从系统性看隐喻理论的解释力:概念认知还是语用认知?  

Scrutinizing the Explanatory Power of Metaphor Theories via Systematicity:Conceptual Cognition or Pragmatic Cognition?

作　　者：范振强[1] Fan Zhenqiang(School of Foreign Languages,Zhejiang Gongshang University,Hangzhou,Zhejiang 310018)

机构地区：[1]浙江工商大学外国语学院,浙江杭州310018

出　　处：《嘉兴学院学报》2019年第3期93-101,125,共10页Journal of Jiaxing University

基　　金：教育部人文社科研究项目(16YJC740015)

摘　　要：概念隐喻理论(CMT)掀起了隐喻研究的认知革命,系统性是CMT在判别语料时的关键依据。研究发现,以系统性为标准,可以发现CMT的解释力存在局限性,并不能解释所有的"我们赖以生存的隐喻",即CMT无法解释概念系统以外的隐喻。研究同时表明,作为认知语用学基础的关联理论(RT)能够解释更广泛的隐喻类型:首先,它能同时解释概念系统内和系统外的隐喻;其次,就系统内隐喻而言,RT不仅能够解释隐喻的系统性及其形成过程,并且在解释的细致性方面更具优势;不仅如此,它还能够揭示隐喻交际的内部认知过程以及外部使用动因。因此RT是一种更全面和更细致的隐喻解释模式。Conceptual Metaphor Theory(CMT)has triggered a cognitive revolution for metaphor research,with the notion of“systematicity”as its cornerstone for identifying linguistic metaphors.Based on systematicity,it can be revealed that CMT is far from being capable of explaining all“the metaphors we live by”,i.e.it can not cover the linguistic metaphors which are beyond the conceptual system.It is also illustrated that Relevance Theory,the theoretical foundation of cognitive pragmatics,has the potential to interpret a wider range of metaphors:It can not only give a more in-depth explanation of metaphors both inside and outside conceptual system,but also reveal more about the internal cognitive mechanism,the external communicative motivation,as well as the conventionalization of our metaphorical conceptual system.Therefore,Relevance Theory is a more comprehensive and rigorous interpretation mode for metaphors.

关 键 词：隐喻 系统性 解释力 概念隐喻理论 关联理论 认知语用学 

分 类 号：H0-05[语言文字—语言学]