗論和適宜論不同的是,認為兩者的異同是多元素共同作用的結果,這些因素包括:謂詞的類型、本喻體之間的相似度和它們之間的意義組合、喻體對共性特征的貢獻、人們對本喻體之間搭配的熟悉度等。本文首先通過實證方法證明明喻和隱喻的選擇與這五個方面相關,并在實驗的論證基礎上提出了一種全新的異同觀。 為了探究兩者之間的差異,本研究選取了50對本體和喻體,就明喻和隱喻的最基本形式:A是（像） B展開討論。太原理工大學非英語專業(yè)的一年級學生參與了四個問卷的調查,四次調查的人數(shù)累計共達332人,調查的內容包括:本喻體的傾向性形式表達,兩者共性特點描述及相似度和顯著性判斷、喻體在相似性形成中的作用、兩者搭配的熟悉度以及句子的理解難易程度判斷。 結果表明:當本體為具體名詞,喻體也為具體名詞,且兩者之間相似度較小、熟悉度不高,本喻體對喻底的貢獻基本均衡,且兩者的順序在某種程度上具有一定的逆轉性,其喻底大多呈現(xiàn)出屬性類特點時,被試更傾向于選擇明喻;而... 

【文章頁數(shù)】：178 頁

【學位級別】：博士

【文章目錄】：
Acknowledgments
Abstract
摘要
List of Tables and Figures
Chapter 1 Introduction
    1.1 Impetus of the study
    1.2 Assumptions about simile and metaphor
    1.3 Purpose and rationale of the study
    1.4 Theoretical foundation of the study
    1.5 Research methodology
    1.6 The organization of the dissertation
Chapter 2 Definition of Simile and Metaphor and Some Related Notions
    2.1 Definitions of simile and metaphor
        2.1.1 Simile in relation to metaphor
        2.1.2 Simile as a version of metaphor
    2.2 Different names for topic and vehicle
    2.3 Typical and atypical structures
    2.4 Identification of simile and metaphor
    2.5 Summary
Chapter 3 Comparison between Simile, Metaphor and their Literal Counterparts
    3.1 Indirect process and direct process
    3.2 Features of simile and metaphor vs. their literal counterparts
        3.2.1 Low/high salience vs. high/high salience
        3.2.2 Semantic anomaly vs. semantic literality
        3.2.3 Interchangeability vs. non-interchangeability
        3.2.4 Non-reversibility vs. reversibility
    3.3 The use of simile and metaphor
    3.4 Summary
Chapter 4 A Survey of the Relationship between Simile and Metaphor
    4.1 The equivalence view
        4.1.1 The comparison model
            4.1.1.1 Development of the comparison model
            4.1.1.2 Further studies of the comparison model
            4.1.1.3 Structure-mapping theory
        4.1.2 The categorization model
        4.1.3 Conceptual metaphor theory
    4.2 The non-equivalence view
        4.2.1 The conventionality model
        4.2.2 The literal base model
    4.3 Empirical studies on the competing views
        4.3.1 The conventionality hypothesis
        4.3.2 Aptness hypothesis
    4.4 Summary
Chapter 5 Research Description
    5.1 Research questions
    5.2 Pilot study
    5.3 Design of questionnaires
    5.4 Participants and role of the researcher
    5.5 Data process and analysis
Chapter 6 Experiments and Analyses
    6.1 Simile attributive and metaphor relational
        6.1.1.E xperiment 1
        6.1.2 Results and discussion
    6.2 Simile less similar and metaphor more similar
        6.2.1 Experiment 2
        6.2.2 Results of holistic and discrete similarity rating
        6.2.3 Discussion
    6.3 Simile less familiar and metaphor more familiar
        6.3.1 Experiment 3
        6.3.2 Results and discussion
    6.4 Simile more symmetric and metaphor more asymmetric
        6.4.1 Experiment 4
        6.4.2 Results and discussion of asymmetry ratings
        6.4.3 Results and discussion of reversibility
    6.5 Simile with concrete-concrete pairing and metaphor abstract- concrete pairing
        6.5.1 Procedure of the study
        6.5.2 Results and discussion
    6.6 Summary
Chapter 7 Conclusions
    7.1 Simile-metaphor distinction
    7.2 Simile-metaphor overlapping
    7.3 Simile-metaphor continuum
    7.4 Theoretical implications
    7.5 Limitations of the study
    7.6 Suggestions for future research
Bibliography
Appendices
Appendix 1 Questionnaire 1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire 2
Appendix 3 Questionnaire 3
Appendix 4 Questionnaire 4
Appendix 5 Statistical Results Processed by SPSS


【參考文獻】：
期刊論文
[1]隱喻生涯模型及其解釋力[J]. 龔玉苗,周榕.  外國語文. 2009(03)
[2]隱喻和轉喻的區(qū)分:研究現(xiàn)狀和分歧[J]. 張輝,楊波.  外國語文. 2009(01)
[3]隱喻政治與政治隱喻:論美國政治家的政治隱喻[J]. 陳勇,劉肇云.  外語教學. 2009(01)
[4]英漢語聽覺概念隱喻的共性與個性[J]. 覃修桂.  外語學刊. 2009(01)
[5]論隱喻——指導語言學博士研究生記實[J]. 王德春.  外語學刊. 2009(01)
[6]隱喻與認知研究25年（1980—2004）:成績、問題與展望[J]. 李福印,秦進平.  中國外語. 2007(04)
[7]論明喻和隱喻產生的先后順序——一項以《詩經(jīng)》為語料的認知研究[J]. 彭宣維.  北京師范大學學報(社會科學版). 2007(03)
[8]基于模型的語用推理[J]. 徐盛桓.  外國語(上海外國語大學學報). 2007(03)
[9]隱喻的主觀性與主觀化[J]. 魏在江.  解放軍外國語學院學報. 2007(02)
[10]概念隱喻和語篇連貫[J]. 任紹曾.  外語教學與研究. 2006(02)



本文編號：3695324