{"title":"第四尊大师奖杯，对偶","authors":"R. Harris","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Four Master Tropes—metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony—are a significant theme in the history of rhetoric, but this grouping is wrong in fundamental ways—irony is not a trope at all properly understood, and the bulk of the arguments in this tradition suggest, along with a few new ones of my own, that the fourth Master Trope should be antithesis.","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"1 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Fourth Master Trope, Antithesis\",\"authors\":\"R. Harris\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Four Master Tropes—metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony—are a significant theme in the history of rhetoric, but this grouping is wrong in fundamental ways—irony is not a trope at all properly understood, and the bulk of the arguments in this tradition suggest, along with a few new ones of my own, that the fourth Master Trope should be antithesis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in the History of Rhetoric\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in the History of Rhetoric\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1569412","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACT The Four Master Tropes—metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony—are a significant theme in the history of rhetoric, but this grouping is wrong in fundamental ways—irony is not a trope at all properly understood, and the bulk of the arguments in this tradition suggest, along with a few new ones of my own, that the fourth Master Trope should be antithesis.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
