RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      Revisiting Gricean Approach to Metaphors

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A105932435

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      This paper argues that Grice’s theory can still explain metaphors if we make the following revisions. The first revision to make is that not only flouting maxims but also observing maxims should explain metaphors depending on different types of metaphors. Secondly, we should admit the fact that sufficiently rich contexts can obviate the need to calculate maxims to arrive at metaphorical meanings. These revisions can address why sometimes no processing differences are found between literal languages and metaphorical languages even though ordinarily it is the case that metaphorical languages take a longer time to process than literal languages. Furthermore, the proposal of this paper can explain why category mismatches are not the necessary condition to evoke metaphors. Claiming that there are ways to make Gricean approach to metaphors still work, this paper also discusses high linguistic values of Grice’s maxims in comparison to other attempts to reduce the maxims, such as Horn’s two principles and the relevance principle. This paper concludes that we need to give more credit to Grice’s work not only for metaphors per se but also for diversity of the system.
      번역하기

      This paper argues that Grice’s theory can still explain metaphors if we make the following revisions. The first revision to make is that not only flouting maxims but also observing maxims should explain metaphors depending on different types of meta...

      This paper argues that Grice’s theory can still explain metaphors if we make the following revisions. The first revision to make is that not only flouting maxims but also observing maxims should explain metaphors depending on different types of metaphors. Secondly, we should admit the fact that sufficiently rich contexts can obviate the need to calculate maxims to arrive at metaphorical meanings. These revisions can address why sometimes no processing differences are found between literal languages and metaphorical languages even though ordinarily it is the case that metaphorical languages take a longer time to process than literal languages. Furthermore, the proposal of this paper can explain why category mismatches are not the necessary condition to evoke metaphors. Claiming that there are ways to make Gricean approach to metaphors still work, this paper also discusses high linguistic values of Grice’s maxims in comparison to other attempts to reduce the maxims, such as Horn’s two principles and the relevance principle. This paper concludes that we need to give more credit to Grice’s work not only for metaphors per se but also for diversity of the system.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 오상룡, "영어와 한국어의 연어" 한국중앙영어영문학회 59 (59): 263-279, 2017

      2 Glucksberg, Sam, "The psycholinguistics of metaphor" 7 (7): 92-96, 2003

      3 Gibbs, Raymond, "The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language and understanding" Cambridge University Press 1994

      4 Grice, Paul, "Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts" Academic Press 41-58, 1975

      5 Grice, Paul, "Studies in the way of words" Harvard University Press 1989

      6 이제원, "Spray-Load 교체구문에서 한정명사구의 전체적 해석을 위한 통사기반 연구" 한국중앙영어영문학회 60 (60): 265-280, 2018

      7 Saeed, John, "Semantics" Wiley-Blackwell 2009

      8 Kearns, Kate, "Semantics" St. Martin’s Press 2000

      9 조윤경, "Orientational Metaphors as Indexical Metaphors" 미래영어영문학회 22 (22): 307-326, 2017

      10 Glucksberg, Sam, "On understanding nonliteral speech: Can people ignore metaphors?" 21 (21): 85-98, 1982

      1 오상룡, "영어와 한국어의 연어" 한국중앙영어영문학회 59 (59): 263-279, 2017

      2 Glucksberg, Sam, "The psycholinguistics of metaphor" 7 (7): 92-96, 2003

      3 Gibbs, Raymond, "The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language and understanding" Cambridge University Press 1994

      4 Grice, Paul, "Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts" Academic Press 41-58, 1975

      5 Grice, Paul, "Studies in the way of words" Harvard University Press 1989

      6 이제원, "Spray-Load 교체구문에서 한정명사구의 전체적 해석을 위한 통사기반 연구" 한국중앙영어영문학회 60 (60): 265-280, 2018

      7 Saeed, John, "Semantics" Wiley-Blackwell 2009

      8 Kearns, Kate, "Semantics" St. Martin’s Press 2000

      9 조윤경, "Orientational Metaphors as Indexical Metaphors" 미래영어영문학회 22 (22): 307-326, 2017

      10 Glucksberg, Sam, "On understanding nonliteral speech: Can people ignore metaphors?" 21 (21): 85-98, 1982

      11 Keysar, Boaz, "On the functional equivalence of literal and metaphorical interpretations in discourse" 28 (28): 375-385, 1989

      12 Lakoff, George, "Metaphors we live by" University of Chicago Press 1980

      13 Kövecses, Zoltan, "Metaphor: A practical introduction" Oxford University Press 2010

      14 Horn, Lawrence, "Meaning, form and use in context: Linguistic applications" Georgetown University Press 11-42, 1984

      15 Ortony, Andrew, "Interpreting metaphors and idioms: Some effects of context and comprehension" 17 (17): 465-477, 1979

      16 Blasko, Dawn, "Effects of familiarity and aptness on metaphor processing" 19 (19): 295-308, 1993

      17 Inhoff, Albrecht Werner, "Contextual effects on metaphor comprehension in reading" 12 (12): 558-567, 1984

      18 Tendahl, Markus, "A hybrid theory of metaphor: Relevance theory and cognitive linguistics" Palgrave Macmillan 2009

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2026 평가예정 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2020-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2017-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
      2013-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2010-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2007-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      2006-01-01 평가 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2004-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.45 0.45 0.45
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.4 0.38 0.67 0.23
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼