Conceptual Metonymies and Metaphors behind TU

Abstract

Abstract: A series of studies of the cognitive mechanisms behind the Five Elements SHUI ‘Water', HUO ‘Fire', MU ‘Wood', JIN ‘Metal' and TU ‘Earth' have been done. As an integral part, this paper focuses on TU ‘Earth'. Data analyses show that the construction of the semantic network of EARTH in ancient Chinese is dominated by conceptual metonymies EARTH FOR ITS FEATURES, EARTH FOR PRODUCTS FROM EARTH, EARTH FOR LAND, EARTH FOR REGION and EARTH FOR MEASURING LAND, and by conceptual metaphors A(N) PHENOMENON/OBJECT WITH FEATURES OF EARTH IS EARTH, A(N) PERSON/OBJECT/PHENOMENON WITHIN A REGION IS EARTH, HUMAN BEING IS EARTH, GOD OF LAND IS EARTH and REPLACEMENT OF DYNASTIES IS REPLACEMENT OF THE FIVE ELEMENTS. The network of EARTH in modern Chinese is built by metonymies EARTH FOR LAND and EARTH FOR REGION, and by metaphors A(N) PHENOMENON/OBJECT WITH FEATURES OF EARTH IS EARTH, A(N) PERSON/OBJECT/PHENOMENON WITHIN A REGION IS EARTH, BEING OUT OF FASHION IS EARTH, CULTURE IS EARTH and WORLD IS EARTH. Changes of the cognitive networks of EARTH through history reflect the weakening of the influence of the Five Elements Theory.

CLC Number:

JIA Dongmei, LAN Chun. Conceptual Metonymies and Metaphors behind TU "Earth" in the Five Elements[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2013, 13(01): 20-25.

References

Barcelona, A. 2002. Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within cognitive linguistics: An update [A]. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (eds.). Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast [C]. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 207-77.
Croft, W. 2002. The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies [A]. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (eds.). Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast [C]. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 161-205.
Croft, W. & D. A. Cruse. 2004. Cognitive Linguistics [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, V. & M. Green. 2006. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction [M]. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Gädenfors, P. 1996. Conceptual spaces as a framework for cognitive semantics [A]. In A. Clard (ed.). Philosophy and Cognitive Science [C]. Kluwer: Dordrecht. 159-80.Kövecses, Z. 2010. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction (2^nd edn.) [M]. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. 1993. The contemporary theory of metaphor [A]. In A. Ortony (ed.). Metaphor and Thought [C]. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. 202-51.
Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought [M]. New York: Basic Books.
Lakoff, G. & M. Turner. 1989. More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor [M]. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Radden, G. & Z. Kövecses. 1999. Toward a theory of metonymy [A]. In K. Panther & G. Radden (eds.). Metonymy In Language and Thought [C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.17-59.
Taylor, J. 2001. Linguistics Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,.
Yu, N. 2009. The Chinese Heart in A Cognitive Perspective: Culture, Body, and Language [M]. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
冯友兰.1998.中国哲学史新编(上卷)[M].北京:人民出版社.
邝芷人.1992.阴阳五行及其体系[M].台北:文津出版社.
罗竹风.2001.汉语大词典[Z].上海:汉语大词典出版社.
庞朴.1999.当代学者自选文库庞朴卷[M].合肥:安徽教育出版社.
周桂钿.2002.释“天人合一”——兼论传统价值观的现代意义及其现代转换[J].山东社会科学(1):77-81.

[1]	. [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 454(4): 13-20.
[2]	. [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 452(2): 53-63.
[3]	Wandong XU, Xiangdong GU. Cognitive Validity: A Review of its Rationale, Definition, Models and Empirical Studies [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2020, 450(6): 68-78.
[4]	Yanjie GAO, Yi DING, Yue JIANG. Interpersonal Meanings of the Values of Modal Operators in English Political Interviews [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2020, 450(6): 50-58.
[5]	Le ZHANG, Qin LIU. Phraseological Features of Cover Letters written by Chinese science and engineering majors [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2020, 450(6): 111-120.
[6]	YAO Jianpeng. An Insight into Repair Initiation in L2 Teacher Discourse [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(09): 70-75.
[7]	LI Wenzhong. Revisiting the Use of the Corpus Evidence in the US Supreme Court [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2014, 14(07): 7-11.
[8]	LIU Lixin, YANG Yuchen. A Critical Review of “qi-cheng-zhuan-he” within the Field of Contrastive Rhetoric [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2014, 14(04): 18-22.
[9]	ZHANG Huiping, LIU Yongbing. On the Syntactic Features of DMs Expressiong Adding and the Acquisition Regularities of the Beginners: An Empirical Study Based on ICCI Learner Corpus [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2013, 13(01): 14-19.
[10]	David Coniam, Barley Mak, JIN Tan, LIU Li. Reflections on the Practice of Onscreen Marking: The Case of Hong Kong Public Examinations [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2013, 13(08): 14-19.
[11]	ZOU Shen. How Do Teachers View and Practice Test Fairness? Findings from a Questionnaire Survey [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2013, 13(08): 20-25.
[12]	Jessica R. W. Wu. A Comparability Study between Paper-based and Computer-based Test Mode of the GEPT Advanced Writing Test [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2013, 13(08): 6-13.
[13]	WANG Hua. An Analysis of Foreign Language Learning Motivation from the Perspective of Dynamic Assessment [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2013, 13(08): 26-30.

Conceptual Metonymies and Metaphors behind TU "Earth" in the Five Elements

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 13

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments