英汉工具类名转动词的ICM对比研究
发布时间：2018-10-21 11:19
【摘要】：本文以Lakoff（1987）提出的概念化认知模型ICM（Idealized Cognitive Model）为理论视点，考察英汉两种语言中工具类名转动词（文中称之为IDV）的意义构建过程，旨在通过分析ICM三个子模型（意象图式模型，隐喻模型，转喻模型）各自的应用条件和要求，归纳出英汉语中工具类名词在名转动过程中所采用的认知模型有何相同与不同之处，为其意义构建过程提供解释性框架。 本文假设英汉语工具类名转动词在意义构建过程中不仅都采用了意象图式模型，隐喻模型和转喻模型，且涉及了一种新模型---转喻-隐喻连续体模型。本文采取定性研究的方法，对英汉语中的工具类名转动词进行研究。研究数据来源于自建语料库。语料主要来自朗文当代高级英语辞典、现代汉语词典、百度和谷歌搜索引擎。 本研究拟解决以下问题：1）IDV的主要认知模型有哪几种？2）IDV的意义是如何构建的？3）英汉语的IDV意义构建各自倾向于选用何种认知模型？4）英汉IDV所选认知模型的相同和不同之处在哪里？原因何在？ 经过讨论分析，本研究得到如下发现： 1）英汉语工具类名转动词的意义构建都涉及意象图式模型，转喻模型，隐喻模型和转隐喻连续体模型四种认知模型，但后三种认知模型在其意义构建过程中更为重要。 2）对IDV而言，转喻模型比隐喻模型更为基础，前者为后者提供心理和逻辑基础，继而二者形成转隐喻连续体语义链。 3）英语IDV倾向于使用转喻模型和转隐喻连续体模型来构建意义，较少使用隐喻。而汉语IDV则倾向使用隐喻和隐喻意义的扩展来构建意义，较少使用转喻模型和转隐喻连续体模型。 4）英语IDV主要选用FUNCTION FOR ACTION和PART FOR WHOLE+FUNCTION FOR ACTION两种转喻模型和基于源域和标域在形状、结果和状态上的相似性的隐喻模型，其形成的转隐喻连续体语义链也是从简单到复杂，逻辑清晰。而汉语IDV主要选择FUNCTION FOR ACTION这种转喻模型和基于源域和标域在形状、结果、状态和过程上的相似性的隐喻模型和隐喻意义扩展，其形成的转隐喻连续体语义链也相对简单。概因人类共同的认知能力和规律以及外部环境中的诸多共同点，英汉语工具类名转动词选用的认知模型种类并无太大差异。但又由于不同的语言习惯和心理特征，两种语言所选用的认知模型存在具体差异也是必然的。 本研究结果有望增强ICM的解释力，并对工具类名词词性转换的相关研究提供一个崭新的视角和研究方法，同时也给语言习得、英语教学、对外汉语教学、人工智能翻译等提供有价值的参考。
[Abstract]:Taking ICM (Idealized Cognitive Model), a conceptual cognitive model proposed by Lakoff (1987), as the theoretical point of view, this paper examines the meaning construction process of tool name rotation words (IDV) in both English and Chinese. The purpose of this study is to analyze the three submodels of ICM (image schema model). This paper summarizes the similarities and differences between the cognitive models of instrumental nouns in the process of nomenclature rotation in English and Chinese, and provides an explanatory framework for the process of meaning construction. In this paper, we assume that in the process of meaning construction, we not only adopt image schema model, metaphor model and metonymy model, but also involve a new model-metonymy-metaphorical continuum model. In this paper, the qualitative research method is adopted to study the instrumental class name transfer verbs in English and Chinese. The data are derived from a self-built corpus. The corpus mainly comes from Longman Advanced English Dictionary, Modern Chinese Dictionary, Baidu and Google search engine. This study intends to solve the following problems: 1) what are the main cognitive models of IDV? 2) how does the meaning of IDV be constructed? 3) which cognitive models tend to be chosen for IDV construction in English and Chinese? 4) the same cognitive models chosen by IDV in English and Chinese What's the difference? Why? After discussion and analysis, the following conclusions are obtained: 1) the construction of the meaning of metonymy transverbs in English and Chinese involves four cognitive models: image schema model, metonymy model, metaphorical model and metaphorical continuum model; However, the latter three cognitive models are more important in the process of meaning construction. 2) for IDV, metonymy model is more basic than metonymy model, the former provides psychological and logical basis for the latter. Then they form the semantic chain of metaphorical continuum. 3) English IDV tends to use metonymy model and metaphorical continuum model to construct meaning. On the other hand, Chinese IDV tends to use metaphor and the extension of metaphorical meaning to construct meaning. English IDV mainly uses FUNCTION FOR ACTION and PART FOR WHOLE FUNCTION FOR ACTION metonymy models and metonymy models based on the similarity between source domain and scalar domain in shape, result and state. 4) English IDV mainly uses metonymy model and metonymy model. The semantic chain of metaphorical continuum is from simple to complex, and its logic is clear. Chinese IDV mainly chooses FUNCTION FOR ACTION metonymy model and metaphorical model based on the similarity of source domain and scalar domain in shape, result, state and process, and the extension of metaphorical meaning. The semantic chain of metaphorical continuum is also relatively simple. Due to the common cognitive abilities and laws of human beings and many common elements in the external environment, there is no significant difference in the types of cognitive models used in the choice of instrumental nomenclature transverbs in English and Chinese. However, due to different language habits and psychological characteristics, it is inevitable that there are specific differences in cognitive models between the two languages. The results of this study are expected to enhance the explanatory power of ICM, and to provide a new perspective and research method for the research on the conversion of instrumental nouns into parts of speech, as well as for language acquisition, English teaching, and teaching Chinese as a foreign language. Artificial intelligence translation and so on provides the valuable reference.
【学位授予单位】：宁波大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：H314;H146
本文编号：2284943
[Abstract]:Taking ICM (Idealized Cognitive Model), a conceptual cognitive model proposed by Lakoff (1987), as the theoretical point of view, this paper examines the meaning construction process of tool name rotation words (IDV) in both English and Chinese. The purpose of this study is to analyze the three submodels of ICM (image schema model). This paper summarizes the similarities and differences between the cognitive models of instrumental nouns in the process of nomenclature rotation in English and Chinese, and provides an explanatory framework for the process of meaning construction. In this paper, we assume that in the process of meaning construction, we not only adopt image schema model, metaphor model and metonymy model, but also involve a new model-metonymy-metaphorical continuum model. In this paper, the qualitative research method is adopted to study the instrumental class name transfer verbs in English and Chinese. The data are derived from a self-built corpus. The corpus mainly comes from Longman Advanced English Dictionary, Modern Chinese Dictionary, Baidu and Google search engine. This study intends to solve the following problems: 1) what are the main cognitive models of IDV? 2) how does the meaning of IDV be constructed? 3) which cognitive models tend to be chosen for IDV construction in English and Chinese? 4) the same cognitive models chosen by IDV in English and Chinese What's the difference? Why? After discussion and analysis, the following conclusions are obtained: 1) the construction of the meaning of metonymy transverbs in English and Chinese involves four cognitive models: image schema model, metonymy model, metaphorical model and metaphorical continuum model; However, the latter three cognitive models are more important in the process of meaning construction. 2) for IDV, metonymy model is more basic than metonymy model, the former provides psychological and logical basis for the latter. Then they form the semantic chain of metaphorical continuum. 3) English IDV tends to use metonymy model and metaphorical continuum model to construct meaning. On the other hand, Chinese IDV tends to use metaphor and the extension of metaphorical meaning to construct meaning. English IDV mainly uses FUNCTION FOR ACTION and PART FOR WHOLE FUNCTION FOR ACTION metonymy models and metonymy models based on the similarity between source domain and scalar domain in shape, result and state. 4) English IDV mainly uses metonymy model and metonymy model. The semantic chain of metaphorical continuum is from simple to complex, and its logic is clear. Chinese IDV mainly chooses FUNCTION FOR ACTION metonymy model and metaphorical model based on the similarity of source domain and scalar domain in shape, result, state and process, and the extension of metaphorical meaning. The semantic chain of metaphorical continuum is also relatively simple. Due to the common cognitive abilities and laws of human beings and many common elements in the external environment, there is no significant difference in the types of cognitive models used in the choice of instrumental nomenclature transverbs in English and Chinese. However, due to different language habits and psychological characteristics, it is inevitable that there are specific differences in cognitive models between the two languages. The results of this study are expected to enhance the explanatory power of ICM, and to provide a new perspective and research method for the research on the conversion of instrumental nouns into parts of speech, as well as for language acquisition, English teaching, and teaching Chinese as a foreign language. Artificial intelligence translation and so on provides the valuable reference.
【学位授予单位】：宁波大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：H314;H146
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前3条
1 牛保义;名转动结构式中的功能代谢问题研究[J];外语学刊;2002年01期
2 高芳,徐盛桓;名动转用与语用推理[J];外国语(上海外国语大学学报);2000年02期
3 高芳;名动转用与含意[J];外语教学;2002年02期
相关博士学位论文 前1条
1 王文斌;隐喻构建与解读的主体自洽[D];上海外国语大学;2005年
，本文编号：2284943
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/kejilunwen/sousuoyinqinglunwen/2284943.html
