隐喻认知机制下的英语象名词抽可数性研究

论文摘要

英语名词有可数与不可数之分,这是英语中存在的普遍现象。语言学家对此有广泛深入的研究。对英语名词可数性的界定也有很多种说法。本文认为,英语名词的可数与否其实是一种认知过程的静态表现形式。可令人遗憾的是,目前只有很少的人进行英语抽象名词可数性的研究。故而本文提出:隐喻是研究英语抽象名词可数性的有效方法。首先,本文对历史上有影响的三种理论(Quirk等人的理论、Bloomfield的界限理论和Langacker的界限理论)进行了简单的回顾。由于Quirk等人和Bloomfield把英语名词可数性的研究独立于人们的体验之外,因此这两种理论均未对英语名词的可数性给出令人信服的解释。Langacker发展了Bloomfield的界限理论,指出界限(bounding)是该理论的核心因素。他主张在认知语言学的框架里讨论名词的可数性问题并取得了很大的突破。唯一不足的是,Langacker并未就抽象名词的界限问题给出令人满意的解释。本文旨在采用隐喻的研究方法来阐释英语中抽象名词可数性,以此来完善Langacker的理论。与传统隐喻观不同,本文是在认知语言学的框架内讨论隐喻的。认知语言学认为:隐喻无处不在,我们的思维也具有隐喻性;隐喻是一种跨域映射,是一种基本的、有效的认识抽象事物的认知工具。通过隐喻的映射机制,它能把源域的一些基本特征映射到目标域,进而使人们能够认识目标域。在讨论抽象名词可数性的问题时,人们很难确定和解释抽象名词的界限。针对这一难题,本文认为可以运用隐喻的隐射机制来构建和解释抽象名词的边界问题。并且,本文提出隐喻在英语抽象名词界限的设置中起到了关键的作用。具体来说,隐喻通过实体隐喻、结构隐喻和空间隐喻可以构筑英语抽象名词的界限,进而完善了Langacker的界限理论,为研究英语抽象名词铺平了道路。为了检测隐喻在教学中是否能帮助学生界定英语抽象名词的可数性,作者在西南大学高职院的工商管理专业作了两次实验,其目的有二:一是证明该方法的有效性;二是证明该方法的有效性不是短暂的而是持久性的。经过对两次试验结果的统计和分析,最后得出了结论:该方法有助于学生更好地、更牢固地、更快地界定英语抽象名词的可数性。实验结果还证明,这种方法对长时间记忆也很有效果。这样一来,就可以减轻学生的学习负担。在本文的最后,作者分别从英语教师、英语学习者和教材设计者的角度,提出了几点建议:作为英语教师,应该如何借助隐喻的手段教授英语单词;作为英语学习者,应该怎样培养自己运用隐喻的手段来学习英语;作为教材的编纂者,应该如何把隐喻知识与英语学习巧妙地连接起来。总之,本文从理论和实践的角度证明了隐喻是研究英语抽象名词可数性的最基本和最主要的方式。本文同时证明:用认知语言学的理论来研究英语抽象名词会更加丰富教学方法而且有助于英语词汇教学的改革。

论文目录

• Abstract
• 中文摘要
• Chapter One Introduction
• 1.1 The Definition of Abstract Nouns
• 1.2 The Significance of the Thesis
• 1.3 The Aim of the Thesis
• 1.4 The Organization of the Thesis
• Chapter Two Previous Studies of the Countability of Abstract Nouns
• 2.1 Introduction
• 2.2 Quirk et al.’s Grammatical Approach to the Countability of Nouns
• 2.3 Bloomfield’s Semantic Approach to the Countability of Nouns
• 2.4 Langacker’s Cognitve Approach to the Countability of Nouns
• 2.5 Summary
• Chapter Three Theoretical Basis: A Metaphorical Approach
• 3.1 A Brief Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics
• 3.1.1 A Historical Review of Cognitive Linguistics
• 3.1.2 The Philosophical Basis of Cognitive Linguistics
• 3.1.3 Three Approaches in Cognitive Linguistics
• 3.2 Categorization and Metaphor
• 3.2.1 Categorization in the View of Cognitive Linguistics
• 3.2.2 Metaphor in the View of Cognitive Linguistics
• 3.2.3 The Relationship between Categorization and Metaphor
• 3.3 Building a Theoretical Basis for the Study of the Countability of Abstract Nouns from a Metaphorical Perspective
• 3.3.1 Conceptual Metaphor
• 3.3.2 The Principle of Mapping
• 3.3.3 The Categories of Metaphor
• 3.3.3.1 Orientational Metaphor
• 3.3.3.2 Ontological Metaphor
• 3.3.3.3 Structural Metaphor
• 3.3.3.4 The Relationship among These Three Categories of Metaphor
• 3.3.4 The Systematicity of Metaphor
• 3.4 Summary
• Chapter Four The Countability of Abstract Nouns: A Metaphorical Approach
• 4.1 Langacker’s Bounding Criterion of the Countability of Nouns
• 4.2 Metaphors as Cognitive Instruments in Understanding Abstract Nouns
• 4.3 Bounding in Terms of Metaphor
• 4.3.1 The Physical Basis of the Bounding Metaphor in Terms of Metaphor
• 4.3.2 Three Approaches to Bounding in Terms of Metaphor
• 4.3.2.1 Bounding by Ontological Metaphor
• 4.3.2.2 Bounding by Structural Metaphor
• 4.3.2.3 Bounding by Orientational Metaphor
• 4.3.3 The Systematicity of Bounding in Terms of Metaphor
• 4.4 Summary
• Chapter Five An Experiment Study of the Metaphorical Approach to the Countability of Abstract Nouns
• 5.1 The Purpose of the Experiment
• 5.2 Subjects of the Experiment
• 5.3 The Metaphorical Theory Basis
• 5.4 The Research Method and Procedure
• 5.4.1 The Research Method
• 5.4.2 The Research Procedure
• 5.4.2.1 Stage One: To prove the Effectiveness of the Metaphorical Approach to the Countability of Abstract Nouns
• 5.4.2.2 Stage Two: To prove the Valid Period of the Metaphorical Approach to the Countability of Abstract Nouns
• 5.5 Summary
• Chapter Six Conclusion
• 6.1 Major Findings
• 6.2 Implications for Vocabulary Teaching
• 6.2.1 Implications for English Teachers
• 6.2.2 Implications for English Learners
• 6.2.3 Implications for Textbook Designers
• 6.3 Limitations
• Bibliography
• Appendix 1
• Appendix 2
• Appendix 3
• Appendix 4
• Acknowledgements