Metaphoric interpretation

Pub Date : 2021-07-21 DOI:10.1163/18773109-01302008
Xinmeng Lu, T. Pritchard
{"title":"Metaphoric interpretation","authors":"Xinmeng Lu, T. Pritchard","doi":"10.1163/18773109-01302008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This paper compares two different theoretical approaches which have been developed to account for metaphoric interpretation: the comparison approach and the categorisation approach. Following a brief review on the history of the two theoretical approaches, the paper points out in part 5 that these two approaches are not fundamentally incompatible. It is further argued in parts 6 and 7 that while the comparison approach can be improved to provide metaphoric interpretations beyond a focus on words and phrases, similar improvement can hardly be made for the categorisation approach, whether by updating the approach itself or by merging it with non-categorisational processes. As a result, the metaphoric cases accountable by the categorisation approach can only be a subset of the cases accountable by the comparison approach.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01302008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper compares two different theoretical approaches which have been developed to account for metaphoric interpretation: the comparison approach and the categorisation approach. Following a brief review on the history of the two theoretical approaches, the paper points out in part 5 that these two approaches are not fundamentally incompatible. It is further argued in parts 6 and 7 that while the comparison approach can be improved to provide metaphoric interpretations beyond a focus on words and phrases, similar improvement can hardly be made for the categorisation approach, whether by updating the approach itself or by merging it with non-categorisational processes. As a result, the metaphoric cases accountable by the categorisation approach can only be a subset of the cases accountable by the comparison approach.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
隐喻的解释
本文比较了两种不同的隐喻解释理论方法:比较法和分类法。在简要回顾了这两种理论方法的历史之后,本文在第五部分指出,这两种方法并非根本不相容。第6部分和第7部分进一步指出,虽然可以改进比较方法,以提供超出对单词和短语的关注的隐喻解释,但无论是通过更新方法本身还是通过将其与非分类过程合并,都很难对分类方法进行类似的改进。因此,通过分类方法负责的隐喻案例只能是通过比较方法负责的案例的子集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1