当前位置:首页 >> 文学 >> 认知语言学讲稿

认知语言学讲稿


A Brief Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics Self-introduction Fellowships and affiliations Current fields of interests Educational background Major publications 汪少华

语言学博士, 教授, 语言学博士 教授,博士生导师 中国功能语言学研究会理事 中国认知语言学研究会副秘书长, 中国认知语言学研究会副秘书长,常务理事 南京师范大学外国语学院英语系主任 南京师范大学外国语学院英语系主任 主要研究兴趣: 语言学、隐喻学、 主要研究兴趣 语言学、隐喻学、语用学和语言教学研究等 Educational Background 1996-1999, M.A. East China Normal University Socio-linguistics, Language Teaching 1999-2002, Ph.D. Fudan University Functional linguistics, Pragmatics, Cognitive linguistics, Cognitive Poetics, Cognitive Science 2002-2005, Post-doctoral researcher, Department of Chinese Language and Literature, Nanjing Normal University Corpus Linguistics, Contrastive Studies of Chinese and English, Machine Translation Publications Main Contents 1. Introduction 2. Conceptual Metaphor Theory 3. Image Schema Theory 4. Conceptual Blending Theory 5. Cognitive Grammar Some Assumptions 1. Cognitive semantics is no so difficult as it sounds. Metaphors we live by Blending is the way we think. 2. This is a survey of survey—brief introduction to CMT, CBT, CG, IST, PTT 3. Since CS is a new discipline, most of the questions are open. Everyone can contribute a little to it in some way or other. 4. A bird in the hand is worth than two in the bush. 5. Interactive process: we may discuss some problems together via my email (addresss:wshdaniel@sohu.com)

1

Major References Evaluation(Term Paper) Metaphormania Metaphor is the hallmark of genius. Scholars: George Lakoff, Gilles Fauconnier, Mark Turner, Mark Johnson, Ronald W. Langacker , John Taylor, etc. Lectures Conferences

Scope of Cognitive Linguistics 1. What is semantics? Definition: Semantics is the scientific study of meaning in language. 2. Different approaches to semantics 1) Philosophy Austin: Performatives and speech acts Strawson: presupposition Grice: implicature 2) Logic: truth-condition semantics 3) Anthropology Malinowski: theory of context of situation Kinship semantics: componential analysis 4) Psychology: How we process language in its production and reception Behavourism: stimulus-response Mentalism: interpretive semantics; generative semantics Examples: 3. Cognitive science Cognitive science: Cognitive science is the scientific discipline that studies conceptual systems. It is a relatively new discipline, having been founded in the 1970s. 4. The term “Cognitive” Cognitive: In cognitive science, the term cognitive is used for any kind of mental operation or structure that can be studied in precise terms. All aspects of thought and language, conscious or unconscious, are cognitive. 5. First-generation cognitive science First-generation cognitive science evolved in the 1950s and 1960s, centering on ideas about symbolic computation. It accepted without question the prevailing view that reason was disembodied and literal_ _as in formal logic or the manipulation of a system of signs. 6. Second-generation cognitive science It is founded in the 1970s. It focuses on unconscious conceptual systems. 7. Cognitive linguistics Cognitive linguistics Definition: Cognitive linguistics is a linguistic theory that seeks to use the discoveries of second-generation cognitive science to explain as much of language as possible. 8. Assumption of Cognitive Linguistics Concepts are neural structures that allow us to mentally characterize our categories and reason about it. An embodied concept is a neural structure that is actually part of, or makes use

2

of, the sensorimotor system of our brain. Much of conceptual inference is, therefore, sensorimotor inference.

Language is one of our most important windows into the workings of the mind. It is not the only window, but it is the source of a vast majority of the evidence about cognition.

The grammar of a language consists of the highly structured neural connections linking the conceptual and expressive (phonological) aspects of the brain. 9. What is cognitive semantics? Definition: cognitive semantics studies human conceptual systems, meaning, and inference. In short, it studies human reason. 10. The most basic results: Concepts arises from, and are understood through, the body, the brain, and the experience in the world. Concepts crucially make use of imaginative aspects of mind: frames, metaphor, metonymy, prototypes, radial categories, mental spaces, and conceptual blending. Abstract concepts arise via metaphorical projections from more directly embodied concepts (e.g., perceptual and motor concepts). Such embodied mechanisms of conceptualization and thought are hidden from our consciousness, but they structure our experience and are constitutive of what we do consciously experience. 11. Traditional false assumptions All everyday conventional language is literal, and none is metaphorical. All subject matter can be comprehended literally, without metaphor. Only literal language can be contingently true or false. All definitions given in the lexicon of a language are literal, not metaphorical. The concepts used in the grammar of a language are all literal; none are metaphorical. The evidence for the existence of a system of conventional conceptual metaphors is of five types: -Generalizations governing polysemy, that is, the use of words with a number of related meanings. -Generalizations governing inference patterns, that is, cases where a pattern of inferences from one conceptual domain is used in another domain. -Generalizations governing novel metaphorical language (see, Lakoff & Turner, 1989). -Generalizations governing patterns of semantic change (see, Sweetser, 1990). -Psycholinguistic experiments (see, Gibbs, 1990, this volume). Cognitive linguistics (CL): an introduction Prototypes and categories Levels of categorization Frames Figure and ground Conceptual metaphors and metonymies Other issues in CL

3

12. Cognitive Linguistics: an Introduction What is CL and where does it fit in? The term cognitive: ?Cognitive means relating to the mental process involved in knowing, learning, and understanding things.‘ (COBUILD) In that many modern linguists recognize that language knowledge resides in the minds of speakers they might be said to practice ?cognitive‘ linguistics Chomskyan linguistics as ?cognitive linguistics‘ and the ?cognitive turn‘ in linguistics Syntactic Structures (Chomsky 1957), Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (Chomsky 1965): grammar exists in speakers‘ minds; innate UG; language as autonomous component of the mind: knowledge of language forms an autonomous module/faculty independent of other mental processes Cognitive Linguistics: definitions and descriptions ?[A] descriptive label for a rather broad movement within modern linguistics. It includes a variety of approaches, methodologies, and emphases, which are, however, unified by a number of common assumptions. Foremost among these is the belief that language forms an integral part of human cognition, and that any insightful analysis of linguistic phenomena will need to be embedded in what is known about human cognitive abilities.“ (Taylor 2002: 3f.) ?Cognitive linguistics […] is an approach to language that is based on our experience of the world and the way we perceive and conceptualize it.“ (Ungerer & Schmid 1996: x) In CL research is shaped from the outset by what is believed to be cognitively plausible. Language as an integral part of cognition: study of language in light of what is known about the mind (experimentation, introspection, common-sense observation) ?Cognitive Linguists study much the same kind of things as any other linguist – syntax, morphology, phonology, word meaning, discourse structure […]. But the general thrust of the Cognitive Linguistics enterprise is to render these accounts consonant with aspects of cognition which are well documented or self-evident, or at least highly plausible, and which may well be manifested in non-linguistic activities.“ (Taylor 2002: 9) Three main ‘topics’/approaches: experientialism, prominence, attention

1. Experientialism (vs objectivism) Experientialism rejects the basic belief of objectivism that categories exist in objective reality, together with their properties and relations, independently of our consciousness. Symbols of language are meaningful because they are associated with these objective categories. Three doctrines of objectivism that are refuted: ?The doctrine of truth-conditional meaning: Meaning is based on reference + truth ?The ‘correspondence’ theory of truth: Truth consists in the correspondence between symbols and states-of-affairs in the world
?The doctrine of objective reference: there is an ‘objectively correct’ way to associate symbols with things in the world. Instead, experientialism suggests that “our bodily experience and the way we use imaginative mechanisms are central to how we construct categories to make sense of experience.” (Lakoff 1987: xii) 2. Prominence: selection and arrangement of information 3. Attention: which aspect of an event attracts attention Why study CL? 1) one of the most recent approaches within linguistics,

4

2) unified cognitive explanation of language, 3) applicable to TEFL Thirty years of CL three landmarks in the history of CL 1975-1977 the early beginnings: Talmy 1975 on figure/ground Langacker 1976 on Cognitive Grammar Lakoff 1977 on ‘gestalt’ models Thirty years of CL three landmarks in the history of CL 1987-1989 entering the international scene: 1987 Langacker: Foundations of Cognitive Grammar 1987 Lakoff: Women, Fire & Dangerous Things 1988 Rudzka-Ostyn (ed.), Topics in CL 1989 1st Intl Cognitive Linguistics Conference 1989 launching Cognitive Linguistics, the journal Thirty years of CL three landmarks in the history of CL from 1996-1998 on international consolidation: publication of textbooks and reference works foundation of national ICLA affiliates Thirty years of CL three landmarks in the history of CL from 1996-1998 on international consolidation: publication of textbooks and reference works foundation of national ICLA affiliates Thirty years of CL three landmarks in the history of CL from 1996-1998 on international consolidation: publication of textbooks and reference works foundation of national ICLA affiliates Thirty years of CL simplifying in three decades:

5

1977-1987: the pioneering stage 1987-1997: the expansion stage 1997-2007: the consolidation stage

Thirty years of CL simplifying in three decades: 1977-1987: the pioneering stage 1987-1997: the expansion stage 1997-2007: the consolidation stage → what are the theoretical developments accompanying this sociological expansion ?

Step II The Wider Context Overview an overview of the development of linguistic theory in the 20th century: decontextualization initial reactions recontextualization claim: CL epitomizes the recontextualizing tendency Saussurean Grammar langue: a social system a collective set of coded conventions parole: an individual, psychological activity a set of combinations from the code

Saussurean Grammar a missing link: where is the locus of an individual's knowledge of the social system ? what is the bridge between the social code and the individual activity ? graphically: Saussurean Grammar Saussurean Grammar Chomskyan Grammar competence: filling in the gap an individual's knowledge of the language but creating a new hiatus: the social nature of the system remains out of sight again a binary instead of a ternary division Chomskyan Grammar

6

Chomskyan Grammar consequences of the Chomskyan position: where does the individual knowledge of the language come from ? if the source of linguistic knowledge is not social, what is it ? ?innateness, a genetic conception of language hence: a stepping-stone development, leading by an internal logic to an isolation of grammar:

Chomskyan Grammar in other words: a restrictive strategy that separates the autonomous grammatical module from different forms of context: the social context the discursive context of actual language use the cognitive context of meaning and experience ? decontextualisation Initial reactions 1960-1980: the discarded aspects of language are developed separately, as disciplines more or less independent from theoretical grammar Contemporary trends general (or at least growing) tendency dissatisfaction with the modular view of linguistics, in favor of an integrated approach: the peripheral aspects that were being developed largely separately and autonomously, are being linked up more narrowly with the grammar itself (which can then no longer be autonomous)

Contemporary trends ? how does this work in CL ? i.e. how does CL integrate - meaning - the lexicon - the performance level - the social side of language ? Step III Cognitive Linguistics as a Recontextualizing Approach Recovering meaning the basic vocabulary of CL involves a set of semantic concepts: prototype, schematic network, conceptual metaphor, metonymy, conceptual integration, idealized cognitive models, frames and all sorts of construal mechanisms Recovering the lexicon the family of construction grammars constitute a lexicalist approach in various respects constructions may consist of abstract entities togther with lexically specific elements constructions, even if abstract, have to be studied together with their lexical realization

7

semantically, constructions exhibit the same structural features as lexical categories Recovering performance from the beginning of CL, there is an interest in pragmatic meaning (cp. grammaticalization research), but the tendency becomes outspoken with the definition CL as a usage-based theory of grammar the growing interest in applied CL (acquisition, poetics, language learning, critical discourse analysis) Recovering the social context two major tendencies: situated embodiment and the cultural background of meaning: cultural models variationist CL: cognitive sociolinguistics CL from the point of view of lectal variation (dialectal, regiolectal, sociolectal, stylistic variation) Kristiansen & Dirven (eds.) 2007 Summary Conceptual Metaphor Wang Shao-hua Landmark books G. Lakoff & M. Johnson, Metaphors We Live By (1980) G. Lakoff & M. Johnson, Philosophy in the Flesh (1999) Classical view of metaphor: metaphor was seen as a matter of language not thought. Metaphorical expressions were assumed to be mutually exclusive with the realm of ordinary everyday language: everyday language had no metaphor, and metaphor used mechanisms outside the realm of everyday conventional language. The contemporary view of metaphor Metaphorical expressions are not in language, but in thought: They are general mappings across conceptual domains. The word metaphor has come to mean a cross-domain mapping in the conceptual system. The term metaphorical expression refers to a linguistic expression (a word, phrase, or sentence) that is the surface realization of such a cross-domain mapping (this is what the word metaphor referred to in the old theory). The term conceptual metaphor In using the term conceptual metaphor, Lakoff and Johnson sought to emphasize the distinction between metaphor as a kind of utterance and metaphor in the realm of thought. On their account, it is not the use of a linguistic metaphor such as "time is money" that is ultimately responsible for structuring one's understanding of time in terms of currency, but rather it is the metaphorical way of thinking about time that leads to the use of the verbal metaphor. Metaphor, on this account, is primarily a matter of thought. Both the verbal instantiations of the metaphor and the partial restructuring of the way the metaphor's topic domain is understood are products of the underlying conceptual metaphor.

Discussion Questions (Reddy) Reddy “The Conduit Metaphor” (Brooke Maury) In Reddy’s ‘conduit metaphor,’ words are envisioned as packages of information transmitted from one person to another. The role of the sender and receiver is mainly to package and unpackage the ‘content’ of the words they are sending and receiving. Is this really a useful metaphor for human communication?

8

The conduit metaphor Ideas and thoughts are objects Words and sentences are containers Communication consists of sending the (filled) containers to a hearer Understanding is taking the contents out of the containers Metaphor of/in Communication It's hard to get that idea across to him. I gave you that idea. It's difficult to put my ideas into words. The meaning is right there in the words. His words carry little meaning. That's not what I got out of what he said. The Conduit Metaphor Language functions like a conduit, transferring thoughts bodily from one person to another In writing and speaking, people insert their thoughts or feelings in the words Words accomplish the transfer by containing the thoughts or feelings and conveying them to others In listening or reading, people extract the thoughts and feelings once again from the words It’s hard to get that idea across to him. I gave you that idea. Your reasons came through to us. It’s difficult to put my ideas into words. When you have a good idea, try to capture it immediately in words. Try to pack more thought into fewer words. You can’t simply stuff ideas into a sentence. Example(1) dead-end street, crossroads, stuck, spinning one's wheels, not going anywhere Cross-domain mapping THE LOVE-AS-JOURNEY MAPPING 如下 如下: The lovers correspond to travelers.情侣与旅人相对 情侣与旅人相对 The love relationship corresponds to the vehicle.情侣关系与交通工具相对 情侣关系与交通工具相对 The lovers' common goals correspond to their common destinations on the journey. 情侣的共 同目标与旅人的共同目的地相对 Difficulties in the relationship correspond to impediments to travel. 情侣关系中的波折与旅行中的障碍相对 Conceptual Metaphor Theory Example (2) :Time is money You’re wasting my time. This gadget will save you hours. I don’t have the time to give you. How do you spend your time these day? That flat tire cost me an hour. I’ve invested a lot of time in her. I don’t have enough time to spare for that.

9

You’re running out of time.

You need to budget your time. Put aside some time for ping pong. Is that worth your while? Do you have much time left? He’s living on borrowed time. You don’t use your time profitably. I lost a lot of time when I got sick. Thank you for your time.

In modern Western culture, time is money, time is a limited resource, and time is a valuable commodity. This isn’t a necessary way for human beings to conceptualize time; it is tied to western culture. There are cultures where time is none of these things. An entailment relationship There is subcategorization within this single system. These subcategorization relationships characterize entailment relationships between the metaphors . TIME IS MONEY VALUABLE COMMODITY. TIME IS A LIMITED RESOURCE TIME IS A

Metaphorical entailments can characterize a coherent system of metaphorical concepts and a corresponding coherent system of metaphorical expressions for those concepts. e.g. TIME IS Money -> spend, invest, budget, profitably, cost Resources -> use, use up, have enough of, run out of Commodities -> have, give, lose, thank you for Example We started out from these premises … and arrived at these conclusions We have arrived at a crucial point in the argument Where are you going with this? I see where you are coming from You’ re wandering off the topic Let’s move on to the next point Can you go over that again for me? Cross-domain Mapping Source domain Travelling

Target Domain

Reasoning

10

traveller thinker departure point premises arrival point conclusion motion reasoning process path argument places on a path points in an argument straying from the path straying from the argument following the traveller understanding a person’s argument going over (part of) the path again repeating (part of) the argument Conceptual metaphors A LINE OF THOUGHT IS A PATH A PREMISE IS A STARTING POINT A CONCLUSION IS A DESTINATION UNDERSTANDNING IS FOLLOWING etc. Lakoff Metaphor Theory Metaphor is conceptual space map - map is asymmetric: concrete source to abstract target - map is partial: not all sources used - understand target via source - both entities & inferences mapped

An Extended Example “Theories are constructed objects” - Major premises are foundations - Major claims & arguments are structure - Facts are material constituents - Arguments are mortar of facts & claims - Logical strength is design or architecture - Theorist is architect - Believability is strength - Persistence is successful standing - Failure is collapse TIME is SPACE Winter is approaching We are getting close to winter Look forward to the future Look back on the past What lies ahead of us? Lets put this behind us Coming events / past (= passed!) events Move the meeting forward two days Examples I find it difficult to put my ideas into words These are empty words

11

I didn’t get much out of that lecture I can’t get my ideas across to them Your ideas came across very clearly This essay has no content

Cross-domain Analysis Source domains: motion, location, containment, distance, up/down, weight, temperature, etc. Target domains: time, life, emotions, reasoning, value judgments, communication, etc. Metaphors often based on association between domains Up = more, life, happiness, status, power

Hot/cold: enthusiasm, excitement Motion: change of state

Some conventionalized metaphors have limited productivity I’m looking forward to seeing you again *looking towards / in the direction of … *looking directly forward … *looking ahead to … *Where are you looking forward (to)? 5. Two Types of metaphor Novel metaphor Juliet is the sun. The surgeon is a butcher. –X and Y are both nominal expressions, but they are not symmetrical. We are talking about “Juliet” or “the surgeon” rather than “the sun” or “a butcher. ” –Quite uncommon in ordinary speech. They have not been conventionalized. –They are not the type of metaphors that Lakoff intends to study. Conventionalized metaphors I’ll see you at 2 o’clock. (the literal meaning of at is locative in nature, but it has been metaphorical extended to apply also to time. TIME IS SPACE) We have entered the 21st century. I finished this in two hours. They worked through the night. He is in danger. (a state “danger” has been conceived as a container. STATES ARE CONTAINERS) They’re in love. How do we get out of this mess? He fell into a deep depression. A (conventional) metaphor is therefore a conceptual mapping between to domains: TARGET DOMAIN IS SOURCE DOMAIN. The target domain is rather abstract (like TIME and STATES), whereas the source domain (like SPACE and CONTAINERS) is more concrete. The mapping between source and target domains involves two sorts of correspondences. Her anger broiled over. (ANGER IS HEAT OF A FLUID).

12

Ontological correspondence Source: HEAT OF FLUID Target: ANGER Container body Heat of fluid anger Heat scale anger scale Pressure in container experienced pressure Limit of container’s limit of person’s ability resistance to suppress anger Explosion loss of control

Metonymy Using one entity to refer to another that is related to it. Functions of Metaphor and Metonymy The primary function of Metaphor is understanding According to Bernhard Debatin (1995: 381) the fundamental function of metaphor is that of rational anticipation that comes from three basic functions the creative-cognitive the normative and world-disclosing the communicative-evocative functions Metonymy has primarily a referential function It allows one to use one entity to stand for another It serves the function of providing understanding. Metonymy -> THE PART FOR THE WHOLE There are many parts that can stand for the whole Which part we pick out determines which aspect of the whole we are focusing on e.g. We need some good heads on the projects (good heads = intelligent people) head ->intelligent part of the body The Times hasn’t arrived at the press conference yet. (The Times = the reporter from the Times) The Times -> the importance of the institution the reporter represents Metonymy -> THE PART FOR THE WHOLE -> THE FACE FOR THE PERSON She’s just a pretty face. There are an awful lot of faces out there in the audience. We need some new faces around here.

Metonymies are not random or arbitrary occurrences

13

Metonymic concepts are also systematic They are instances of certain general metonymic concepts in terms of which we organize our thoughts and actions. Metonymic concepts allow us to conceptualize one thing by means of its relation to something else e.g. THE PART FOR THE WHOLE We don’ hire longhairs. PRODUCER FOR PRODUCT He bought a Ford. OBJECT USED FOR USER The buses are on strike CONTROLLER FOR CONTROLLED Nixon bombed Hanoi INSTITUTION FOR PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE You will never get the university to agree to that.

Thus, like metaphors, metonymic concepts structure not just our language but our thoughts, attitudes, and actions Like metaphoric concepts, metonymic concepts are grounded in our experience. The grounding of metonymic concepts is in general more obvious than is the case with metaphorical concepts. It usually involves direct physical or causal association. How Is Our Conceptual System Grounded? e.g. Concepts that are understood directly

Spatial concepts The structure of our spatial concepts emerges from our constant spatial experience – our interaction with the physical environment Concepts that emerge in this way are concepts that we live by in the most fundamental way

Every experience takes place within a vast background of cultural presuppositions. We experience our “world” in such a way that our culture is already present in the very experience itself. Concepts in terms of our body functions

14

UP-DOWN, IN-OUT, FRONT-BACK, LIGHT-DARK, WARM-COLD, MALE-FEMALE, etc. Such a sharply delineated conceptual structure for space emerges from our perceptual-motor functioning Grounding for our conceptual system We typically conceptualize the nonphysical in terms of the physical – that is, we conceptualize the less clearly delineated in terms of the more clearly delineated. The mechanism of metaphor From human to non-human From inside out: heart From body organs to outer phenomena: foot, mouth From near to far: From familiar to unfamiliar Philosophical implication: humanistic: man-centred, materialism-based Chinese Metaphors of Thinking Yu, N. (2003: 141-165) Thinking is Object Manipulation 思想交流 思想火花 抛在脑后 挖空心思 思想包袱 思想疙瘩 旧思想的束缚 Acquiring Ideas is Eating 精神食粮 陈腐观念 陈糠烂谷子 馊主意 如饥似渴 囫囵吐枣 搜肠刮肚 Thinking is Moving 思路 想到 想通 想出 想开 Examples 门外一阵喧哗打断了她的思路。 门外一阵喧哗打断了她的思路。 她忽然 想到一件重要的事情。 想到一件重要的事情。 只要想通了, 只要想通了, 他就会积极地 去干 。 她想出一条妙计。 她想出一条妙计。 想开点,别生气了。 想开点,别生气了。 她遭人遗弃,一时想不开就自杀了。 她遭人遗弃,一时想不开就自杀了。

Successful thinking takes a correct direction 晕头转向

15

这道算题真难,把我搞得晕头转向。 这道算题真难,把我搞得晕头转向。 拐弯 他思想一时还拐不过弯来。 他思想一时还拐不过弯来。

The Integrated Theory of Primary Metaphor The integrated theory of primary metaphor has 4 parts: ?Johnson’s theory of conflation in the course of learning. For you children, subjective (nonsensorimotor) experience and judgments, on the one hand, and sensorimotor experiences, on the other, are so regularly conflated that for a time, children do not distinguish between the other when they occurred together. ?Grady’s theory of primary metaphor. Each primary metaphor has a minimal structure and arise naturally, automatically, and unconsciously through everyday experience by means of conflation, during which cross-associations are form. Complex metaphors are formed by conceptual blending.
?Fauconnier and Turner’s theory of conceptual blending. Distinct conceptual domains can be coactivated, and under certain conditions connections across the domains can be formed, leading to new inferences. Such conceptual blending can be either conventional or whole original. ?Narayanan’s neural theory metaphor. The “associations” made during the period of conflation are realized neurally in simultaneous activations that result in permanent neural connections being made across the neural networks that define conceptual domains.

Complex metaphors Complex metaphors are “molecular” constructions of “atomic” parts, the Primary Metaphors. The construction process is called conceptual blending. Metaphors. Most of these “molecular” structures are stable and therefore determine an important part of our conceptual system. Thus, whatever we think, say, or do, is influenced by complex metaphors – they even structure our dreams. As an example, let us have a closer look at the Complex Metaphor A Purposeful Life is a Journey

Primary Metaphors: Purposes Are Destinations Actions Are Motions Cultural Belief: People are supposed to have purposes in life, and they should act so as to achieve those purposes. The metaphorical version of the Cultural Belief is People are supposed to have destinations in life, and they should move in such a way as to reach these destinations. Combined with the fact that A trip to a series of destinations is a journey, These two Primary Metaphors and the Cultural Belief result in a Complex Metaphor (consisting of four sub-metaphors): A Purposeful Life Is A Journey A Person Living A Life Is A Traveler Life Goals Are Destinations

16

A Life Plan Is An Itinerary

The Invariance Principle The Invariance Principle states: metaphorical mappings preserve the cognitive topology (that is, the image-schema structure ) of the source domain, in a way consistent with the inherent structure of the target domain(1993: 215). George Lakoff’s other research areas Lakoff’s research covers many areas of Conceptual Analysis within Cognitive Linguistics The nature of human conceptual systems, especially metaphor systems for concepts such as time, events, causation, emotions, morality, the self, politics, etc. The development of Cognitive Social Science, which applies ideas of Cognitive Semantics to the Social Sciences The implications of Cognitive Science for Philosophy, in collaboration with Mark Johnson, Chair of Philosophy at the University of Oregon Neural foundations of conceptual systems and language, in collaboration with Jerome Feldman, of the International Computer Science Institute, seeking to develop biologically-motivated structured connectionist systems to model both the learning of conceptual systems and their neural representations The cognitive structure, especially the metaphorical structure, of mathematics, in collaboration with Rafael Nú?ez Questions It is often stated, that conceptual we use conceptual metaphors in order to gain understanding of abstract, intangible concepts in terms of the concrete and the familiar. Metaphor therefore enriches (and enables) abstract thought. But: Can we really claim that our feelings, emotions, thoughts, intentions etc. (there are typical target domains of conceptual metaphors) are inaccessible to us without metaphor? Surely not!

Another possibility, is that we use metaphor in order to talk and communicate about our feelings etc. Concrete (e.g. spatial) language is able to be validated by different speakers, and is likely to be consistent between speakers. Are metaphors (re-)categorizations? (Glucksberg & Keyser) Sam is a pig. Is this a metaphor, or is it to be interpreted ‘literally’? If pig = farm animal (and Sam is a man), the sentence cannot be literally true. But if pig = a dirty, greedy creature (whether animal or man), then it can be literally true. Pig = farm animal is a prototypical instance of this new, schematic category.

Image schema theory

Do you know how hard it would be to talk without metaphors?

17

New York Times: “a sale of the personal computer business would be a step away from IBM’s traditional emphasis…” Profits in hardware business were slender and growth prospects were limited. Personal computer making has followed the same path to Asia… …attack on the web site. We have reached our goal… Conceptual metaphors: Metaphors people unconsciously use in everyday life. i.e.) “follow the same path” “reached the goal” Creative metaphors: i.e.) How do people make metaphorical sentences unconsciously?

Contemporary theory of metaphor According to this theory, we unconsciously process an image schema projection, that is, a projection of concrete experiences onto abstract concept. In other words, we use concepts we know well based on our experiences to understand more abstract concept such as emotions. Background information Contemporary theory of metaphor (CTM) by Lakoff and Johnson(1980) There are 5 primary claims they proposed: (1) Conceptual metaphors (2) Cognitive domains existence (3) Mental images grounded in perceptual experience (4) Its operation: Image schema projection (5) Evidence: Linguistic expressions (1) What are conceptual metaphors? They focus on only conceptual metaphors. Conventionalized metaphor expressions (NOT poetic or creative metaphor expressions) Metaphors people use unconsciously and automatically. i.e.) I got an idea. She stole my idea. We exchange our ideas.

(2) Cognitive domains existence The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing (abstract domain) in terms of another (concrete domain). i.e.) ANGER IS HOT LIQUID IN A CONTAINER metaphor

18

A concept of ANGER is understood in terms of HOT LIQUID IN A CONTAINER concept. “She was brimming with rage” anger is heat of a liquid in a container “He got steamed up about what she said” intensity of anger is degree of temperature (producing steam) “He managed to keep his anger bottled up inside him” Suppressing anger is closing a container (3) Mental images grounded in perceptual experience Concrete domains contain image components called Mental Images. They come from perceptual experience or bodily based experience.

(4) Image schema projection It is an operation for metaphor production. It projects part of a general structure of a recurrent pattern of bodily experience onto another. It's dynamic, rather than static (item-to-item projection). Unconscious and automatic. In order to talk and think about abstract domain we use the structure of other concrete domains. i.e.) “ANGER IS HOT LIQUID IN A CONTAINER” We project internal structure from our everyday conception of HOT LIQUID IN A CONTAINER to organize our everyday conception of ANGER. Since projection is not simple image-to-image mappings, instead, it is a dynamic structure projection, we can also project inferences from a concrete domain to an abstract domain.

(5) Linguistic evidence for Conceptual metaphors The evidence for conceptual metaphors is inferred from linguistic expressions that occur systematically and consistently in the everyday speech. Anger is hot liquid in a container: “She was brimming with rage” “He got steamed up about what she said” “He managed to keep his anger bottled up inside him” “Let him stew”

Examples for Containment metaphors The results show the whole domain of Containment Words ((Static & Dynamic words)): i.e.) ‘Sally + trouble’ Sally is in trouble. Sally got out of the trouble. Sally’s life is full of trouble. i.e.) ‘Tom + situation’ Tom is in difficult situation.

19

Tom put us in a strange situation. Examples for Containment metaphors The results show the whole domain of possession words ((Static & Dynamic words)): i.e.) ‘Sally + trouble’ Sally is having trouble with her family. Sally gave me too much trouble. i.e.) ‘Tom + pain’ Tom has a pain in the back. That gave Tom a lot of pain. Tom did not take great pain.

container (in/out) momentum enablement source-path-goal (SPG) cycle part/whole full-empty merging matching contact compulsion restraint removal iteration surface balance attraction transfer link

near/far object mass/count center/periphery scale splitting superposition process collection figure/ground verticality (up/down) Here are some kinds of force schemata: What is an attraction schema? What is a balance schema? What is a blockage schema? What is a compulsion schema?

20

What is a counterforce schema? What is a diversion schema? What is an enablement schema? (Central) IMAGE-schema OVER Instances of OVER-schema

The balloon is flying over the house The bird is flying over the tree The figure follows a PATH The figure is called a TRAJECTOR (the path of a bullet is its trajectory - German ‘Flugbahn’) The ground functions as and is called LANDMARK Trajector = most prominent element (figure) in a relational structure; landmark = ground trajector/landmark as basis for analysis of various prepositional meanings, e.g. out, up

(Central) IMAGE-schemas OUT/UP Handout Locative relations (prepositions) can be analysed in terms of image schemas which consist of a trajector, a landmark and a PATH. Elaborations Variations of central schema Account for specific meanings (polysemy), linked by similarity to central schema handout Metaphorical extensions (She has a strange power over me) Activity The table is under the pen The pen is on the table The woman is in front of the house The house is behind the woman Explain why some of these examples are unusual (although ‘grammatically correct’!) But special context? - Which house is his? - Oh, the one just behind this woman over there Woman as landmark (cognitive reference point) Other schemas Remember: image schemas are grounded in physical experience (perceiving, moving, exerting, experiencing force …); used to organize more abstract domains CONTAINMENT schema Experience: body as container, being in rooms, putting thins into containers E.g. She‘s deep in thought (activity as container) Polysemy of IN as expressing different relationships between entity + container; meanings again as extensions from a central containment schema

The water in the vase The crack in the vase

21

The crack in the surface The bird in the tree The chair in the corner PATH schema She‘s writing a PhD thesis and she‘s nearly there (activity as moving along a PATH) FORCE schema Force F acts on Entity E F Blockage: F

Removal of Restraint F

applied to modal verb analysis

Other schemas: links, balance, up-down, front-back, part-whole, centre-periphery Summary: ?image schemas are … experientially-based conceptual constructs by which we characterize, for example, spatial relations, and which can be metaphorically extended across a range of domains, typically shifting from the external and concrete to the internal and abstract“ (Saeed: p. 318)

Conclusion image schema projection occurs during metaphor production. Conceptual Blending Theory

Mental Spaces

?Used to describe how language users assign and manipulate reference ?In conversation we construe so-called mental spaces, e.g. when we talk about Shakespeare‘s
play Julius Caesar: world of play (mental space no 1) Julius Caesar real world / history (mental space no 2)

22

?When we use the name Julius Caesar to refer to someone we can refer to ?The character in the play ?The historical figure ?The actor
There are links between all of them: the actor plays the character who is based on a historical figure; usage explicable by the so-called Identification Principle.

?This

is best explained by reference to a different example: Graham is very young (picture-person)

?If two objects, a + b, are linked by a pragmatic function F (b=F(a)), a description of a (da) may
be used to identify its counterpart b. Picture of Graham (b) Graham (a) image (F) Description of (a), da, (his name, Graham = TRIGGER) can be used to identify his image (b = TARGET) ?Some additional examples:

In Len‘s painting, the girl with blue eyes has green eyes MS 1 = real world of S MS 2 = painting girl + blue eyes (a) girl + green eyes (b) a b CONNECTOR The image relationship is made explict by PP (in Len‘s painting); person-image connector ?World-mind connector = mental parallel to image connectors: Len believes that the girl with blue eyes has green eyes girl with blue eyes (a) girl with green eyes (b) a b CONNECTOR S ?real‘ world Len‘s beliefs (reported)

?Triggers for setting up mental spaces = ?spacebuilders“ ?Adverbials: in Joan‘s novel ?Adverbs: really, possibly ?Hypothetical space: If … then (If I were rich, I‘d move from Germany to a Caribbean Island) ?Mental verbs: believe, hope, imagine ?[Referential Opacity; Presupposition] ?Summary: space formation is triggered by language and allows for flexibility in reference
manipulation

23

DOUBLE SCOPE NETWORKS

What? The operations, mechanisms, principles, constraints. Why? The evolutionary and coevolutionary aspect. How? The neurobiological substrate. VITAL RELATIONS: INNER-SPACE AND OUTER-SPACE Constitutive Principles Language as a result of integrations and as a system of prompts for integrations Polysemy ("Father") Debate With Kant COMPRESSION IN A TWO-WORD NUTSHELL

Governing Principles for Compression GOVERNING PRINCIPLES FOR COMPRESSION, 1 GOVERNING PRINCIPLES FOR COMPRESSION, 2 GOVERNING PRINCIPLES FOR COMPRESSION, 3 GOVERNING PRINCIPLES FOR COMPRESSION, 4 GOVERNING PRINCIPLES FOR COMPRESSION, 5 GOVERNING PRINCIPLES FOR COMPRESSION, 6 GOVERNING PRINCIPLES FOR COMPRESSION, 7 Compressing outer-space vital relations into inner-space structure in the blend

Other Governing Principles OTHER GOVERNING PRINCIPLES OTHER GOVERNING PRINCIPLES OTHER GOVERNING PRINCIPLES OTHER GOVERNING PRINCIPLES OTHER GOVERNING PRINCIPLES OTHER GOVERNING PRINCIPLES OTHER GOVERNING PRINCIPLES OTHER GOVERNING PRINCIPLES

24

Types of Networks Blending and Language Blending Networks Blending Networks Borrowing a Compression

25


赞助商链接
更多相关文档:

认知语言学讲稿

认知语言学讲稿 隐藏>> A Brief Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics Self-introduction Fellowships and affiliations Current fields of interests Educational backgro...

认知语言学的基本理论及应用

认知语言学的基本理论及应用_教育学/心理学_人文社科_专业资料。——认知语言学的基本理论及应用 一,认知语言学的基本理论 1 原型范畴理论(The Theory of Prototyp...

认知语言学

陈忠著 , 《认知语言学研究》 , 2005 年 , 第 1 页 第一章 认知语言学概说第一节 认知语言学的理论主张及其背景 20 世纪 80 年代兴起于欧美,并以 1989 ...

认知语言学

认知语言学_文学_高等教育_教育专区。硕士学位研究生课程论文 论文题目: 《认知语言学概论》读书报告 论文成绩: 《认知语言学概论》读书报告在读赵艳芳老师的这本《...

认知语言学

认知语言学 Cognitive Linguistics 课程代码 李勇忠 汉语中“NP1+Vi+NP2”构式的认知语义分析 0122033 2013 级 外国语言学及应用语 言学 认知语言学 提交日期 ...

认知语言学论文

认知语言学论文_文学_高等教育_教育专区 暂无评价|0人阅读|0次下载|举报文档 认知语言学论文_文学_高等教育_教育专区。Essay Questions on Cognitive Linguistics ...

认知语言学赵艳芳

认知语言学赵艳芳 - 本书一共十二章,第一章是导论,首先介绍了什么是认知。关于认知的定义,有广义和 狭义之分, 但不论是广义还是狭义的认知定义都认为思维是认知...

认知功能语言学

认知功能语言学_教育学/心理学_人文社科_专业资料。认知功能语言学 ——Defining cognitive linguistics 认知功能语言学 ? 认知语言学简介 ? 认知语言学的语言观及...

认知语言学

既然当代认知语言学理论研究已经表明,隐喻是人 类的基本认知方式,而认知方式决定语言表达方式,那么,在外语教学中培养语言学习者的目 标语的隐喻能力,不仅可以让他们...

认知语言学的基础知识

四、关于认知 认知语言学不是语言学的分支学科,而是当代语言学的一个学派 它是功能主义语言学这 当代语言学的一个学派。它是功能主义语言学这 当代语言学的一个...

更多相关标签:
网站地图

文档资料共享网 nexoncn.com copyright ©right 2010-2020。
文档资料共享网内容来自网络,如有侵犯请联系客服。email:zhit325@126.com