一词多义：文化调节的认知现象

论文摘要

一词多义是一种最常见也是最重要的语言现象,长期以来一直受到不同流派语言学家的关注。以往人们大多从传统语言学的角度研究一词多义现象,他们更多地关注多义性产生的外部原因,而并不考虑其认知基础。因此,他们并没有把握住一词多义现象的本质。随着认知科学的发展,认知语言学为一词多义现象的研究提供了较为有力和系统的工具。本文以经验现实主义为哲学基础,以原型范畴学说等为理论依据,从认知语言学的角度对一词多义现象进行了的探索,试图对这一语言现象做出一个令人满意的解释。本文研究了多义词的内部结构及其语义范畴的拓展机制,并进行了跨文化对比研究,得到了以下结论。首先,一词多义现象也是一种认知现象,它是人类认知范畴化和概念化的结果。多义词的各项词义围绕一项典型词义构成了一个原型范畴,各项词义之间遵循家族相似性原则。其次,多义词的形成过程就是词义范畴的扩展过程,非典型成员的衍生和类典型的分裂是其扩展的两种主要方式,概念隐喻和转喻则是其扩展的两种主要机制。第三,基于不同文化中存在认知共性和个性的观点,本文认为同一多义词的词义在不同的语言中也存在相似性和差异性。通过对英汉语中同一多义词“心”的分析,本文总结了多义词概念化过程中的两个特征:一方面,多义范畴中意义的扩展都遵循两条普遍的认知机制,即隐喻和转喻,因此同一多义词在不同的语言中会发现相似的意义,多义范畴具有认知共性;另一方面,多义词的词义扩展也会受到文化的调节,因为文化差异会导致人们在隐喻和转喻上的差异,从而导致多义词词义的差异。总之,一词多义现象体现了不同文化中人们的认知共性和个性。本文的新颖之处体现在两个方面。首先,它肯定了词类转化是转喻的结果这一观点。多数学者赞同该观点,但进行详细论述的人却不多。本文用“基体”和“侧面”的理论对这一观点进行了详细阐述。另一个新颖之处在于本文还从跨文化的角度对一词多义现象进行了认知研究。过去的多数认知语言学家只专注于人类认知共性的研究,忽略了文化差异造成的认知个性。本文以“心”为例,对不同语言尤其是英语和汉语中同一多义词进行了对比研究,证明文化差异导致了认知个性,进而造成了同一多义词词义在不同语言中的差异性。总之,本文从认知语言学的角度对一词多义现象进行了较为全面的阐释,它对词汇学习与教学,以及词典编纂都具有一定的指导意义。

论文目录

• Abstract
• 摘要
• List of Figures and Tables
• Introduction
• Chapter One Literature Review
• 1.1 The semantic phenomenon:polysemy
• 1.2 Polysemy and homonymy
• 1.3 Traditional studies on polysemy
• 1.3.1 Philological period
• 1.3.2 Traditional semantics period
• 1.3.3 Structuralism period
• 1.3.3.1 The semantic triangle
• 1.3.3.2 The theory of semantic field
• 1.3.3.3 The theory of componential analysis
• 1.3.3.4 The behaviorism
• 1.4 The philosophical foundation
• 1.4.1 Objectivism
• 1.4.1.1 The objective ontology
• 1.4.1.2 The objective epistemology
• 1.4.2 The classical theory of categorization
• 1.4.3 The inadequacies
• Chapter Two Theoretical Framework
• 2.1 The philosophical foundation:experientialism
• 2.2 The prototype theory of categorization
• 2.2.1 Prototype categories
• 2.2.2 Prototype
• 2.3 Cognitive linguistics
• 2.3.1 Differences between cognitive linguistics and other schools
• 2.3.2 The cognitive view in lexical semantics
• 2.4 Cultural models
• Chapter Three Polysemy as a Cognitive Phenomenon
• 3.1 Polysemy as a prototype category
• 3.2 Types of category extension in polysemy
• 3.2.1 Derivation of non-prototypical members
• 3.2.1.1 The radial pattern
• 3.2.1.2 The concatenate pattern
• 3.2.1.3 The synthetic pattern
• 3.2.2 Prototype split
• 3.3 Mechanisms for category extension in polysemy
• 3.3.1 Two basic notions
• 3.3.1.1 Domain
• 3.3.1.2 Image schema
• 3.3.2 Metonymy
• 3.3.2.1 The nature of metonymy
• 3.3.2.2 Metonymic extension in the polysemous category
• 3.3.2.3 Conversion
• 3.3.3 Metaphor
• 3.3.3.1 The nature of metaphor
• 3.3.3.2 The classification of metaphor
• 3.3.3.3 Metaphorical extension in the polysemous category
• 3.3.4 Comparisons and combinations of metonymy and metaphor
• 3.4 A case study:exchange
• Chapter Four Polysemy Modulated by Culture
• 4.1 Language,cognition and culture
• 4.1.1 The definition of culture
• 4.1.2 The relationship between language,cognition and culture
• 4.2 Cultural,cognitive universals and polysemy
• 4.3 Cultural,cognitive variations and polysemy
• 4.3.1 Different social environments
• 4.3.2 Different psychological culture
• 4.3.3 Different thinking models
• 4.3.3.1 English "abstract thinking" vs.Chinese "imagic thinking"
• 4.3.3.2 English "analytical thinking" vs.Chinese "synthetic thinking"
• 4.3.3.3 English "contradiction" vs.Chinese "unification"
• 4.4 A case study:heart and xin
• 4.4.1 Polysemous categories of HEART and XIN
• 4.4.1.1 Polysemous category of HEART in English
• 4.4.1.2 Polysemous category of XIN in Chinese
• 4.4.2 Polysemous categories of HEART and XIN postulated by universal cognitive mechanism
• 4.4.2.1 Metaphorical extension in polysemous categories of HEART and XIN
• 4.4.2.2 Metonymic extension in polysemous categories of HEART and XIN
• 4.4.3.Polysemous categories of HEART and X1N modulated by culture
• 4.4.3.1 The seat of mentality in Chinese
• 4.4.3.2 Courage or bravery in English
• 4.4.3.3 Other differences
• Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Acknowledgements
• List of Published Papers
• 学位论文评阅及答辩情况表