期刊文献+

礼貌语言的转喻视角 被引量:7

A Metonymic Perspective on Politeness Language
下载PDF
导出
摘要 礼貌的语用研究和转喻的认知研究都已在各自的领域取得很高的成就。然而,目前国内外尚无人从转喻认知的视角对礼貌进行诠释。本文摆脱传统的语用视角研究礼貌,转而采用转喻认知理论来探讨礼貌语言。文章认为,转喻的本质就是任何形式的替代.即“以此言彼”.英语的公式是X stands for Y;认知层面的转喻能够表达礼貌,这是转喻新思维和礼貌的特点决定的。遵循这一理念,文章从三个方面,即间接言语行为转喻、委婉语转喻和语法转喻,对礼貌语言进行了分析。 Although great achievements have been made in the pragmatic study of politeness language and in the research of conceptual metonymy, it seems that none has combined politeness language with metonymy both home and abroad. The author turns from pragmatics to metonymy as a cognitive tool and attempts to probe into politeness language. Realizing that the essence of metonymy is just substitution or replacement and that metonymy can effectively express politeness, the author follows this train of thought and provides an analysis of politeness language from the three perspectives of indirect speech act metonymy, euphemism metonymy and grammatical metonymy.
作者 祖利军
出处 《山东外语教学》 2008年第2期8-15,共8页 Shandong Foreign Language Teaching
关键词 转喻 礼貌 间接言语行为 委婉语 语法转喻 metonymy politeness language indirect speech act euphemism grammatical metonymy
  • 相关文献

参考文献12

  • 1李勇忠.言语行为转喻与话语的深层连贯[J].外语教学,2004,25(3):14-18. 被引量:46
  • 2徐莉娜.跨文化交际中的委婉语解读策略[J].外语与外语教学,2002(9):6-9. 被引量:79
  • 3Croft,W.The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies[].Cognitive Linguistics.1993
  • 4Halliday,M.A.K.An Introduction to Functional Grammar[]./.19942000
  • 5K vecses,Z,&G.Radden.Metonymy:developing a cognitive linguistic view[].Cognitive Linguistics.1998
  • 6Lakoff,G,&M,Johnson.Metaphors We Live By[]..1980
  • 7Leech,G.Principles of Pragmatics[]..1983
  • 8Panther,K-U,&L Thornburg.Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing[]..2003
  • 9Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáz,F,J.The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy[].Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads.2000
  • 10Searle,J.R.Speech Acts[]..1969

二级参考文献24

  • 1王甦 汪圣安.认知心理学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1996,2..
  • 2Bach, K. &. Harnish, R. Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts[M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1979.
  • 3Gibbs, Raymond W., Jr. The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
  • 4Gordon, David & Lakoff, George. Conversational postulates[A].In Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan(eds.). Speech Acts(Syntax and Semantics 3) [C]. New York: Academic Press, 1975 : 187-210.
  • 5Hernandez, L. P. & de Mendoza, F. J. R. Grounding, semantic motivation, and conceptual interaction in indirect directive speech acts[J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2002(34) :259-284.
  • 6Lakoff,George. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things[M]. Chicago: IL: University of Chicago Press, 1987.
  • 7Leech, Geoffrey. Principles of Pragmatics [M]. New York:Longman, 1983.
  • 8Levinson, Stephen. Pragmatics[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
  • 9Morgan, Jerry L. Two types of convention in indirect speech acts[A]. In :Peter Cole, (ed.). Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 9: Pragmatics[C]. New York: Academic Press, 1978:261-280.
  • 10Panther, Klaus-Uwe and Linda Thornburg. A cognitive approach to inferencing in conversation[J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 1998(30) : 755-769.

共引文献123

同被引文献75

引证文献7

二级引证文献30

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部