A Comparative Study On Metaphor And Metonymy

The research of metaphor and metonymy has experienced three periods, from classical rhetoric into the palace of cognitive linguistics research. So as far as theoretical paradigm is concerned with, the Substitution Theory, the Comparison Theory, the Interaction Theory, the Mapping Theory, and Blended Space Theory mainly focus on the nature, and mechanism. As viewed from interrelationship between metaphor and metonymy, scholars such as Goossens (2003: 349-377), Barcelona (2000: 31-58) and Mendoza (2000: 121-124) propose that metaphor and metonymy often interact with each other, and that a large number of metaphors are metonymically motivated. Barcelona examines the metonymic motivation for conceptual metaphor to study the interaction between metonymy and metaphor, meanwhile no denying the fact that the instances of metonymies are motivated by metaphors on certain circumstance.However, in this dissertation, after surveying the literature review systematically, the author has found that the deficiencies lie in two aspects:[1] Most scholars apply themselves to discrepancies of metaphor and metonymy research, ignoring the relationship between them.[2] The internal mechanism of metaphor and metonymy, as well as how to achieve interpretation in meaning construction haven't receive clear demonstration.Naturally the research questions should make up the drawback in this regard: [1] Is there a continuum in metaphor and metonymy?[2] What is the operational mechanism of continuum?[3] In what way these theories operate in meaning construction?These research questions are also the focus of this dissertation. After surveying conceptual metaphor and metonymy form cognitive point of view, in the first place the author concludes ten common items on grounding of comparative analysis. Basing on the ten common items mentioned before, the author proposes a relative new classification as conceptual continuum and contextual continuum to testify the relationship between metaphor and metonymy. On the basis of previous study and corpus analysis, it is safe to draw the conclusion that the distinction between metaphor and metonymy is not scattered but scalar, and meaning construction relies on the value point along the continuum.However ,take specific instance"乡愁是一枚邮票"—余光中《乡愁》in Chinese for example , according to the traditional view, if there is a sign of metaphorical word"is"in the form of"X is Y", it should be metaphor. Whereas, the problem here is that above motioned example is not fully in line with the traditional definition of metaphor, that is, the source domains and target domains should have a necessary and sufficient similarity. The above citation is to achieve economy in cognition, connivance in the process of comprehension, which forms a novel metaphor and a new cognitive view.From the perspective of unstereotypical relationship (Zou Chunling, 2010), which is different from the traditional view on distinguishing metaphor and metonymy, this view has testified the existence of the continuum from metaphor to metonymy. Further progress is achieved by answering focus as following:[1] Analysis on these conditions and reasons in forming continuum: among them, attributive coincidence, the relationship between necessary contiguity and occasional contiguity in the operation of metonymy.[2] The operation of continuum from metaphor to metonym in meaning construction that is the interpretation of Connotation and Denotation in meaning construction.After those efforts are made to establish a metonymy --metaphor, upon which such a continuum are built, relying on abductive reasoning, for further inquiring Why can X possess some basic attributes of Y, the answer will rely on the inheritance of the Mental-Model based pragmatic reasoning linked with Stereotypical Relation proposed by Xu Shenghuang (2007b: 2-7) and Connotation and Denotation Model proposed by Zou Chunling (2009: 218, 2010).This dissertation consists of six parts.Part one is the introduction of the whole dissertation which explains the objectives, scope, hypothesis and data of this thesis, and states the basic features of metaphor and metonymy with a brief introduction of framework, data collection and methodology, in order to expound and prove the plausibility and feasibility of this thesis. In part two, the author reviews relevant theories domestic and abroad of the past years in retrospect, and provide history and academic background for this thesis. Part three describes the theoretical background and hypothesis, objectives, and methodology. Part four, on the basis of relevant theories, the author complementarily rewords the definition of continuum in metaphor and metonymy, forming the analysis patterns of this dissertation. Accordingly, it provides the definition and classification of this research which is on continuum. Part five is the further discussion of mechanism of continuum, taking it as a cognitive-pragmatic phenomenon. Part six is the overall conclusion of this dissertation, including summary, validity, reliability, limitation and further research.