Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies ›› 2015, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (11): 24-29.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2015.11.006
Previous Articles Next Articles
LU Junyu
Published:
2020-07-25
CLC Number:
LU Junyu. The Reversibility of Figure-Ground Theory and the Cognitive Mechanism of Metonymy[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(11): 24-29.
Alac, M. & S. Coulson. 2004. The man, the key, or the car: Who or what is parked out back? [J]. Cognitive Science Online (l2): 21-34. Barcelona, A. 2002. Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within cognitive linguistics: An update [A]. In René Dirven & Ralf Pörings (eds.). Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast [C]. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 207-78. Boersma, P. 2007. Some listener-oriented accounts of haspiré in French [J]. Lingua 117: 1989-2054. Baylis, G.C. & J. Driver. 1995. One-sided edge assignment in vision: Figure-ground segmentation and attention to objects[J]. Current Directions in Psychological Science (4): 140-46. Croft, W. 2002[1993]. The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies [A]. In René Dirven & Ralf Pörings (eds.). Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast [C]. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 161-205. Dirven, R. 1999. Conversion as a conceptual metonymy of event schemata [A]. In K-U. Panther & G. Radden (eds.). Metonymy in Language and Thought [C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 275-76. Fillmore, C. 1985. Frames and the semantics of understanding [J]. Quaderni di Semantica (6): 222-54. Huang Liqiang & H. Pashler. 2009. Reversing the attention effect in figure-ground perception [J]. Psychological Science 20:1199-1201. Julesz, B. Textons. 1984. The elements of texture perception, and their interactions [J]. Nature 290: 91-97. Koch, P. 1999. Frame and contiguity: On the cognitive bases of metonymy and certain types of word formation [A]. In K-U. Panther & G. Radden (eds.). Metonymy in Language and Thought [C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 139-68. Koch, P. 2001. Metonymy: Unity in diversity [J]. Journal of Historical Pragmatics (2): 201-44. Koffka, K. 1999[1935]. Principles of Gestalt Psychology [M]. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Kövecses Z. 2013. The metaphor-metonymy relationship: Correlation metaphors are based on metonymy [J]. Metaphor and Symbol (2): 75-88. Lakoff, G. & M. Turner. 1989. More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor [M]. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press. Langacker, R. W. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. Ⅱ. [M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Langacker, R. W. 1993. Reference-point constructions [J].Cognitive Linguistics (4): 1-38. Langacker, R. 1999. Grammar and Conceptualization [M]. Berlin/NewYork: Moulton de Gruyter. Langacker, R. 2009. Metonymic grammar [A]. In K-U. Panther, L. Thornburg & A. Barcelona (eds.). Metonymy and Metaphor in Grammar [C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 46-71. Mendoza, R. F. J. & Olga I. Díez Velasco. 2002. Patterns of conceptual interaction [A]. In René Dirven & Ralf Pörings (eds.). Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast [C]. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 489-532. Panther, K-U. 2005. The role of conceptual metonymy in meaning construction [A]. In R. F. J. Mendoza & M. S. P. Cervel (eds.). Cognitive Linguistics: Internal Dynamics and Interdisciplinary Interaction [C]. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 353-86. Panther, K-U. & L. Thornburg. 2003. Metonymies as natural inference and activation schemas [A]. In K-U. Panther & L. Thornburg (eds.). Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing [C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 127-48. Peirsman, Y. & D. Geeraerts. 2006. Metonymy as a prototypical category [J]. Cognitive Linguistics (3): 269-316. Qiu T Fangtu, T. Sugihara & R. von der Heydt. 2007. Figure-Ground mechanisms provide structure for selective attention [J]. Nature Neuroscience (10):1492-99. Radden, G. & Z. Kövecses. 1999. Towards a theory of metonymy [A]. In K-U. Panther & G. Radden (eds.). Metonymy in Language and Thought [C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 17-60. Rojo, A. M. 2009. A cognitive approach to the translation of metonymy-based humor [J]. Across Languages and Cultures (10): 63-83. Rubin, E. 1958[1915]. Figure and ground [A]. In D.C. Beardslee & M. Wertheimer (eds.). Readings in Perception [C]. Princeton: Van Nostrand. 194-203. Sperb, D. & D. Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition (2nd edition) [M]. Oxford: Blackwell. Treisman, A. 1986. Features and objects in visual processing [J]. Scientific American 255:114-25. Talmy, L. 1978. Figure and ground in complex sentences [A]. In J. H. Greenberg (ed.). Universals in Human Language Vol.4 [C]. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 627-49. Talmy, L. 2000. Towards a Cognitive Semantics, vol.1: Concept Structuring Systems [M]. Cambridge: MIT Press. Ungerer, F. & H. J. Schmid. 2001. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. van Valin, R. D. 2005. Exploring the Syntax-semantics Interface [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vecera, S. et al. 2004. Exogenous spatial attention influences figure-ground assignment [J]. Psychological Science (15): 20-26. Vernon, M. D. 2013. Visual Perception [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 刘国辉.2006.图形-背景空间概念及其在语言中的隐喻性表征[J].外语研究(2):23-29. 卢军羽.2011.隐喻与转喻:争议与原型解释[J].天津外国语大学学报(2):8-15. 张辉、孙明智.2005.概念转喻的本质、分类和认知运作机制[J].外语与外语教学(3):1-6. 张克定.2011.英语倒装方位构式的认知语篇研究[J].外语教学与研究(4):529-39. |
[1] | YANG Yaping. The Revival of Ordinary Language Philosophy [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2019, 19(01): 97-105. |
[2] | MEI Xuan. Interpreting Moral Assertions from the Perspective of Implicature Theory [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2017, 17(06): 57-61. |
[3] | CHEN Shifa, ZHU Lihui, WANG Ya, YANG Xin, GU Xiaolan, YANG Lianrui. Processing English Mono-morphemic Nouns and Verbs for English Learners of Chinese: An ERP Study [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2017, 17(06): 51-56. |
[4] | XIAO Ruolin, WEI Naixing. A Corpus-based Contrastive Study of N that-cl Patterns in Research Articles by Chinese and Western Scholars [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2017, 17(01): 34-41. |
[5] | QU Tao. Interactions in Linguistic and Multimodal Texts: A Case Study of Pride and Prejudice [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(09): 14-19. |
[6] | LEI Qian, ZHANG Delu. A Multimodal Stylistic Study on the Two Covers of Graham Rawle’s Woman’s World [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(09): 20-25. |
[7] | SHI Chunxu, WANG Zhenhua. The Holistic Appraisal Construction in Multimodal History Textbooks [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(09): 8-13. |
[8] | LIU Rui, ZHANG Del. On the Assessment Framework for Chinese College Students’ Multiliteracies in Foreign Languages [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(09): 26-31. |
[9] | SHEN Xingchen, CHEN Xinren. A Cognitive Pragmatic Approach to Referential Ambiguity in Advertisements: A Case Study of Car Ads [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(09): 33-38. |
[10] | WANG Xueyu. Diachronic Changes of Discourse and Identity Construction: A Historical Sociopragmatic Perspective [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(09): 39-43. |
[11] | QIAN Yonghong. Socio-psychological Mechanism Underlying Misleading Vague Language in Advertisements: A Critical Pragmatic Analysis [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(09): 44-48. |
[12] | WU Jue, YAO Yayan. Memetic Strategies in Micro-movie Advertisements [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(09): 49-51. |
[13] | FAN Zhenqiang. The Contextual Effects and Motivation of Tautology within Neo-cognitive Pragmatics [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(07): 12-16. |
[14] | XIE Nini. Review of Reading Visual Narratives [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2014, 14(09): 74-76. |
[15] | WEN Xu. Pragmatics Enterprise: Philosophical, Cultural, and Cognitive Perspectives [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2014, 14(06): 54-58. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||