Semantics: a coursebook, second edition
tải về 1.74 Mb. Chế độ xem pdf
|
| Interpersonal and non-literal meaning
338 Examples Here are some examples of personi fication: (1) That theory explains everything you need to know about metaphor. (2) I think that life has cheated me out of any hope of happiness. (3) Cancer finally caught up with him. Comment Note that, literally speaking, a theory cannot explain anything (1), only a person can. Similarly, only people can literally cheat someone (2) or catch up with someone (3). But conceiving such non-human entities as a theory, life, and cancer as though they are human entities enables us to attribute motivations and characteristics to them that would not be possible without personi fication. Conceptualizing entities in human terms by means of personi fication makes them more accessible to understanding. Let us now examine one more example of non-literal language, metonymy, that is somewhat di fferent from the kinds of non-literal language we have seen up to this point. Definition METONYMY is a kind of non-literal language in which one entity is used to refer to another entity that is associated with it in some way. In other words, metonymic concepts ‘allow us to conceptualize one thing by means of its relation to something else’ (LJ 1980: 39). Example The following example of metonymy is frequently cited in the literature to illustrate this concept: The ham sandwich in the next booth is waiting for his bill Comment How do we understand this sentence? Clearly we cannot interpret it literally, since we are not implying that an actual sandwich is waiting to get its bill. Such an interpretation would lead to an anomaly. We rather understand it to mean that the person who ordered the ham sandwich is waiting for his bill. In the particular context in which this sentence would be uttered, presumably a café or restaurant, the person uttering the sentence would know that there was a close relationship between the thing ordered and the person who ordered it. Because this relationship is so obvious in the context, it is permissible to refer to the person by what he ordered. As a matter of fact, this might be the preferred way of referring to the person, because the people who wait on customers in a diner typically don’t learn the names of their customers, but they are well aware of what their customers ordered. Practice Explain the metonymy in each sentence below. (1) We enjoy watching Hitchcock more than Spielberg (2) The Times asked a pertinent question at the news conference (3) The White House refused to answer the question U N I T 2 7 Non-literal meaning: idioms, metaphor, and metonymy 339 Feedback (1) Hitchcock and Spielberg are used to represent the films they made. (2) The Times is used to represent the reporter who works for the newspaper. (3) The White House is used to refer to the spokesperson who works there who actually refused to answer. Comment LJ observe that there are in fact several di fferent kinds of metonymy that are frequently found in everyday language. We will introduce them here by means of a practice. (Note that metonymies are written in the same way as metaphors.) Practice Each of the sentences given below exempli fies one of the following particular subtypes of metonymy: THE PART FOR THE WHOLE, THE FACE FOR THE PERSON, PRODUCER FOR PRODUCT, OBJECT USED FOR USER, CONTROLLER FOR CONTROLLED, INSTITUTION FOR PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE, THE PLACE FOR THE INSTITUTION, THE PLACE FOR THE EVENT. Match each sentence with the kind of metonymy that it represents. (1) Watergate was an important scandal in American politics (2) The rancher needs some more hands during roundup time (3) The buses are on strike today (4) Hollywood keeps putting out mediocre movies (5) The art collector bought an expensive Picasso (6) Hitler conquered Poland in just a few days (7) The Army needs many new soldiers (8) She’s just another pretty face Feedback (1) THE PLACE FOR THE EVENT (2) THE PART FOR THE WHOLE (3) OBJECT USED FOR USER (4) THE PLACE FOR THE INSTITUTION (5) PRODUCER FOR PRODUCT (6) CONTROLLER FOR CONTROLLED (7) INSTITUTION FOR PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE (8) THE FACE FOR THE PERSON Comment As a matter of fact, multiple examples could be given for each subtype of metonymy in this practice, which you will be asked to do in a later exercise. This shows that examples of metonymy are rarely isolated and unrelated to each other. Moreover, it seems clear that the kinds of associations between entities that allow us to refer to one entity by means of another via metonymy are principled and not arbitrary, as was discussed earlier with respect to the ham sandwich example. It is easy to see the same kind of principled association in other cases, once the appropriate context is taken into account. For example, invoking the metonymy THE PLACE FOR THE EVENT by using Watergate to refer to the scandal that took place in the Nixon administration in the 1970s makes sense and is not arbitrary, because PA RT S I X Interpersonal and non-literal meaning 340 the sequence of events that led to the scandal started with a burglary in the apartment complex with that name in Washington DC. These facts about metonymy show that it is highly structured and not random or haphazard. LJ note that, like metaphors, ‘metonymic concepts structure not just our language but our thoughts, attitudes, and actions. And, like metaphoric concepts, metonymic concepts are grounded in our experience’ (LJ 1980: 39). Summary This unit has examined several kinds of non-literal or figurative language and has investigated the extent to which it might be structured in some way. Our survey has shown that, although non-literal language is often thought of as essentially random and idiosyncratic, in reality it tends to be more systematically organized than has usually been recognized. In spite of their apparent idiosyncratic nature, for example, many idiomatic expressions (such as My car is a lemon) probably originated as isolated metaphors which have become fixed or frozen over time. The fact that the metaphors on which they were based never became widely used in the language has led to their identi fication as frozen expressions. But the language is replete with a number of di fferent kinds of metaphorical expressions that are more elaborately entrenched in the culture and, consequently, are more highly systematic in nature. We have found ample evidence in English of numerous structural metaphors, orientational metaphors, and ontological metaphors which are by no means random, but highly structured and rule-governed. Finally, we have examined the role played by several di fferent subtypes of metonymy in everyday language and have found, once again, that it, too, is systematic in nature. We must now draw to a close our discussion of non-literal language, although we have barely scratched the surface of this vast topic and have glossed over some aspects of it that are too complex to pursue in an introductory text. If you are interested in reading further about non-literal language, including metaphor, metonymy, and related subjects, we encourage you to take a look at the references at the end of the book. tải về 1.74 Mb. Chia sẻ với bạn bè của bạn:
|