The purpose of this thesis is to evaluate suggested methods of interpretation of metaphorical expressions from semantic and pragmatic points of view. To study on it, semantic transfer of the examples in the pragmatic approach(Chapter 4) and pragmatic transfer of the ones in Levin's approach out of s...
The purpose of this thesis is to evaluate suggested methods of interpretation of metaphorical expressions from semantic and pragmatic points of view. To study on it, semantic transfer of the examples in the pragmatic approach(Chapter 4) and pragmatic transfer of the ones in Levin's approach out of semantics are used here. It is shown through the examples from English that metaphor is not a device of the rhetorical flourish or a deviant expression, but an ordinary expression which is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Thus, a study on metaphor is getting more important nowadays. In particular, quite a few people are attempting various kinds of interpretations on metaphor. The present study attempts to show that a proper treatment of metaphor necessities both semantic and pragmatic consideration. Aristotle was the first to define metaphor in literary terms. He saw literal language as the proper use of words, and metaphor as a replacement of proper terms with other expressions. Since Aristotle's definition, however, many scholars such as Chomsky and Grice have considered metaphor as a linguistic term. In linguistics, metaphor is interpreted in terms of rules of semantic feature--transfer and of rules of pragmatic nature. The semantic approach claims that metaphor is essentially a matter of sentence meaning accounted for by semantic rules. The pragmatic position, on the other hand, claims that metaphor is a matter of utterance meaning, not sentence meaning. Although they are different in approaches. It is true that both of them concentrate on the basic question. "How can we get at a full understanding of metaphor?" This thesis discusses construal rules of semantics and pragmatics. In particular, an attempt is made to find the problems in semantic and pragmatic approaches of metaphor. In addition to finding problems, another aim is to look for the possible solutions on the problems of two approaches. According to the aims, two assumption is tried here. On the assumption that semantic rules can interpret metaphor, Levin's construal rules are applied to the interpretation of metaphorical sentences cited in the first half of this thesis. In reality, however, it is shown that not all the metaphors can be interpreted by his rules. On the other hand, in pragmatics, metaphors ar understood as the various types of violation of Grice's conversational maxims. It will be shown that situation, culture, and context etc. of utterance play important roles in understanding of metaphor. In this thesis, in order to compare pragmatics with semantics, three theories of pragmatic approach are applied to the interpretation of metaphorical sentence cited in Levin's theory, "The stone died." As a result, it is possible to interpret the metaphoric sentences in pragmatic approach. But it is still shown that pragmatics has some problems in it. In conclusion, I hope to have shown that a proper treatment of metaphor may be provided when we consider both semantic and pragmatic aspects of language use. We should not, however, overlook that metaphor is an ordinary expression pervasive in our everyday speech, and that metaphor is basic not only to language but also to human cognition.
The purpose of this thesis is to evaluate suggested methods of interpretation of metaphorical expressions from semantic and pragmatic points of view. To study on it, semantic transfer of the examples in the pragmatic approach(Chapter 4) and pragmatic transfer of the ones in Levin's approach out of semantics are used here. It is shown through the examples from English that metaphor is not a device of the rhetorical flourish or a deviant expression, but an ordinary expression which is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Thus, a study on metaphor is getting more important nowadays. In particular, quite a few people are attempting various kinds of interpretations on metaphor. The present study attempts to show that a proper treatment of metaphor necessities both semantic and pragmatic consideration. Aristotle was the first to define metaphor in literary terms. He saw literal language as the proper use of words, and metaphor as a replacement of proper terms with other expressions. Since Aristotle's definition, however, many scholars such as Chomsky and Grice have considered metaphor as a linguistic term. In linguistics, metaphor is interpreted in terms of rules of semantic feature--transfer and of rules of pragmatic nature. The semantic approach claims that metaphor is essentially a matter of sentence meaning accounted for by semantic rules. The pragmatic position, on the other hand, claims that metaphor is a matter of utterance meaning, not sentence meaning. Although they are different in approaches. It is true that both of them concentrate on the basic question. "How can we get at a full understanding of metaphor?" This thesis discusses construal rules of semantics and pragmatics. In particular, an attempt is made to find the problems in semantic and pragmatic approaches of metaphor. In addition to finding problems, another aim is to look for the possible solutions on the problems of two approaches. According to the aims, two assumption is tried here. On the assumption that semantic rules can interpret metaphor, Levin's construal rules are applied to the interpretation of metaphorical sentences cited in the first half of this thesis. In reality, however, it is shown that not all the metaphors can be interpreted by his rules. On the other hand, in pragmatics, metaphors ar understood as the various types of violation of Grice's conversational maxims. It will be shown that situation, culture, and context etc. of utterance play important roles in understanding of metaphor. In this thesis, in order to compare pragmatics with semantics, three theories of pragmatic approach are applied to the interpretation of metaphorical sentence cited in Levin's theory, "The stone died." As a result, it is possible to interpret the metaphoric sentences in pragmatic approach. But it is still shown that pragmatics has some problems in it. In conclusion, I hope to have shown that a proper treatment of metaphor may be provided when we consider both semantic and pragmatic aspects of language use. We should not, however, overlook that metaphor is an ordinary expression pervasive in our everyday speech, and that metaphor is basic not only to language but also to human cognition.
주제어
#은유 의미론 화용론
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.