论隐喻与情感两极的互动

Pub Date : 2023-07-11 DOI:10.1163/18773109-01502004
Ren-feng Duann
{"title":"论隐喻与情感两极的互动","authors":"Ren-feng Duann","doi":"10.1163/18773109-01502004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This study investigates Facebook posts related to ‘校正回歸 retrospective adjustment; to backlog’, a neologism coined during the first outbreak of COVID-19 in Taiwan in May 2021. It identifies 19 linguistic metaphors used to refer to this neologism; these are classified into the following eight metaphor groups: financial statements, lie, propaganda, recreation, scoundrel, straw, traffic congestion and tricks; among these, traffic congestion and recreation groups occur in posts of diverging polarities; the remaining six groups occur in posts exclusively expressing negative evaluation. Moreover, this study identifies a rhetorical strategy, parallelism, which occurs exclusively in the negative polarity and triggers a negative interpretation of value-neutral metaphors. Considering the aspects highlighted via the use of certain metaphors, it predicts that, for the conceptualisation of this neologism, objective metaphors are more likely to be used when the emphasis is on things that occur without the involvement of any agent’s volition; subjective metaphors are more likely to be used when the user emphasises the agent’s volition underlying a behaviour, including the manipulation of the number of infected patients, concealment of the truth, and transmission of false information.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the interaction between metaphors and sentiment polarities\",\"authors\":\"Ren-feng Duann\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18773109-01502004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This study investigates Facebook posts related to ‘校正回歸 retrospective adjustment; to backlog’, a neologism coined during the first outbreak of COVID-19 in Taiwan in May 2021. It identifies 19 linguistic metaphors used to refer to this neologism; these are classified into the following eight metaphor groups: financial statements, lie, propaganda, recreation, scoundrel, straw, traffic congestion and tricks; among these, traffic congestion and recreation groups occur in posts of diverging polarities; the remaining six groups occur in posts exclusively expressing negative evaluation. Moreover, this study identifies a rhetorical strategy, parallelism, which occurs exclusively in the negative polarity and triggers a negative interpretation of value-neutral metaphors. Considering the aspects highlighted via the use of certain metaphors, it predicts that, for the conceptualisation of this neologism, objective metaphors are more likely to be used when the emphasis is on things that occur without the involvement of any agent’s volition; subjective metaphors are more likely to be used when the user emphasises the agent’s volition underlying a behaviour, including the manipulation of the number of infected patients, concealment of the truth, and transmission of false information.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01502004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01502004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项研究调查了与“校正回歸 追溯调整;“积压”是2021年5月新冠肺炎在台湾首次爆发时创造的一个新词。它确定了19个用来指称这个新词的语言隐喻;这些隐喻可分为以下八类:财务报表、谎言、宣传、娱乐、无赖、稻草、交通堵塞和伎俩;其中,交通拥堵和娱乐群体出现在两极分化的岗位上;其余六组出现在专门表达负面评价的帖子中。此外,本研究确定了一种修辞策略,即平行性,它只发生在负极性中,并引发对价值中性隐喻的负面解释。考虑到通过使用某些隐喻所强调的方面,它预测,对于这一新词的概念化,当重点是在没有任何主体意愿的情况下发生的事情时,更可能使用客观隐喻;当用户强调行为背后的代理人意志时,主观隐喻更有可能被使用,包括操纵感染患者的数量、隐瞒真相和传播虚假信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
On the interaction between metaphors and sentiment polarities
This study investigates Facebook posts related to ‘校正回歸 retrospective adjustment; to backlog’, a neologism coined during the first outbreak of COVID-19 in Taiwan in May 2021. It identifies 19 linguistic metaphors used to refer to this neologism; these are classified into the following eight metaphor groups: financial statements, lie, propaganda, recreation, scoundrel, straw, traffic congestion and tricks; among these, traffic congestion and recreation groups occur in posts of diverging polarities; the remaining six groups occur in posts exclusively expressing negative evaluation. Moreover, this study identifies a rhetorical strategy, parallelism, which occurs exclusively in the negative polarity and triggers a negative interpretation of value-neutral metaphors. Considering the aspects highlighted via the use of certain metaphors, it predicts that, for the conceptualisation of this neologism, objective metaphors are more likely to be used when the emphasis is on things that occur without the involvement of any agent’s volition; subjective metaphors are more likely to be used when the user emphasises the agent’s volition underlying a behaviour, including the manipulation of the number of infected patients, concealment of the truth, and transmission of false information.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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