The Role of Event Knowledge in Comprehending Synesthetic Metaphors
The Role of Event Knowledge in Comprehending Synesthetic Metaphors
复制标题
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Tetsuaki Nakamura;Maki Sakamoto;A. Utsumi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Tetsuaki Nakamura;Maki Sakamoto;A. Utsumi
事件知识在理解联觉隐喻中的作用中村哲明电子通信大学人类传播系1-5-1，Chofushi，东京182-8585，日本Sakamoto(Sakamoto@hc.uec.ac.jp)东京电子通信大学信息学系1-5-1，Chofugaoka，Chofushi，东京182-8585日本摘要通感隐喻(如“甜蜜的触摸”)是一种修饰语和中心语的组合，它们表达不同的感知品质。现有的研究大多考察了形容词修饰语和中心名词的情态搭配如何解释通感隐喻的可接受性。然而，人们对通感隐喻的理解却鲜有人关注。本文探讨了人们对日语通感隐喻的理解。在我们的心理实验中，我们收集了与62个通感隐喻相关的10388个单词，并将其分为以下四种特征：共性(为隐喻、喻体和主题列出的特征)，车辆共享(为隐喻和喻体列出的特征，但没有为主题列出)，话题共享(为隐喻和主题列出的特征，但没有为喻体列出的特征)和突现(为隐喻列出的特征，但没有为隐喻或主题列出的特征)。结果表明，在通感隐喻的理解中，突现特征显著多于其他类型的特征。这一结果表明，我们并不能很直接地理解基于喻体或话题的显著特征的通感隐喻。在本文中，事件知识被认为在理解通感隐喻中起着至关重要的作用。我们分析了与通感隐喻相关的词汇中有多少可以归类为基于事件知识的词汇。结果表明，基于事件知识的词汇显著多于不能归类为基于事件知识的词汇。这一结果表明，事件知识在理解通感隐喻中起着重要的作用。关键词：通感隐喻；日语；事件知识；词汇联想；涌现特征。前言“甜蜜的触觉”或“甜美的声音”等合成隐喻是形容词隐喻的一种，其中表示某种感觉情态的形容词修饰了名词的情态。认知科学领域的隐喻研究很少或根本没有注意到形容词隐喻。许多现有的研究都注意到了名词性隐喻(如Bowdle&Gentner，2005；GLucksberg，2001；Jones&Estes，2006；UtSumi，2007)和表述性隐喻(如Lakoff&Johnson，1980；Martin，1992)等名词性隐喻。很多研究都集中在联觉隐喻上，包括Werning等人。(2006)，考察了形容词修饰语和中心名词的情态搭配如何解释通感隐喻的可接受性。Ullmann(1951)在对联觉隐喻的早期研究中提出了较低层次和较高层次的知觉通道。他认为，较低感觉(如触觉)的性质应优先出现在源域(即形容词)，而较高(如视觉)感觉的性质应优先出现在目标领域(即名词)。在乌尔曼之后，Williams(1976)提出了一个更具差异性的方向性主张，其中提出了一个类似的感觉通道顺序。Werning等人。(2006)探讨了提高德语通感隐喻认知可及性的因素。然而，很少有研究试图探索人们是如何理解通感隐喻的。UtSumi&Sakamoto(2007a)是为数不多的探索人们如何理解联觉隐喻的研究之一。他们提出了两阶段范畴化理论，认为包括通感隐喻在内的形容词隐喻的理解过程可以解释为一个两阶段范畴化过程。两阶段分类背后的直观思想是，形容词字面上表达的属性与要映射到名词上的属性之间的对应将是间接的，由中间类别中介。例如，在“红色声音”的例子中，形容词“红色”首先让人联想到一个中间类别“红色的东西”，“血”、“火”、“激情”、“苹果”和“危险”通常属于这个类别。然后选择与名词“声音”相关的样本，它们唤起最后一个抽象的属性类别，如“可怕的”、“尖叫的”和“危险的”。然而，他们没有提到中间范畴和名词之间的关系，也没有提到选择某些范例的详细过程，因为那些与名词相关的范例没有被探索。
The Role of Event Knowledge in Comprehending Synesthetic Metaphors Tetsuaki Nakamura (tatnakac@edu.hc.uec.ac.jp) Department of Human Communication, The University of Electro-Communications 1-5-1, Chofugaoka, Chofushi, Tokyo 182-8585, Japan Maki Sakamoto (sakamoto@hc.uec.ac.jp) Department of Informatics, The University of Electro-Communications 1-5-1, Chofugaoka, Chofushi, Tokyo 182-8585, Japan Akira Utsumi (utsumi@se.uec.ac.jp) Department of Informatics, The University of Electro-Communications 1-5-1, Chofugaoka, Chofushi, Tokyo 182-8585, Japan Abstract A synesthetic metaphor (e.g., “sweet touch”) is a metaphor that results from a combination of a modifier and a head, where they express different perceptual qualities. Most of the existing studies examine how the acceptability of synesthetic metaphors can be explained by the pairing of adjective modifier’s and head noun’s modalities. However, little attention has been paid to how people comprehend synesthetic metaphors. This paper explores how people comprehend Japanese synesthetic metaphors. In our psychological experiment we collected 10388 words associated with 62 synesthetic metaphors and classified them into the following four kinds of features: common (features listed for the metaphor, the vehicle and the topic), vehicle- shared (features listed for both the metaphor and the vehicle, but not listed for the topic), topic-shared (features listed for both the metaphor and the topic, but not listed for the vehicle), and emergent (features listed for the metaphor, but not listed for either the vehicle or the topic). The result showed that there were significantly more emergent features than the other kinds of features in the comprehension of synesthetic metaphors. This result suggests that we do not so directly comprehend synesthetic metaphors based on salient features of the vehicle or the topic. In this paper we focus on event knowledge which is assumed to play a crucial role in comprehending synesthetic metaphors. We analyzed how many words associated with synesthetic metaphors could be classified into those based on event knowledge. The results showed that there were significantly more words based on event knowledge than those which could not be classified as words based on event knowledge. This result suggests that event knowledge play an important role in comprehending synesthetic metaphors. Keywords: synesthetic metaphors; Japanese language; event knowledge; words association; emergent features. Introduction Synesthetic metaphors such as “sweet touch” or “sweet voice” are one kind of adjective metaphor, in which an adjective denoting the perception of some sense modality modifies a noun’s modality. Metaphor studies in the domain of cognitive science have paid little or no attention to adjective metaphors. Many existing studies have paid much attention to nominal metaphors such as “My job is a jail” (e.g., Bowdle & Gentner, 2005; Glucksberg, 2001; Jones & Estes, 2006; Utsumi, 2007) and predicative metaphors such as “He shot down all of my arguments” (e.g., Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Martin, 1992). Many studies focusing on synesthetic metaphors, including Werning et al. (2006), have examined how the acceptability of synesthetic metaphors can be explained by the pairing of adjective modifier’s and head noun’s modalities. Ullmann (1951), in a very early study on synesthetic metaphors, proposes a certain hierarchy of lower and higher perceptual modalities. He claims that qualities of lower (e.g., tactile) senses should preferentially occur in the source domain (i.e., adjective), while qualities of higher (e.g., optic) senses should be preferred in the target domain (i.e., noun). After Ullmann, Williams (1976) makes a more differentiated claim of directionality, in which a similar order of sense modalities is proposed. Werning et al. (2006) explores the factors that enhance the cognitive accessibility of synesthetic metaphors for the German language. Very few studies, however, have attempted to explore how people comprehend synesthetic metaphors. Utsumi & Sakamoto (2007a) is one of the few studies to have explored how people comprehend synesthetic metaphors. They proposed a two-stage categorization theory and argued that the comprehension process of adjective metaphors including synesthetic metaphors could be explained as a two-stage categorization process. The intuitive idea behind two-stage categorization is that correspondences between the properties literally expressed by the adjective and the properties to be mapped onto the noun would be indirect, mediated by an intermediate category. In the case of “red voice”, for example, the adjective “red” first evokes an intermediate category “red things,” to which “blood,” “fire,” “passion,” “apple” and “danger” typically belong. Then exemplars relevant to the noun “voice” are selected and they evoke a final abstract category of property like “scary,” “screaming” and “dangerous.” However, they did not mention the relationship between the intermediate category and the noun and the detailed process in which certain exemplars are selected as those relevant to the noun was left unexplored.