congtuhaohoaak
New Member
Download Luận văn An investigation into the role of metaphor in description of emotions in English poetic disscourse
In this paper, we have considered the notion of grammatical metaphor, as it is conceived of in the systemic functional model of language founded by Halliday. We have taken as our starting point the notion of metaphor as it is traditionally known, and re-labelled this notion as ‘lexical metaphor’ because it is concerned with the words, or the lexicon (vocabulary) of a language. Grammatical metaphor, as we have seen, can be explained in relation to lexical metaphor: it is based on the same metaphorical movement, but it is rooted in the grammar of a language, and thus exploits the grammatical resources of a language. Taking into account the general organization of these resources into different large metafunctions that language serves, we have seen how Halliday distinguished between ideational metaphors, which have to do with alternative ways of construing reality, and interpersonal metaphor, which offer alternative possibilities of expressing modal meanings (metaphors of modality), or exchanging commands (metaphors of mood). We also review how logical metaphor and textual metaphor are realized by Halliday and Martin. We conclude that:
Để tải bản DOC Đầy Đủ xin Trả lời bài viết này, Mods sẽ gửi Link download cho bạn sớm nhất qua hòm tin nhắn.
Ai cần download tài liệu gì mà không tìm thấy ở đây, thì đăng yêu cầu down tại đây nhé:
Nhận download tài liệu miễn phí
4 Classification of grammatical metaphor
In general, there are four kinds of grammartical metaphor: ideational (experiential), interpersonal, , logical and. textual. They occur when the usual or ‘congruent’ realization of meaning is given a ‘non congruent’ or metaphorical expression. The ideational grammatical metaphor relates to the experiential meaning, the logical metaphor to the textual meaning and the interpersonal metaphor to the interpersonal meaning.
4.1 Congruent realization of meaning
SFL describes the congruent form of representing experience like this:
Example 1: Congruent realization of meaning
(1) He is furious because his wife has been kidnapped.
In the following example we have a more incongruent form of representing reality through a grammatical metaphor:
Example 2: Incongruent realization of meaning: grammatical metaphor
(2) He is in a flood of anger because his wife has been kidnapped.
Why consider this a metaphorical expression? The answer relies on the acceptance of the notion that the congruent form is the unmarked way we represent experience and that the alternative or marked realization is a form of metaphor.
Congruent Metaphorical
1. Adjective (Qualifier) Noun (Entity)
2. Verb (Process) Noun (Entity)
3. Verb (Process) Adjective (Qualifier)
4. Adverb (Circumstance) Adjective (Qualifier)
5.Conjunction (Relator) Prepositional Phrase ( Circumstance)
Table 2 - Class shift (semantic type)
( Adapted from Halliday 1995)
4.2 Logical grammatical metaphor
Logical grammatical metaphor refers to the consideration of meaning in an incongruent way at the level of the organization of the discourse. The most congruent form of joining two ideas is with a conjunction but when conjunctions are realized through processes and nouns allowing for two or more clauses to become one, it is referred as a logical grammatical metaphor.
In spoken medium the logico-semantic relations such as cause-effect are more commonly realized by conjunctions. This type of metaphor is called ‘ logical metaphor’ because it involves what Martin (1993) calls ‘buried reasoning’, or the metaphorical realization of the logico-semantic relations such as cause and effect that in a less metaphorical realization would be expressed by the conjunctions. This metaphorical realization of conjunctive relations by processes like ‘resulting’, ‘causing’, ‘depending’, etc. and nominal groups like ‘ classifier’, ‘qualifier’, ‘numerative’ , etc.
4. 3 Ideational grammatical metaphor
The examples given in 3, which are repeated here for ease of reference, have been described as illustrating a metaphorical shift from process as clause to process as noun phrase:
1. His failure in the exam surprised me.
In the systemic functional model of language, the notion of a ‘process’ belongs to the ideational metafunction: a ‘process’ is one aspect by which we represent and shape the reality we live in as human beings. In the previous section, ‘process’ has been mentioned as complementary to other ideational notions, viz. ‘entity’ and ‘quality’. With these notions in mind, the nature of the metaphors in (1) and (2) can now be further explained. We have seen above that, in Halliday’s view, a process is normally expressed by means of a clause, but it can metaphorically be expressed by means of a noun phrase. What is important is that a noun phrase is also the ‘normal’ (i.e. default, standard) expression of some other ideational type of meaning, viz. an entity. An entity is normally expressed by means of noun phrase: a table, the sun, my sister, joy, eight books. In this sense, in example (1), the form ‘noun phrase’ is borrowed to metaphorically express the meaning of a process, in the same sense as the lexica; in example (4) (repeated here) borrows the lexeme grasp to express the meaning ‘understand’:
(4) He didn’t grasp it.
The form of a noun phrase can be borrowed to express processes (which are normally realized by means of clauses), but it can also be used metaphorically to express qualities, which are by default encoded by adjectives. In this sense, (6) is a metaphorical variant of (5).
(5) She is dishonest.
(6) You cannot really count on her honesty.
Another common sub-type of ideational metaphor is where a process (normally expressed by means of clause) comes to be expressed by means of an adjective, and thus, comes to be conceived of as a quality instead.
Ideational metaphor is a powerful resource in the grammar of a language, by which the expression of ideational meanings such as processes, qualities and entities is extended in important ways beyond their default encodings as clauses, adjectives and nouns (or noun phrases) respectively: different forms can be borrowed to express different meanings.
4.4 .Interpersonal grammatical metaphor
The main function of the ideational grammatical metaphor is to condense the information as a way to pack more lexical items in one clause at the expense of deleting the participants and time of the processes, i.e. the ideational grammatical metaphor is a more metaphorical way of expressing the meaning at the level of experience. The interpersonal grammatical metaphor, on the other hand, can be described as a metaphorical way to express interpersonal meanings that are congruently represented in mood and modality choices. The use of this kind of grammatical metaphor is especially important in language as they allow for a more explicit or implicit presence of the writer/speaker in the discourse
The interpersonal component of grammar especially concerns the areas of modality and mood. In these two areas, Halliday also distinguishes between basic, non-metaphorical expressions, and metaphorical ones, i.e. inter- personal metaphors. Let us look at each area in turn.
A default realization of a modal meaning, for example, a degree of certainty, according to Halliday, is by means of modal elements that occur within the clause that is being modally evaluated. For example, in order to express the likelihood of John having left already, we can use a modal verb such as must (9) and/or a modal adverb such as certainly (10):
(9) John must have left (, because the lights are off).
(10) John will certainly have left by now.
Halliday calls these expressions of modality, which occur within the clause structure itself, the basic type. However, the same meaning of likelihood with a high degree of certainty can also be expressed by adding more elements to the initial clause John + have left. The following examples illustrate just a few possibilities:
a. I think John has already left.
b. It is very likely that John has already left.
c. Everyone believed that John had already left.
d. It is clear that John has already left.
In each of the examples above, the modal meaning (i.e. a high degree of certainty that something is the case) is expressed by elements which lie outside the original clause, and which are based on particular types of verbs, such as think (a) or believe (c), or particular types of adjectives, such as likely (b) or clear (d). Halliday calls such expressions interpersonal metaphors of modality, because the modal meaning is realized outside the clause (in contrast with the standard encoding by means of modal verbs or adverbs, which lie within the clause structure). In this case, again, the metaphors are based on a borrowing: for example the verb think can be borrowed to express a modal meaning, as in example (a).
The second interpersonal area in grammar, according to systemic functional linguistics, is that of mood. In order to understand the notion of interpersonal metaphors ...
Download miễn phí Luận văn An investigation into the role of metaphor in description of emotions in English poetic disscourse
In this paper, we have considered the notion of grammatical metaphor, as it is conceived of in the systemic functional model of language founded by Halliday. We have taken as our starting point the notion of metaphor as it is traditionally known, and re-labelled this notion as ‘lexical metaphor’ because it is concerned with the words, or the lexicon (vocabulary) of a language. Grammatical metaphor, as we have seen, can be explained in relation to lexical metaphor: it is based on the same metaphorical movement, but it is rooted in the grammar of a language, and thus exploits the grammatical resources of a language. Taking into account the general organization of these resources into different large metafunctions that language serves, we have seen how Halliday distinguished between ideational metaphors, which have to do with alternative ways of construing reality, and interpersonal metaphor, which offer alternative possibilities of expressing modal meanings (metaphors of modality), or exchanging commands (metaphors of mood). We also review how logical metaphor and textual metaphor are realized by Halliday and Martin. We conclude that:
Để tải bản DOC Đầy Đủ xin Trả lời bài viết này, Mods sẽ gửi Link download cho bạn sớm nhất qua hòm tin nhắn.
Ai cần download tài liệu gì mà không tìm thấy ở đây, thì đăng yêu cầu down tại đây nhé:
Nhận download tài liệu miễn phí
Tóm tắt nội dung:
process (a verb, fail, and its participants, He + the exam) is not realized by means of a clause, but rather by means of another type of form, such as a noun phrase, as in the example at hand. In this sense, grammatical metaphor again involves a type of metaphorical movement: from a process as clause (the default encoding of a process) to a process as noun phrase. Grammatical metaphor is thus based on the variation between something common, standard, default (i.e. a process realized as a clause) and something which is extended from that (i.e. a process realized by some other form, e.g. a noun phrase), and in this sense grammatical metaphor is similar to the traditional type of metaphor looked at above. However, in the case of grammatical metaphor, the two aspects involved in the movement or metaphorical extension no longer refer to lexemes and lexical meanings (as with lexical metaphor). Rather, they refer to grammatical forms, or grammatical means of expression, such as a clause and a nominal group. According to Halliday, grammatical metaphor is conceived as an incongruent realization of a given semantic configuration in the lexicogrammar ( 1985: 321)4 Classification of grammatical metaphor
In general, there are four kinds of grammartical metaphor: ideational (experiential), interpersonal, , logical and. textual. They occur when the usual or ‘congruent’ realization of meaning is given a ‘non congruent’ or metaphorical expression. The ideational grammatical metaphor relates to the experiential meaning, the logical metaphor to the textual meaning and the interpersonal metaphor to the interpersonal meaning.
4.1 Congruent realization of meaning
SFL describes the congruent form of representing experience like this:
Example 1: Congruent realization of meaning
(1) He is furious because his wife has been kidnapped.
In the following example we have a more incongruent form of representing reality through a grammatical metaphor:
Example 2: Incongruent realization of meaning: grammatical metaphor
(2) He is in a flood of anger because his wife has been kidnapped.
Why consider this a metaphorical expression? The answer relies on the acceptance of the notion that the congruent form is the unmarked way we represent experience and that the alternative or marked realization is a form of metaphor.
Congruent Metaphorical
1. Adjective (Qualifier) Noun (Entity)
2. Verb (Process) Noun (Entity)
3. Verb (Process) Adjective (Qualifier)
4. Adverb (Circumstance) Adjective (Qualifier)
5.Conjunction (Relator) Prepositional Phrase ( Circumstance)
Table 2 - Class shift (semantic type)
( Adapted from Halliday 1995)
4.2 Logical grammatical metaphor
Logical grammatical metaphor refers to the consideration of meaning in an incongruent way at the level of the organization of the discourse. The most congruent form of joining two ideas is with a conjunction but when conjunctions are realized through processes and nouns allowing for two or more clauses to become one, it is referred as a logical grammatical metaphor.
In spoken medium the logico-semantic relations such as cause-effect are more commonly realized by conjunctions. This type of metaphor is called ‘ logical metaphor’ because it involves what Martin (1993) calls ‘buried reasoning’, or the metaphorical realization of the logico-semantic relations such as cause and effect that in a less metaphorical realization would be expressed by the conjunctions. This metaphorical realization of conjunctive relations by processes like ‘resulting’, ‘causing’, ‘depending’, etc. and nominal groups like ‘ classifier’, ‘qualifier’, ‘numerative’ , etc.
4. 3 Ideational grammatical metaphor
The examples given in 3, which are repeated here for ease of reference, have been described as illustrating a metaphorical shift from process as clause to process as noun phrase:
1. His failure in the exam surprised me.
In the systemic functional model of language, the notion of a ‘process’ belongs to the ideational metafunction: a ‘process’ is one aspect by which we represent and shape the reality we live in as human beings. In the previous section, ‘process’ has been mentioned as complementary to other ideational notions, viz. ‘entity’ and ‘quality’. With these notions in mind, the nature of the metaphors in (1) and (2) can now be further explained. We have seen above that, in Halliday’s view, a process is normally expressed by means of a clause, but it can metaphorically be expressed by means of a noun phrase. What is important is that a noun phrase is also the ‘normal’ (i.e. default, standard) expression of some other ideational type of meaning, viz. an entity. An entity is normally expressed by means of noun phrase: a table, the sun, my sister, joy, eight books. In this sense, in example (1), the form ‘noun phrase’ is borrowed to metaphorically express the meaning of a process, in the same sense as the lexica; in example (4) (repeated here) borrows the lexeme grasp to express the meaning ‘understand’:
(4) He didn’t grasp it.
The form of a noun phrase can be borrowed to express processes (which are normally realized by means of clauses), but it can also be used metaphorically to express qualities, which are by default encoded by adjectives. In this sense, (6) is a metaphorical variant of (5).
(5) She is dishonest.
(6) You cannot really count on her honesty.
Another common sub-type of ideational metaphor is where a process (normally expressed by means of clause) comes to be expressed by means of an adjective, and thus, comes to be conceived of as a quality instead.
Ideational metaphor is a powerful resource in the grammar of a language, by which the expression of ideational meanings such as processes, qualities and entities is extended in important ways beyond their default encodings as clauses, adjectives and nouns (or noun phrases) respectively: different forms can be borrowed to express different meanings.
4.4 .Interpersonal grammatical metaphor
The main function of the ideational grammatical metaphor is to condense the information as a way to pack more lexical items in one clause at the expense of deleting the participants and time of the processes, i.e. the ideational grammatical metaphor is a more metaphorical way of expressing the meaning at the level of experience. The interpersonal grammatical metaphor, on the other hand, can be described as a metaphorical way to express interpersonal meanings that are congruently represented in mood and modality choices. The use of this kind of grammatical metaphor is especially important in language as they allow for a more explicit or implicit presence of the writer/speaker in the discourse
The interpersonal component of grammar especially concerns the areas of modality and mood. In these two areas, Halliday also distinguishes between basic, non-metaphorical expressions, and metaphorical ones, i.e. inter- personal metaphors. Let us look at each area in turn.
A default realization of a modal meaning, for example, a degree of certainty, according to Halliday, is by means of modal elements that occur within the clause that is being modally evaluated. For example, in order to express the likelihood of John having left already, we can use a modal verb such as must (9) and/or a modal adverb such as certainly (10):
(9) John must have left (, because the lights are off).
(10) John will certainly have left by now.
Halliday calls these expressions of modality, which occur within the clause structure itself, the basic type. However, the same meaning of likelihood with a high degree of certainty can also be expressed by adding more elements to the initial clause John + have left. The following examples illustrate just a few possibilities:
a. I think John has already left.
b. It is very likely that John has already left.
c. Everyone believed that John had already left.
d. It is clear that John has already left.
In each of the examples above, the modal meaning (i.e. a high degree of certainty that something is the case) is expressed by elements which lie outside the original clause, and which are based on particular types of verbs, such as think (a) or believe (c), or particular types of adjectives, such as likely (b) or clear (d). Halliday calls such expressions interpersonal metaphors of modality, because the modal meaning is realized outside the clause (in contrast with the standard encoding by means of modal verbs or adverbs, which lie within the clause structure). In this case, again, the metaphors are based on a borrowing: for example the verb think can be borrowed to express a modal meaning, as in example (a).
The second interpersonal area in grammar, according to systemic functional linguistics, is that of mood. In order to understand the notion of interpersonal metaphors ...