Прагматика отторжения и неприятия: теоретические и методологические аспекты

Обложка

Цитировать

Полный текст

Аннотация

В данной статье изложена теория отторжения и неприятия с позиций аудитории и говорящего. В ней дается определение отторжения и неприятия, обсуждаются их рамки и природа. Работа основывается на материале сообщений в основных и социальных сетях на двух языках - английском и арабском. Статья опирается на социально-когнитивные теории дискурса. Главный вопрос статьи - как и почему носители арабского и английского языка отторгают и не принимают сообщения. Предыдущие исследования неприятия образного языка были посвящены преимущественно такому риторическому тропу, как метафора, и тому, что побуждает английскую политическую и медийную элиту отвергать метафорические выражения. Это поднимает важный вопрос, который редко задается: как и почему представители широкой общественности не принимают вербальные метафоры, а также другие тропы, такие как гипербола и метонимия; что происходит в других языках, например, арабском, и в других сферах, таких как изобразительное искусств. В статье показано, что имеющаяся литература, посвященная обсуждению смысла и/или диалогического действия и поведения человека содержит существенные теоретические, методологические и аналитические недостатки. Статья вносит значительный вклад в теорию концептуальной метафоры и преднамеренного или спонтанного использования языка.

Об авторах

Ахмед Абдель-Рахим

Седльцкий университет

Автор, ответственный за переписку.
Email: ahmedelsayed20017@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7547-150X

преподаватель Университета Седльце, Института лингвистики и литературоведения, Седльце, Польша. Занимал должность преподавателя и исследователя в Университете Умм-аль-Кура в Мекке (Саудовская Аравия), Университете Марии Кюри-Склодовской в Люблине (Польша), а также в Университете Люнебурга и Университете Мартина Лютера в Галле-Виттенберге (Германия). Автор монографий Pictorial framing in moral politics: A corpus-based experimental (2019, Routledge) и Frame flouting: A theory of language and mind (Routledge, в печати).

Седльце, Польша

Список литературы

  1. Amsalem, Eran & Alon Zoizner. 2022. Real, but limited: A meta-analytic assessment of framing effects in the political domain. British Journal of Political Science 52 (1). 221-237.
  2. Attardo, Salvatore. 2015. Humorous metaphors. In Geert Brône, Kurt Feyaerts & Tony Veale (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics and humor research, 91-110. Berlin, München, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
  3. Baker, Paul. 2006. Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. Bloomsbury Publishing.
  4. Baker, Paul. 2012. Acceptable bias? Using corpus linguistics methods with critical discourse analysis. Critical Discourse Studies 9 (3). 247-256.
  5. Barnden, John. 2020. Uniting irony, hyperbole and metaphor in an affect-centred, pretence-based framework. In Angeliki Athanasiadou & Herbert Colston (eds.), The diversity of irony, 15-65. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
  6. Bateman, John. 2014. Text and Image: A Critical Introduction to the Visual/Verbal Divide. London: Routledge.
  7. Bonalumi, Francesca, Feride Belma Bumin, Thom Scott-Phillips & Christophe Heintz. 2023. Communication and deniability: Moral and epistemic reactions to denials. Frontiers in Psychology 13. 1073213.
  8. Boogaart, Ronny, Henrike Jansen & Maarten van Leeuwen. 2022. “I was only quoting”: Shifting viewpoint and speaker commitment. In Laurence R. Horn (ed.), From lying to perjury: Linguistic and legal perspectives on lies and other falsehoods, 113-138. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
  9. Brouwer, Susanne. 2019. The auditory foreign-language effect of moral decision making in highly proficient bilinguals. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 40 (10). 865-878.
  10. Casasanto, Daniel & Kyle Jasmin. 2012. The hands of time: Temporal gestures in English speakers. Cognitive Linguistics 23 (4). 643-674.
  11. Cienki, Alan. 1998. Metaphoric gestures and some of their relations to verbal metaphorical expressions. In Jean-Pierre Koenig (ed.), Discourse and cognition: Bridging the gap, 189-204. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications.
  12. Cody, Michael J. & Margaret L. McLaughlin. 1988. Acounts on trial: Oral arguments in traffic court. In Charles Antaki (ed.), Analysing everyday explanation: A casebook of methods, 113-126. London: Sage Publications, Inc.
  13. Clark, Herbert H. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  14. Clark, Billy. 2022. Pragmatics: The Basics. London & New York: Routledge.
  15. Croft, William & Esther J. Wood. 2000. Construal operations in linguistics and artificial intelligence. In Liliana Albertazzi (ed.), Meaning and cognition: A multidisciplinary approach, 51-78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  16. Danto, Arthur C. 1997. Translation and betrayal. Anthropology and Aesthetics 32. 61-63. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20166986?origin=JSTOR-pdf
  17. Druckman, James N. 2001. On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? The Journal of Politics 63 (4). 1041-1066.
  18. Edwards, Janis L. 1997. Political Cartoons in the 1988 Presidential Campaign: Image, Metaphor, and Narrative. London: Garland Publishing.
  19. Elder, Chi-Hé & David Beaver. 2022. “We’re running out of fuel!”: When does miscommunication go unrepaired? Intercultural Pragmatics 19 (5). 541-570. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2022-5001
  20. El Refaie, Elisabeth. 2011. The pragmatics of humor reception: Young people’s responses to a newspaper cartoon. Humor 24 (1). 87-108. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.2011.005
  21. Fetzer, Anita. 2007. Non-acceptances in context. Intercultural Pragmatics 4 (4). 493-520. https://doi.org/10.1515/IP.2007.025
  22. Forceville, Charles. 2019. Review of Andreas Musolff (2016) Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 6 (1). 211-215.
  23. Forceville, Charles. 2020. Visual and Multimodal Communication. Applying the Relevance Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  24. Gazdar, Gerald. 1979. Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form. New York: Academic Press.
  25. Gibbs, Raymond W. 2015. Do pragmatic signals affect conventional metaphor understanding? A failed test of deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics 90. 77-87.
  26. Gibbs, Raymond W. & Josie Siman. 2021. How we resist metaphors. Language and Cognition 13 (4). 670-692. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2021.18
  27. Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
  28. Grady, Joseph. 1997. THEORIES ARE BUILDINGS revisited. Cognitive Linguistics 8 (4). 267-290. Cognitive Linguistics Bibliography (CogBib), https://www.degruyter.com/ database/COGBIB/entry/cogbib.4912/html (аccessed:25.02.2023).
  29. Grice, Paul. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  30. Hanks, Patrick. 2013. Lexical Analysis: Norms and Exploitations. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
  31. Haugh, Michael. 2008. Intention and diverging interpretings of implicature in the “uncovered meat” sermon. Intercultural Pragmatics 5 (2). 201-228.
  32. Hoey, Michael. 2012. Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. London: Routledge.
  33. Holt, Elizabeth & Jim O’Driscoll. 2021. Participation and footing. In Michael Haugh, Dániel Z. Kádár & Marina Terkourafi (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of sociopragmatics, 140-161. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  34. Horn, Laurence Robert. 1972. On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English. Mimeo: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
  35. Ioannidis, John P. 2005. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine 2 (8). e124. 0696-0701.
  36. Kahneman, Daniel. 2011. Thinking Fast and Slow. Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.
  37. Kecskés, Istvan. 2023. Introduction. In Istvan Kecskes (ed.), Common Ground in First Language and Intercultural Interaction, 1-4. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
  38. Kövecses, Zoltán. 2010. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  39. Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
  40. Lakoff, George. 2014. The All New Don’t Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. Chelsea Green Publishing.
  41. Lakoff, George & Mark Turner. 1989. More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  42. Langacker, Ronald. 2008. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. New York: Oxford Academic.
  43. Langton, Rae. 1993. Speech acts and unspeakable acts. Philosophy and Public Affairs 22 (4). 305-330.
  44. Ledgerwood, Alison. 2014. Introduction to the special section on advancing our methods and practices. Perspectives on Psychological Science 9 (3). 275-277.
  45. Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
  46. Leech, Geoffrey. 2014. The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  47. Levinson, Stephen. C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  48. Levinson, Stephen. C. 1987. Putting linguistics on a proper footing: Explorations in Goffman’s participation framework. In Paul Drew & Andrew Wootton (eds.), Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order, 161-227. Oxford: Polity Press.
  49. McEnery, Tony & Andrew Hardie. 2011. Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  50. McFarlane, Steven, Heather Cipolletti Perez & Christine Weissglass. 2020. Thinking in a non-native language: A new nudge? Frontiers in Psychology 11. 549083.
  51. Miozzo, Michele, Eduardo Navarrete, Martino Ongis, Enrica Mello, Vittorio Girotto & Francesca Peressotti. 2020. Foreign language effect in decision-making: How foreign is it? Cognition 199. 104245.
  52. Müller, Cornelia. 2008. Metaphors Dead and Alive, Sleeping and Waking: A Dynamic View. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  53. Musolff, Andreas. 2000. Political imagery of Europe: A house without exit doors? Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 21 (3). 216-229.
  54. Musolff, Andreas. 2016. Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
  55. Musolff, Andreas. 2019. Creativity in Metaphor Interpretation. Russian Journal of Linguistics 23 (1). 23-39. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2019-23-1-23-39
  56. Musolff, Andreas. 2022. “World-beating” pandemic responses: Ironical, sarcastic, and satirical use of war and competition metaphors in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. Metaphor and Symbol 37 (2). 76-87. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2021.1932505
  57. Paradis, Cartia. 2004. Where does metonymy stop? Senses, facets, and active zones. Metaphor and Symbol 19 (4). 245-264.
  58. Popa-Wyatt, Mihaela. 2020. Hyperbolic figures. In Angeliki Athanasiadou & Herbert Colston (ed.), The diversity of irony, 91-106. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
  59. Reagle, Joseph Michael. 2015. Reading the Comments: Likers, Haters, and Manipulators at the Bottom of the Web. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
  60. Sampson, Geoffrey. 2013. One man’s norm is another’s metaphor: Patrick Hanks: Lexical analysis. Norms and exploitations. Language and Dialogue 3 (3). 437-456.
  61. Schäffner, Christina. 2004. Metaphor and translation: Some implications of a cognitive approach. Journal of Pragmatics 36. 1253-1269.
  62. Sönning, Lukas & Valentin Werner. 2021. The replication crisis, scientific revolutions, and linguistics. Linguistics 59 (5). 1179-1206.
  63. Segel, Edward & Lera Boroditsky. 2011. Grammar in art. Frontiers in Psychology 1. 244.
  64. Sperber, Dan (ed.). 2000. Metaprepresentations: A Multidisciplinary Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  65. Steen, Gerard. 2017. Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, core tenets, remaining issues. Intercultural Communication. 14 (1). 1-24.
  66. Tannen, Deborah. 1986. This is Not What I Meant. How Conversational Style Makes or Breaks your Relations with Others. William Morrow & Company Inc.
  67. Thomas, Jenny. 1983. Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics 4 (2). 91-112.
  68. Toivo, Taru Iris Wilhelmiina. 2020. Reduced emotional resonance in bilinguals’ L2: Potential causes, methods of measurement, and behavioural implications (Doctoral dissertation, University of Glasgow).
  69. van Dijk, Teun. 1984. Prejudice in Discourse: An Analysis of Ethnic Prejudice in Cognition and Conversation. Amsterdam: John Benhamins.
  70. van Dijk, Teun 1992. Denying racism: Elite discourse and racism. Discourse and Society 3 (1). 87-118.
  71. van Dijk, Teun. 2014. Discourse and Knowledge: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  72. van Dijk, Teun. 2021. Antiracist Discourse: Theory and History of a Macromovement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  73. Venuti, Lawrence. 2017. The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge
  74. Wegner, Daniel M., David J. Schneider, Samuel R. Carter & Teri L. White. 1987. Paradoxical effects of thought suppression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53 (1). 5-13.
  75. Weigand, Edda. 2021. Dialogue: The complex whole. Language and Dialogue 11 (3). 457-486.
  76. Weigand, Edda. 2023. Principles of New Science: Dialogue between science and philosophy. Language and Dialogue 13 (1). 26-50.
  77. Weigand, Edda & Istvan Kecskés (eds). 2018. From Pragmatics to Dialogue. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  78. Weizman, Elda & Anita Fetzer (eds.). 2015. Follow-ups in Political Discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  79. Wong, Galston & Bee Chin Ng. 2018. Moral judgement in early bilinguals: Language dominance influences responses to moral dilemmas. Frontiers in Psychology 9. 1070.
  80. Yus, Francisco. 2012. Relevance, humour and translation. In Ewa Waƚaszewska & Agnieszka Piskorska (eds.), Relevance theory: More than understanding, 117-145. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  81. Poole, Steven. 2020a, April 16. ‘Frontline’: is it misleading to apply military metaphors to medicine? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/apr/16/frontline-is-it-misleading-to-apply-military-metaphors-to-medicine (accessed 17 April 2020)
  82. Poole, Steven. 2020b, August 15. From ‘alert’ to ‘zoom’: Steven Poole’s lexicon of lockdown. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/15/from-alert-to-zoom-steven-pooles-lexicon-of-lockdown (accessed 20 March 2019)
  83. Ray, Saptarshi. 2014, April 16. Found in translation ... when misquoting someone is the best way to be fair and accurate. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/media/mind-your-language/2014/apr/16/mind-your-language-quote-unquote, (accessed 30 April 2020)
  84. Simons, Margret. 2015. What’s with all the war metaphors? We have wars when politics fails. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/17/whats-with-all-the-war-metaphors-we-have-wars-when-politics-fails (accessed 10 March 2023)

© Абдель-Рахим А., 2024

Creative Commons License
Эта статья доступна по лицензии Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Данный сайт использует cookie-файлы

Продолжая использовать наш сайт, вы даете согласие на обработку файлов cookie, которые обеспечивают правильную работу сайта.

О куки-файлах