{"title":"隐喻和转喻在构建移植语篇中的作用","authors":"M. Brdar, Rita Brdar-Szabó","doi":"10.29162/jez.2020.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This\narticle studies figurative uses of metaphors and metonymies utilized to frame\nthe discourse of transplantology. We assume a somewhat wider view of framing\nthan is usually found in the literature and argue that framing effects can be\nobserved on a cline stretching from the private to the institutional pole. We\ncombine this approach with the findings of the prospect theory that\ndistinguishes between gain-framing and loss-framing as two strategic choices\nin tackling an issue in discourse. The framing tools, as we show in our\nanalysis of authentic materials, in order to be effective need to be adapted\nto the section of, or the point on, the cline occupied by a particular\nsubtype of discourse. Although the focus in the cognitive linguistic\nliterature is on how conceptual metaphors are employed in framing discourse,\nwe point out that metonymies, interacting with these metaphors, can also play\na very important role. The framing tools used in public campaign aimed at\nwinning new organ donors are strategically mostly gain-framed, and as a rule\nglobally based on the gift\nmetaphor. It seems that the metaphorical use of gift as a global choice in institutional contexts is not\nvery efficient since it is too general and vague to make discourse more\npersuasive at the personal level, as expected in the light of the\nexemplification theory. This metaphor is more effective when adapted\naccordingly, as we demonstrated on some campaigns supported by or based on\nmetonymic presentation of various aspects stressing the quality of life after\ntransplantation","PeriodicalId":41610,"journal":{"name":"Jezikoslovlje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of metaphors and metonymies in framing the transplantation\\ndiscourse\",\"authors\":\"M. Brdar, Rita Brdar-Szabó\",\"doi\":\"10.29162/jez.2020.10\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This\\narticle studies figurative uses of metaphors and metonymies utilized to frame\\nthe discourse of transplantology. We assume a somewhat wider view of framing\\nthan is usually found in the literature and argue that framing effects can be\\nobserved on a cline stretching from the private to the institutional pole. We\\ncombine this approach with the findings of the prospect theory that\\ndistinguishes between gain-framing and loss-framing as two strategic choices\\nin tackling an issue in discourse. The framing tools, as we show in our\\nanalysis of authentic materials, in order to be effective need to be adapted\\nto the section of, or the point on, the cline occupied by a particular\\nsubtype of discourse. Although the focus in the cognitive linguistic\\nliterature is on how conceptual metaphors are employed in framing discourse,\\nwe point out that metonymies, interacting with these metaphors, can also play\\na very important role. The framing tools used in public campaign aimed at\\nwinning new organ donors are strategically mostly gain-framed, and as a rule\\nglobally based on the gift\\nmetaphor. It seems that the metaphorical use of gift as a global choice in institutional contexts is not\\nvery efficient since it is too general and vague to make discourse more\\npersuasive at the personal level, as expected in the light of the\\nexemplification theory. This metaphor is more effective when adapted\\naccordingly, as we demonstrated on some campaigns supported by or based on\\nmetonymic presentation of various aspects stressing the quality of life after\\ntransplantation\",\"PeriodicalId\":41610,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jezikoslovlje\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jezikoslovlje\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2020.10\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jezikoslovlje","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29162/jez.2020.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The role of metaphors and metonymies in framing the transplantation
discourse
This
article studies figurative uses of metaphors and metonymies utilized to frame
the discourse of transplantology. We assume a somewhat wider view of framing
than is usually found in the literature and argue that framing effects can be
observed on a cline stretching from the private to the institutional pole. We
combine this approach with the findings of the prospect theory that
distinguishes between gain-framing and loss-framing as two strategic choices
in tackling an issue in discourse. The framing tools, as we show in our
analysis of authentic materials, in order to be effective need to be adapted
to the section of, or the point on, the cline occupied by a particular
subtype of discourse. Although the focus in the cognitive linguistic
literature is on how conceptual metaphors are employed in framing discourse,
we point out that metonymies, interacting with these metaphors, can also play
a very important role. The framing tools used in public campaign aimed at
winning new organ donors are strategically mostly gain-framed, and as a rule
globally based on the gift
metaphor. It seems that the metaphorical use of gift as a global choice in institutional contexts is not
very efficient since it is too general and vague to make discourse more
persuasive at the personal level, as expected in the light of the
exemplification theory. This metaphor is more effective when adapted
accordingly, as we demonstrated on some campaigns supported by or based on
metonymic presentation of various aspects stressing the quality of life after
transplantation