概念隱喻的映照規則

Mapping Principles in the Processing of Conceptual Metaphors

龔書萍(Shu-Ping Gong)

指導教授 ： 安可思

國立臺灣大學/文學院/語言學研究所/博士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2009.00290

摘要

這個研究探討隱喻是如何建構兩個源域之間的概念映照。研究中檢驗三個映照的學說：以分類為主的學說 (例如：特徵分類模型)、以排列為主的學說(例如：結構排列模型)、以規則為主的學說 (例如：概念映照模型)。本研究測試兩種類型的新穎隱喻：其一為依據映照規則的新穎隱喻；另一個為違反映照規則的新穎隱喻。本研究提出以規則為主的學說可以解釋隱喻是如何處理。我們預測人會使用映照規則來處理隱喻，另外，我們也假設了語境會影響人是否提取映照規則來理解新穎隱喻。

四個實驗結果 (包括一個隱喻釋義作業及三個閱讀作業) 證明了以規則為主的學說。實驗ㄧ探討人類是是如何釋義隱喻。我們發現，在受試者所產生的釋義中，依據映照規則的釋義出現的頻率多於違反映照規則的釋義。這個結果說明了受試者使用映照規則來釋義隱喻。

實驗二及實驗三使用閱讀時間的測量方式來探討受試者使用映照規則來理解隱喻是否受到語境的影響。在實驗二中，當受試者整合新穎隱喻句子到源域不一致的語境時，依據映照規則的新穎隱喻跟違反映照規則的新穎隱喻都很不容易理解，二者閱讀時間沒有顯著差異。然而，在實驗三中，我們發現受試者在整合新穎隱喻句子到源域一致的語境時，依據映照規則的新穎隱喻比違反映照規則的新穎隱喻容易理解，二者閱讀時間有顯著差異。實驗四也是使用閱讀時間測量方式來探討在沒有語境的狀況下，受試者是否能使用映照規則來幫助理解新穎隱喻。結果顯示依據映照規則的新穎隱喻跟違反映照規則的新穎隱喻都很不容易理解，二者閱讀時間沒有顯著差異。

這三個閱讀實驗結果顯示切題的語境訊息會促進理解依據映照規則的新穎隱喻。然而，不切題的語境訊息會或沒有先前語境都不會影響兩種新穎隱喻的理解。這個結果與規則為主的學說預測ㄧ致：在一些狀況下依據映照規則新穎隱喻的閱讀時間比違反映照規則的新穎隱喻的閱讀時間較短。

本研究結果支持概念映照模型的假設，受試者會使用映照規則來解釋及理解隱喻。另外，這個研究顯示先前語境對於不同新穎隱喻有不同的影響。依據映照規則的新穎隱喻容易受到先前語境的影響，因為他們的語意可以理解，比較容易整合到先前語境中；違反映照規則的新穎隱喻不容易受到語境的影響，因為他們的語意難以理解，比較困難整合到先前語境中。

關鍵字

概念映照模型 ； 華語隱喻 ； 隱喻釋義 ； 語境 ； 句子處理

並列摘要

This research investigates how metaphors construct conceptual mappings between domains. We evaluate three mapping accounts: the category-based account (i.e., the Attribution Categorization Model), the alignment-based account (i.e., the Structural Mapping Model), and the principle-based account (i.e., the Conceptual Mapping Model). In this study, two types of novel metaphor sentences were examined: novel metaphor sentences following mapping principles and novel metaphor sentences not following mapping principles. We propose that the principle-based account can explain how metaphors are processed. We predict that people will use the mapping principles to process metaphors. In addition, it is hypothesized that context affects whether mapping principles will be accessed when people comprehend novel metaphors.

Four experiments (i.e., a metaphor paraphrasing task and three reading tasks) support the principle-based account. Experiment 1 examined how metaphors were paraphrased. We found that participants produced paraphrases relating to mapping principles more frequently than those not relating to mapping principles. This suggests that participants used mapping principles to paraphrase metaphors.

Experiments 2 and 3 used a timed reading measure to examine whether context affects the access of mapping principles in understanding metaphors. In Experiment 2, we found that participants processed novel metaphor sentences following mapping principles as slowly as those not following mapping principles in the integration of novel metaphor sentences into domain-incongruent discourse. The reading times between two types of sentences did not reach significant difference. However, in Experiment 3, we found that participants comprehended novel metaphor sentences following mapping principles faster than those not following mapping principles in the integration of novel metaphor sentences into domain-congruent discourse. The reading times between two types of sentences reached significant difference. Experiment 4 also used a timed reading measure to examine whether participants access mapping principles for processing novel metaphor sentences without prior context. The results showed that the novel metaphor sentences were read as slow as those not following mapping principles. The reading time between two types of sentence conditions did not reach significant difference.

The results of three reading tasks show that relevant contextual information can facilitate the comprehension of novel metaphor sentences following mapping principles. However, irrelevant contextual information or no prior context can not affect the processing of both types of novel metaphor sentences. The results are consistent with that the principle-based account that novel metaphor sentences following mapping principles are processed faster than those not following mapping principles in certain conditions.

This study supports the Conceptual Mapping Model that participants use mapping principles to interpret and comprehend novel metaphors. In addition, this work demonstrates that prior context differently impacts the processing of two types of novel metaphors: novel metaphor sentences following mapping principles, because their meanings are interpretable and are easily integrated into discourse, are affected by prior context; in contrast, novel metaphors not following mapping principles, because their meanings are less interpretable and are not easily integrated into discourse, are not affected by prior context.

並列關鍵字

Conceptual Mapping Model ； metaphors in Mandarin Chinese ； metaphor paraphrases ； context ； sentences processing

參考文獻

Ahrens, K., Chung, S. F., & Huang, C.-R. (2004). From Lexical Semantics to Conceptual Metaphors: Mapping Principle Verification with WordNet and SUMO. In D. Ji, L. K. Teng, & H. Wang (Eds.). Recent Advancement in Chinese Lexical Semantics: Proceedings of the 5th Chinese Lexical Semantics Workshop (CLSW-5). 99–106. Singapore: COLIPS.

Ahrens, K. (Forthcoming). Mapping Principles for Conceptual Metaphors. In Cameron, Lynne, Alice Deignan, Graham Low, Zazie Todd (Eds.). Researching and Applying Metaphor in the Real World. John Benjamins.

Allbritton, D. W., McKoon, G., & Gerrig, R. J. (1995). Metaphor-based schemas and text representations: making connections through conceptual metaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition. 21: 612–25.

Becker A. H. (1997). Emergent and common features influence metaphor interpretation. Metaphor and Symbol. 12(4): 243–59.

Bowdle, B. F., & Gentner, D. (2005). The career of Metaphor. Psychological Review. 112(1): 193–216.