论文部分内容阅读
本文是对VerenaHaser(2005)《隐喻、转喻和体验哲学:挑战认知语义学》一书的书评。该书指出Lakoff的认知语义学存在着大量的自相矛盾和论证过程中的循环推理,对认知语义学的理论框架提出了质疑,认为它最大的缺陷在于其概念的模糊性。本文从隐喻和转喻的区分标准、Lakoff的论证方法、与体验哲学对立的“客观主义神话”和如何解释隐喻映射等方面进行述评。
This article is a review of VerenaHaser’s (2005) metaphor, metonymy and experiential philosophy: Challenge Cognitive Semantics. The book points out that Lakoff’s cognitive semantics have a lot of self-contradictions and circular reasoning in the process of argumentation, which raises questions about the theoretical framework of cognitive semantics. He thinks that the biggest defect of Lakoff lies in its fuzziness. This article reviews the distinction between metaphor and metonymy, the Lakoff’s method of argumentation, the “objectivist mythology” that contradicts experiential philosophy, and how to interpret metaphorical mapping.