【作者】 蒋道华；

【导师】 朱跃；

【作者基本信息】 安徽大学 ， 英语， 2004， 硕士

【摘要】 隐喻，作为修辞学研究中的重要课题，历来倍受关注。而对其认知的研究，又进一步拓宽了对隐喻本质的认识，加深了人们对隐喻的理解。但对隐喻不管是作修辞还是认知的研究，都或多或少地反映了隐喻的操作特征，因而两者是互补而不是截然对立。修辞学的研究反映了隐喻语言运作的特征；认知的研究揭示了隐喻的概念性本质。本文正是基于对隐喻的这种认识，以英汉两种语言隐喻操作上的对比分析，探讨隐喻的认知价值，从词类、句法和概念的角度详细分析了隐喻运作的基点，向内部挖掘隐喻的运作特征、构成规律，向外部探究隐喻的文化情境特性，力图揭示隐喻运作上的语言机制和认知价值的互动整合关系。本文强调，隐喻中的语言选择并不是盲目随意的，而是和人的认知活动密切相关的。本文同时试图整合隐喻研究的二分法(修辞、认知)，探讨隐喻多层面操作的互动性，体现隐喻认知在英汉语言中的普遍性和文化制约性。 本文首先追溯了中外隐喻研究的发展史。就历史渊源而言，西方的隐喻研究起源于亚里士多得的《修辞学》和《诗学》两部著作，而中国则始于先秦时期的修辞思想。随着认识的不断深入，西方开始对隐喻作语义、语用进而到认知的多面跨领域研究，大大拓宽了对隐喻本质的认识。而汉语对隐喻的研究自始至终都圄于修辞的分析，归属于比喻的研究，着重细化归类。就这一点而言，西方隐喻研究的发展是外向开放的；中国隐喻研究是内向单一的。只是到了现代，随着对西方理论的介绍与引进，国内才开始注意隐喻的认知分析，但也还是起步阶段。 其次，就隐喻的操作，本文作了详尽的分析描述，分别从词类、句法和概念三大层面着重分析英汉隐喻的内部运作转换和外部文化情境关联。宏观隐喻和微观隐喻的区分将隐喻的操作与修辞和认知从语言层面上结合起来。各种词类的微观隐喻操作进一步的体现了隐喻的认知倾向性；宏观的隐喻概念又拓宽了语言的可隐喻性。隐喻运作的深层结构和表层结构将隐喻概念和语言体现从转换的角度又连接起来，突出了隐喻在语言中的认知性。同时，隐喻的概念性具有普遍性，更具有民族性的特征。 最后，本文从理论的角度强调了隐喻的动态性和整体性。而隐喻三大层面的分析也正是从操作的角度贯彻了隐喻过程的动态整体性。更多还原

【Abstract】 Metaphor, as an important topic in the research of rhetoric, has enjoyed a long discussion. The new cognitive approach further broadens our understanding to the nature of metaphor. However, either of these two approaches cannot be devalued but should be integrated to mirror the properties of metaphor operationalization. Therefore, these two approaches to the understanding of metaphor are not contradictory but complementary in practice. Rhetoric approach reflects the features of linguistic operation, and cognitive approach brings to light the conceptual nature of metaphor. On the basis of these two approaches, this study endeavors to investigate the cognitive properties of metaphorization from the perspectives of linguistic categories, syntax and conceptual modes, centering on the internally operationalized mechanisms, forming principles, and the externally situational and cultural mappings upon metaphorical interpretation. This study is also tentatively to explore the interaction and the integration between linguistic operations and cognitive value in metaphor operationalization. It reaches the conclusion that linguistic selections are not at random but closely associated with human cognitive activities, and the conceptual nature of metaphor is manifested through linguistic and cognitive interaction.This study firstly traces back to the historical development of metaphor researches in both Chinese and English contexts. Historically speaking, western researches on metaphor originate from Rhetoric and Poetics by Aristotle; Chinese researches are initiated from voluminous rhetorical thoughts in Pre-Qin Dynasty. With the advancement of the researches, researches in the West deepen into the analysis from semantic, pragmatic and even cognitive angles to unravel the nature of metaphor. However, Chinese researches of metaphor are still retained to the rhetorical discussions, subsumed under the study of Biyu. Not until recent times, has the cognitive understanding been considered. But this direction is still on the threshold.Then, this study sheds much light upon metaphor operationalization from the categorial, syntactical and conceptual strata to investigate the interior operationalmechanism and exterior connection with the socio-cultural mappings on metaphor. The demarcation of macro-metaphor and micro-metaphor integrates the linguistic features with human cognitive tendencies. The deep structure and the surface structure of metaphor unite metaphorical concepts with linguistic instantiations, highlighting the cognitive properties of metaphor in language.Finally, this study explicates the importance of the dynamics and integration of metaphor operationalization from the theoretical perspective. It is the dynamic and integrative processes that are carried out through the three strata (linguistic categories, syntax and concepts).更多还原