A Contrastive Study Of Transcategorization Of English And Chinese Basic Color Terms

The article takes as its theoretical framework the related theories of cognitive linguistics and functional linguistics, using the method of contrastive research, using a paradigm constructed from the combination of introspection and empirical study and using the method of systematic observation with reference to text, to investigate the phenomena of the transcategorization of Chinese and English basic terms for color.Through the contrastive study of the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and Peking University‘s Corpus of the Chinese Language (CCL), the author draws the conclusion that the degree of class shift (verbalization) and the degree of rank shift of the Chinese basic terms for color are greater than those of shifts of the English basic terms for color. The observation is noted also for the self-constructive corpus.In the first two corpora, there are three pairs of basic terms for color, showing greater degrees of class shift and rank shift, the colors being red (红),white (白) and black (黑). The three pairs of basic terms for color rank as the superlative ordinals of the universal human cognitive system for color. The author shows that the most typical basic terms for color can be class-shifted and rank-shifted easily. The orders of the transcategorization of the three pairs of Chinese and English basic terms for color are different for reasons that are mainly historical, cultural and cognitive..In COCA, there is an unusual phenomenon in which the English basic color term―brown‖ranks first place for verbalization in the English basic color system. The term’s Chinese counterpart,―h (褐)‖, shows no instance of verbalization. The Chinese basic color term―hóng (红)‖ranks first in its system.The highest frequencies of the verbalization of Chinese and English basic color terms are asymmetric.The difference of English basic color terms‘class shift may be due to the fact that there is little cross-over among English nouns, verbs and adjectives; whereas, the higher frequency of verbalization of the Chinese basic color terms could explain Chinese nouns‘functioning as verbs and verbs‘functioning as adjectives.Able to function both nominally and verbally, many words are ambi-functional in Chinese.Another reason for class-shift frequency differences in the Chinese and English basic terms‘verbalization is that English pays more attention to classification,―thingness‖, abstraction and generalization, while Chinese focuses on process, specialization and metaphorization.The higher frequency in the class shift of Chinese basic color terms is due to the cause-and-effect relationships that the language indicates, having a more paramorphic nature than that of English basic color terms, a characteristic more suited to showing relationships of cause and effect.Speaking contrastively, when native English speakers encounter a clause complex with an adverbial clause of reason, often they say the effect clause first and the cause clause second, a situation that is one of the factors restricting the rank shift of English basic color terms. The English basic color terms can be down-shifted so to speak only to groups but only to a certain extent. On the contrary, Chinese basic color terms can be down-shifted right to the level of words. (Of course, English-speaking children may state the cause clause before the effect clause.)Through observation of the participants of the high frequency verbalization of basic color terms in each individual larger corpus, one finds that the high frequency of the verbalizing of the English basic color term―brown‖occurs mainly in the culinary register. One hundred twenty-five (125) of 134 instances of the verbalization of―brown‖appear in the culinary register, showing a strong relationship between man and nature. Another 9 instances of the verbalization of―brown‖also show a strong relationship between man and the outside world. The previous results show that Anglophones make a clear distinction between subject and object, thereby showing the nature of the relationship between man and objects.The high frequency of the verbalization of the word―hóng (红)‖appears usually in the interpersonal register, human organ register, emotional register, animal register and plant register. Regarding registers using―hóng (红)‖, one can observe that a Sinophone values both interpersonal relationships and oneself. Similarly, Sinophones are careful not to neglect their relationship with nature. Within the ideological context of language, the importance of interpersonal harmony is clear.Finally, the author illustrates distinctions in the semantic transference of Chinese and English basic terms in three respects: the contrast of metaphorical attribute transference, the contrast of processing transference and the contrast of cause-and-effect transference. Through a discussion of Chinese and English high frequency verbalization of the terms―brown‖and―hóng (红)‖, the author shows that the mechanism for the semantic transference of―brown‖is realized through metonymy, while the mechanism for the Chinese basic term―hóng (红)‖is realized through both metonymy and metaphor. When the transcategorization of the Chinese basic term―hóng (红)‖takes place, the semantic transference is made mainly from the basic color source domain to both the inter-personal target domain and the emotional target domain. Showing a considerable amount of semantic transcategorization, the Chinese basic term―hóng (红)‖is rooted deeply in its history and culture and cognition.