|
Modern Linguistics 2023
生理转喻认知机制下汉泰“害怕(恐惧)”类情感概念构建的对比分析
|
Abstract:
转喻不亚于隐喻是个体在构建情感概念的过程中重要的认知机制。个体在情感理想化认知模型的基础上,通过生理转喻的认知心理操作,激活了情感ICM内作为载体的体内外生理反应和目标情感之间的心理访问通道,并基于体验认知获得的“生理反应”构建整体情感概念,从而将这些生理反应认定为特定的情感,将抽象的情感具体化。本文在生理转喻认知的理论框架内,对比分析了汉语和泰语中用来表达“害怕(恐惧)”情感概念的语言表征结构,探究了个体运用体内外生理反应构建“害怕(恐惧)”情感概念过程中的转喻认知情况,并考察中泰两国人民在不同社会文化背景下的个体对“害怕(恐惧)”情感的概念构建的普遍性和特殊性。研究发现,汉语和泰语在运用体内外生理反应构建抽象的“害怕(恐惧)”情感概念过程中,会运用到多种类型的生理反应作为载体来理解和具体化目标情感概念,但是中国人情感概念构建的方式比泰国人更加丰富。本研究旨在通过对情感概念构建的考察,扩充泰语认知语言学转喻的相关研究,给其他研究者提供参考。
Metonymy, in parallel with metaphor, serves as a pivotal cognitive mechanism when individuals frame emotional concepts. Drawing upon the foundational tenets of the Idealized Cognitive Model of emotions (emotional ICM), one can observe the intricate dance between internal and external physiological reactions within the emotional ICM, facilitated by physiological metonymy. Such reac-tions, rooted in our embodied experiences, pave the way for emotion conceptualization; transform-ing these bodily responses into discernible emotions and grounding otherwise abstract emotional perceptions. Using a corpus-based approach, combined with prior studies, this article, within the theoretical bounds of physiological metonymy, contrasts the linguistic articulations of the emotional concept “fear” across Chinese and Thai. The study delves into the manifestation of physiological re-actions—both internal and external—as vehicles in the conceptualization of “fear.” It further seeks to discern the shared and unique pathways in emotion conceptualization for individuals hailing from diverse cultural landscapes of China and Thailand. The findings unveil that both Chinese and Thai employ a plethora of physiological cues as anchors when shaping the abstract concept of “fear,” albeit with Chinese exhibiting a richer tapestry of conceptual constructs compared to Thai. This ex-ploration enhances our understanding of cognitive metonymy in Thai and offers a beacon for sub-sequent scholars in the field.
[1] | Radden, G. and K?vecses, Z. (1999) Towards a Theory of Metonymy. Metonymy in Language and Thought, 4, 17-60.
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.03rad |
[2] | 孙玉洁. 英汉愉悦情感语义表征的比较研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 南京: 南京师范大学, 2017. |
[3] | Lim, J. (2003) A Study on the Correlation between Idiomatic Emotional Expressions and Their Physiological Responses. Semiotic Inquiry, 14, 53-94. |
[4] | Lim, J. (2008) Exploration of Semantics in Cogni-tive Linguistics. Korean Literature Inc., Seoul. |
[5] | Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Cate-gories Reveal about the Mind. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 |
[6] | Ungerer, F.H. and Schmid, H.J. (1996) An Intro-duction to Cognitive Linguistics. Longman, London & New York. |
[7] | Brannon, K. (2019) Conceptual Metonymy and the Physiological, Poetic Expression of Emotion. Travaux Interdisciplinaires sur la Parole et le Langage. https://doi.org/10.4000/tipa.2881 |
[8] | Nakajima, K., Minami, T. and Nakauchi, S. (2017) Interaction between Facial Expression and Color. Scientific Reports, 7, 41019. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41019 |
[9] | Chokthawikit, S. (2021) Conceptual Metaphor of [FEAR] in Literary Work: A Case Study of the Short Story Entitled ‘/sa?òp ?ō? najdō??uu/’ (Confused Calmness in Snakes Wilderness). Manutsayasat Wichakan, 28, 116-153. |