1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Foreign Languages and Literature
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 身體部位詞「嘴」、「唇」、「舌」及「齒」之詞組表現：以語料庫為本之研究
A Corpus-based Study on Body-part Phraseologies: MOUTH, LIP, TONGUE and TOOTH
作者 陳欣愉
Chen, Hsin-Yu
貢獻者 鍾曉芳
Chung, Siaw-Fong
陳欣愉
Chen, Hsin-Yu
關鍵詞 詞組研究
身體部位詞
詞組及語意
單數
複數
Phraseology
Body-part expression
Pattern and meaning
Singular form
Plural form
日期 2024
上傳時間 4-Sep-2024 13:55:28 (UTC+8)
摘要 人類的身體是我們用以理解周圍世界的概念基礎，而此體現同時影響了我們的認知及語言使用，因此，身體部位在語言上的呈現可用以表達許多觀念，例如位置、時間、情緒、態度等等。過往許多研究都基於認知語言學的理論框架來研究身體部位詞的用法，特別針對字典中的慣用語，尤其是非字面意義的身體部位詞組提出解釋，而這些非字面上的語意通常經由隱喻、轉喻、兩者的結合所產生。然而，身體部位詞在真實語境中的用法卻受到較少注意，尤其是它們常用的詞組、詞組的語意以及詞組偏好單複數詞形之間的關係。 為補足先前研究之不足，本研究旨在對身體部位詞提出更周詳觀察，我們將目標鎖定在四個發音器官：嘴巴(MOUTH)、嘴唇(LIP)、舌頭(TONGUE)、牙齒 (TOOTH)，因為先前很少有研究對它們提出系統性的比較。為觀察真實語言使用， 我們從美國當代英語語料庫提取語料。由於此四個發音器官詞非常高頻，數量眾多，本研究的語料分析分為兩階段：「詞組觀察」及「詞組確認」。在所觀察到的 詞組中，我們首先將詞組分為「已知詞組」及「新增詞組」，接著在各組中，更進 一步將詞組依照他們的語意分類。研究結果指出，在真實語境中這四個詞最常使用 的詞組之語意與言辭、說話及對特定事件的身體反應相關。本研究另外發現其它帶 有模糊語意的詞組符合 Kövecses (2000)所提出的借喻 – PHYSIOLOGICAL AND EXPRESSIVE RESPONSES OF AN EMOTION STAND FOR THE EMOTION。此外，詞組之單複數 使用可能受以下因素影響：發音器官的固有特性、詞組的語意強調、語法限制或慣用語的使用常規。
The human body serves as a conceptual basis through which we understand the world around us. This embodied experience affects our cognition as well as our language. Words or phrases of body parts are accordingly commonly used in daily language to convey various notions such as location, time, emotion, attitude, and so on. Much research has investigated body-part expressions, particularly those documented in dictionaries, such as idioms, within the cognitive theoretical framework. While past studies have significantly contributed to unveiling the cognitive processes of those body- part expressions with non-literal meanings, such as metaphor, metonymy, or the blend of the two, little attention has been paid to their use in authentic contexts. Particularly, the relationship between their patterns, the meanings of these patterns, and the preferred forms (i.e., singular or plural) of the patterns has not been fully explored. To bridge the gaps, this study aims to provide a comprehensive investigation into body-part expressions, focusing on their frequent patterns, forms and meanings. The targets of this study are four speech-organ words MOUTH, LIP, TONGUE, and TOOTH, as there has been limited research providing a systematic comparison among them. To achieve these goals, we extracted naturally occurring data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). Due to the large numbers of these four speech-organ words, the data analysis contains two stages: pattern observation and pattern confirmation. The identified patterns were initially grouped into documented patterns and additional patterns. Within each group, these patterns were further categorized based on their meanings. The results reveal that the most frequent patterns in authentic contexts are associated with spoken words, the act of speaking, and physical responses to certain events. This study also discovered additional patterns with ambiguous meanings that conform to the metonymy PHYSIOLOGICAL AND EXPRESSIVE RESPONSES OF AN EMOTION STAND FOR THE EMOTION (Kövecses, 2000). Moreover, the preferred and exclusive use of singular or plural forms may be attributed to the natural characteristics of the speech organ, semantic emphasis of the pattern, grammatical constraint, or idiomatic convention.
參考文獻 Bagasheva, A. (2017). Cultural Conceptualisations of MOUTH, LIPS, TONGUE and TEETH in Bulgarian and English. In F. Sharifian, Advances in Cultural Linguisitcs (pp. 189-221). Singapore: Springer. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4056-6_10 Black, M. (1955). Metaphor. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 55(1), 273-294. Black, M. (1993). More about metaphor. In A. Ortony, Metaphor and thought (pp. 19-41). Cambridge University Press. Cameron, L. J. (2007). Patterns of metaphor use in reconciliation talk. Discourse & Society, 18(2), 197-222. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926507073376 Charteris-Black, J. (2003). Speaking with forked tongue: A comparative study of metaphor and metonymy in English and Malay phraseology. Metaphor and symbol, 18(4), 289-310. doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1804_5 Cheng , W., Greaves, C., & Warren, M. (2006). From n-gram to skipgram to congram. nternational journal of corpus linguistics, 11(4), 411-433. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.11.4.04che Croft, W. (2002). The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings. De Gruyter Mouton. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.2.161 Deignan, A., & Potter, L. (2004). A corpus study of metaphors and metonyms in English and Italian. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(7), 1231-1252. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.010 Ellis, N. C. (2008). The periphery and the heart of language. Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective. In Granger, S., & Meunier, F, Phraseology in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 1-13). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/z.138 Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2003). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities. Basic Books. Firth, J. R. (1957). A synopsisheory of linguistic theory, 1930-1955. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Fletcher, W. (2012). kfNgram. From http://kwicfinder.com/kfNgram/kfNgramHelp.html Geeraerts, D. (2009). Theories of Lexical Semantics. Oxford University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198700302.001.0001 Gibbs Jr, R. W. (2003). Embodied experience and linguistic meaning. Brain and Language, 84(1), 1-15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00517-5 Gibbs Jr, R. W., Lima, P. C., & Francozo, E. (2004). Metaphor is grounded in embodied experience. Journal of pragmatics, 36(7), 1189-1210. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.009 Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Construction: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure . Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Goossens, L. (1990). Metaphtonymy: the interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(3), 323-340. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.323 Grady, J. E. (1997). Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. University Microfilms. Granger, S., & Meunier, F. (2008). Introduction: the many faces of phraseology. In S. Granger, & F. Meunier, Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. XIX-XXVIII). Amsterdam / Philadelphis: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/z.139.04gra Group Pragglejaz. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1-39. Hsu, H.-l. (2017). Word Component Structures, Meaning Distribution and Lexicalization: Linguisitc Usages Containing Body-Part Terms lian/mian, yan/mu and zui/kou in Taiwan Mandarin. Master's thesis. Taipei, Taiwan: National Chengchi University. Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524773 Hunston, S., & Francis, G. (2000). Pattern Grammar: A corpus-driven approachto the lexical grammar of English. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.4 Hunston, S., & Su, H. (2017). Patterns, constructions, and local grammar: A case study of ‘evaluation’. Applied Linguistics, 40(4), 567-593. doi: doi:10.1093/applin/amx046 Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. University of Chicago press. Kövecses, Z. (2000). Metaphor and Emotion: Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kövecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. Kövecses, Z. (2013). The Metaphor–Metonymy Relationship: Correlation Metaphors Are Based on Metonymy. Metaphor and Symbol, 28(2), 75-88. doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2013.768498 Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Cambridge University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859127 Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: the Embodied Mind & its Challenge to Western Thought. Basic Books. doi: 10.5860/choice.37-0239 Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by. London: The university of Chicago press. Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. New York : Oxford University Press Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and the way forward. Language Teaching Publication Lindquist, H., & Levin, M. (2008). Foot and mouth: Them phrasal patterns of two frequent nouns. In S. Granger, & F. Meunier, Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective . Amsterdam / Philadelphia, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/z.139.15lin Li, J., & Ye, T. (2023). Patterns and functions of I in academic writing: From a local grammar approach. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 61, 101186. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101186 Moon, R. (1998). Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English : A Corpus-Based Approach. New York, the United States: Oxford University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198236146.001.0001 Nissen, U. K. (2011). Contrasting body parts: metaphors and metonymies of MOUTH in English, Danish and Spanish. In Z. Maalej , & N. Yu, Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages cultures (pp. 71-92). Amsterdam / Philadephia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.31.07nis Patterson, K. J. (2018). Understanding metaphor through corpora: A case study of metaphors in nineteenth century writing. Routledge. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351241090 Pustejovsky, J. (1998). The generative lexicon. Computational Linguisitcs, 17(4), 409-441. doi: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3225.001.0001 Radden, G. (2001). The folk model of language. Metaphorik.de, 01, 55-86. Radden, G. (2002). How metonymic are metaphors? In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings, Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 407-434). New York: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.3.407 Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z. (2006). Towards a Theory of Metonymy. Metonymy in language and thought, 4, 17-60. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.03rad Sharifian, F. (2017). Cultural linguisitcs: the state of the art. In F. Sharifian, Advances in Cultural Linguistics. Singapore: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-4056- 6_1 Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford University Press. Steen, G. (2008). When is metaphor deliberate? Second Metaphor Festival. Stockholm. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0001 Steen, G. (2011). The contemporary theory of metaphor—now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Published under the auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association, 6(1), 26-64. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.9.1.03ste Steen, G. (2017). Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues. Intercultural Pragmatics, 14(1), 1-24. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0001 Steen, G. (2023). Thinking by metaphor, fast and slow: Deliberate Metaphor Theory offers a new model for metaphor and its comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology(14), 1-16. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1242888 Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2010). A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amesterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 Stern, J. (2000). Metaphor in context. Cambridge, Massachusetts, England: The MIT Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4568.001.0001 Stubbs, M. (2007a). An example of frequent English phraseology: distributions, structures and functions. In R. Facchinetti, Corpus Linguistics 25 Years on. Amsterdam: Brill. Stubbs, M. (2007b). Quantitative data on multi-word sequences in English: The case of the word 'world'. In M. Hoey, M. Mahlberg, M. Stubbs, & W. Teubert, Text, Discourse and Corpora: Theory and Analysis. London: Continuum. Stubbs, M. (2009). The Search for Units of Meaning: Sinclair on Empirical Semantics. Applied Linguistics, 30(1), 115-137. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn052 Su, H. (2017). Local grammars of speech acts: An exploratory study. Journal of Pragmatics, 111, 72-83. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.02.008 Su, H. (2020). Patterns, local grammars, and the design of English teaching. materials. ELT Journal, 74(1), 73-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccz046 Su, H., & Wei, N. (2018). “I’m really sorry about what I said” A local grammar of apology. Pragmatics, 28(3), 439-462. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.17005.su Su, H., & Zhang, L. (2020). Local grammars and discourse acts in academic writing: A case study of exemplification in Linguistics research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 43, 100805. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100805 Trantescu, A. M. (2018). English mouth idioms and their Romanian equivalents: A cognitive perspective. Annals of the University of Craiova, Series: Philology, English, 1(XIX), 173-186. Wilks, Y. (2005). REVEAL: the notion of anomalous texts in a very large corpus. Tuscan Word Centre International Workshop, (p. 83). Tuscany, Italy. Yu, N. (2011). Speech organs and linguistic activity/function in Chinese. In Z. Maalej, & N. Yu, Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages cultures (pp. 117-148). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: http://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.31.10yu Zhang, L., Jiang, R., & Zhang, J. (2024). ‘Table 1 shows that...’: A local grammar of graphic data commentary in discourse of Economics. English for Specific Purposes, 74, 68-81. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2024.01.001
描述 博士
國立政治大學
英國語文學系
104551504
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104551504
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 鍾曉芳zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Chung, Siaw-Fongen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 陳欣愉zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chen, Hsin-Yuen_US
dc.creator (作者) 陳欣愉zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Chen, Hsin-Yuen_US
dc.date (日期) 2024en_US
dc.date.accessioned 4-Sep-2024 13:55:28 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 4-Sep-2024 13:55:28 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 4-Sep-2024 13:55:28 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0104551504en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/153123-
dc.description (描述) 博士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 英國語文學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 104551504zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 人類的身體是我們用以理解周圍世界的概念基礎，而此體現同時影響了我們的認知及語言使用，因此，身體部位在語言上的呈現可用以表達許多觀念，例如位置、時間、情緒、態度等等。過往許多研究都基於認知語言學的理論框架來研究身體部位詞的用法，特別針對字典中的慣用語，尤其是非字面意義的身體部位詞組提出解釋，而這些非字面上的語意通常經由隱喻、轉喻、兩者的結合所產生。然而，身體部位詞在真實語境中的用法卻受到較少注意，尤其是它們常用的詞組、詞組的語意以及詞組偏好單複數詞形之間的關係。 為補足先前研究之不足，本研究旨在對身體部位詞提出更周詳觀察，我們將目標鎖定在四個發音器官：嘴巴(MOUTH)、嘴唇(LIP)、舌頭(TONGUE)、牙齒 (TOOTH)，因為先前很少有研究對它們提出系統性的比較。為觀察真實語言使用， 我們從美國當代英語語料庫提取語料。由於此四個發音器官詞非常高頻，數量眾多，本研究的語料分析分為兩階段：「詞組觀察」及「詞組確認」。在所觀察到的 詞組中，我們首先將詞組分為「已知詞組」及「新增詞組」，接著在各組中，更進 一步將詞組依照他們的語意分類。研究結果指出，在真實語境中這四個詞最常使用 的詞組之語意與言辭、說話及對特定事件的身體反應相關。本研究另外發現其它帶 有模糊語意的詞組符合 Kövecses (2000)所提出的借喻 – PHYSIOLOGICAL AND EXPRESSIVE RESPONSES OF AN EMOTION STAND FOR THE EMOTION。此外，詞組之單複數 使用可能受以下因素影響：發音器官的固有特性、詞組的語意強調、語法限制或慣用語的使用常規。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) The human body serves as a conceptual basis through which we understand the world around us. This embodied experience affects our cognition as well as our language. Words or phrases of body parts are accordingly commonly used in daily language to convey various notions such as location, time, emotion, attitude, and so on. Much research has investigated body-part expressions, particularly those documented in dictionaries, such as idioms, within the cognitive theoretical framework. While past studies have significantly contributed to unveiling the cognitive processes of those body- part expressions with non-literal meanings, such as metaphor, metonymy, or the blend of the two, little attention has been paid to their use in authentic contexts. Particularly, the relationship between their patterns, the meanings of these patterns, and the preferred forms (i.e., singular or plural) of the patterns has not been fully explored. To bridge the gaps, this study aims to provide a comprehensive investigation into body-part expressions, focusing on their frequent patterns, forms and meanings. The targets of this study are four speech-organ words MOUTH, LIP, TONGUE, and TOOTH, as there has been limited research providing a systematic comparison among them. To achieve these goals, we extracted naturally occurring data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). Due to the large numbers of these four speech-organ words, the data analysis contains two stages: pattern observation and pattern confirmation. The identified patterns were initially grouped into documented patterns and additional patterns. Within each group, these patterns were further categorized based on their meanings. The results reveal that the most frequent patterns in authentic contexts are associated with spoken words, the act of speaking, and physical responses to certain events. This study also discovered additional patterns with ambiguous meanings that conform to the metonymy PHYSIOLOGICAL AND EXPRESSIVE RESPONSES OF AN EMOTION STAND FOR THE EMOTION (Kövecses, 2000). Moreover, the preferred and exclusive use of singular or plural forms may be attributed to the natural characteristics of the speech organ, semantic emphasis of the pattern, grammatical constraint, or idiomatic convention.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I CHINESE ABSTRACT IV ENGLISH ABSTRACT VI LIST OF FIGURES X LIST OF TABLES XI CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION OF THE STUDY 1 1.2 TERMINOLOGY OF THE STUDY 7 1.3 PURPOSES AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS OF THE STUDY 9 1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 10 1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY 11 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 13 2.1 METAPHOR AND METONYMY 13 2.1.1 Metaphor Theories 14 2.1.2 Metonymy Theories 17 2.1.3 The Dichotomy or the Continuum 19 2.2 EXPRESSIONS OF MOUTH, LIP, TONGUE AND TOOTH 24 2.3 THE NATURE OF PHRASEOLOGY 33 2.4 SUMMARY AND GAP OF THE PREVIOUS RESEARCH 37 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 39 3.1 THE CORPUS 39 3.2 DATA COLLECTION 39 3.3 FIRST STAGE OF DATA ANALYSIS: PATTERN OBSERVATION 48 3.3.1 Locating the Target Phrases 49 3.3.2 Determining the Meanings of the Target Phrases 49 3.3.3 Observing the Target Phrases and Generalizing them into Patterns 52 3.4 SECOND STAGE OF DATA ANALYSIS: PATTERN CONFIRMATION 58 3.4.1 Searching the Patterns in the Corpus 59 3.4.2 Classifying the Patterns 59 3.5 SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER 61 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS OF MOUTH 63 4.1 THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PATTERNS OF MOUTH 63 4.2 THE DOCUMENTED PATTERNS OF MOUTH 65 4.3 THE ADDITIONAL PATTERNS OF MOUTH 85 4.4 SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER 100 CHAPTER 5 FINDINGS OF LIP 103 5.1 THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PATTERNS OF LIP 103 5.2 THE DOCUMENTED PATTERNS OF LIP 105 5.3 THE ADDITIONAL PATTERNS OF LIP 119 5.4 SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER 134 CHAPTER 6 FINDINGS OF TONGUE 137 6.1 THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PATTERNS OF TONGUE 137 6.2 THE DOCUMENTED PATTERNS OF TONGUE 138 6.3 THE ADDITIONAL PATTERNS OF TONGUE 150 6.4 SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER 163 CHAPTER 7 FINDINGS OF TOOTH 165 7.1 THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PATTERN OF TOOTH 165 7.2 THE DOCUMENTED PATTERNS OF TOOTH 166 7.3 THE ADDITIONAL PATTERNS OF TOOTH 181 7.4 SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER 192 CHAPTER 8 DISCUSSION 195 8.1 THE PREFERRED FORMS OF THE PATTERNS 195 8.2 THE PATTERNS WITH AMBIGUOUS MEANINGS 200 CHAPTER 9 CONCLUSION 203 9.1 SUMMARY OF THIS STUDY 203 9.2 IMPLICATIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS 206 9.3 LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE STUDIES 207 REFERENCES 211 APPENDICE 217 APPENDIX A EXPRESSIONS CONTAINING MOUTH IN REFERENCE DICTIONARIES 217 APPENDIX B EXPRESSIONS CONTAINING LIP IN REFERENCE DICTIONARIES 219 APPENDIX C EXPRESSIONS CONTAINING TONGUE IN REFERENCE DICTIONARIES 220 APPENDIX C EXPRESSIONS CONTAINING TONGUE IN REFERENCE DICTIONARIES 221zh_TW
dc.format.extent 4003585 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104551504en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 詞組研究zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 身體部位詞zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 詞組及語意zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 單數zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 複數zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Phraseologyen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Body-part expressionen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Pattern and meaningen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Singular formen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Plural formen_US
dc.title (題名) 身體部位詞「嘴」、「唇」、「舌」及「齒」之詞組表現：以語料庫為本之研究zh_TW
dc.title (題名) A Corpus-based Study on Body-part Phraseologies: MOUTH, LIP, TONGUE and TOOTHen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Bagasheva, A. (2017). Cultural Conceptualisations of MOUTH, LIPS, TONGUE and TEETH in Bulgarian and English. In F. Sharifian, Advances in Cultural Linguisitcs (pp. 189-221). Singapore: Springer. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4056-6_10 Black, M. (1955). Metaphor. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 55(1), 273-294. Black, M. (1993). More about metaphor. In A. Ortony, Metaphor and thought (pp. 19-41). Cambridge University Press. Cameron, L. J. (2007). Patterns of metaphor use in reconciliation talk. Discourse & Society, 18(2), 197-222. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926507073376 Charteris-Black, J. (2003). Speaking with forked tongue: A comparative study of metaphor and metonymy in English and Malay phraseology. Metaphor and symbol, 18(4), 289-310. doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1804_5 Cheng , W., Greaves, C., & Warren, M. (2006). From n-gram to skipgram to congram. nternational journal of corpus linguistics, 11(4), 411-433. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.11.4.04che Croft, W. (2002). The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings. De Gruyter Mouton. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.2.161 Deignan, A., & Potter, L. (2004). A corpus study of metaphors and metonyms in English and Italian. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(7), 1231-1252. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.010 Ellis, N. C. (2008). The periphery and the heart of language. Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective. In Granger, S., & Meunier, F, Phraseology in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 1-13). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/z.138 Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2003). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities. Basic Books. Firth, J. R. (1957). A synopsisheory of linguistic theory, 1930-1955. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Fletcher, W. (2012). kfNgram. From http://kwicfinder.com/kfNgram/kfNgramHelp.html Geeraerts, D. (2009). Theories of Lexical Semantics. Oxford University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198700302.001.0001 Gibbs Jr, R. W. (2003). Embodied experience and linguistic meaning. Brain and Language, 84(1), 1-15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00517-5 Gibbs Jr, R. W., Lima, P. C., & Francozo, E. (2004). Metaphor is grounded in embodied experience. Journal of pragmatics, 36(7), 1189-1210. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.009 Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Construction: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure . Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Goossens, L. (1990). Metaphtonymy: the interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(3), 323-340. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.323 Grady, J. E. (1997). Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. University Microfilms. Granger, S., & Meunier, F. (2008). Introduction: the many faces of phraseology. In S. Granger, & F. Meunier, Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. XIX-XXVIII). Amsterdam / Philadelphis: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/z.139.04gra Group Pragglejaz. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1-39. Hsu, H.-l. (2017). Word Component Structures, Meaning Distribution and Lexicalization: Linguisitc Usages Containing Body-Part Terms lian/mian, yan/mu and zui/kou in Taiwan Mandarin. Master's thesis. Taipei, Taiwan: National Chengchi University. Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524773 Hunston, S., & Francis, G. (2000). Pattern Grammar: A corpus-driven approachto the lexical grammar of English. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.4 Hunston, S., & Su, H. (2017). Patterns, constructions, and local grammar: A case study of ‘evaluation’. Applied Linguistics, 40(4), 567-593. doi: doi:10.1093/applin/amx046 Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. University of Chicago press. Kövecses, Z. (2000). Metaphor and Emotion: Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kövecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. Kövecses, Z. (2013). The Metaphor–Metonymy Relationship: Correlation Metaphors Are Based on Metonymy. Metaphor and Symbol, 28(2), 75-88. doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2013.768498 Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Cambridge University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859127 Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: the Embodied Mind & its Challenge to Western Thought. Basic Books. doi: 10.5860/choice.37-0239 Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by. London: The university of Chicago press. Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. New York : Oxford University Press Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and the way forward. Language Teaching Publication Lindquist, H., & Levin, M. (2008). Foot and mouth: Them phrasal patterns of two frequent nouns. In S. Granger, & F. Meunier, Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective . Amsterdam / Philadelphia, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/z.139.15lin Li, J., & Ye, T. (2023). Patterns and functions of I in academic writing: From a local grammar approach. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 61, 101186. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101186 Moon, R. (1998). Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English : A Corpus-Based Approach. New York, the United States: Oxford University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198236146.001.0001 Nissen, U. K. (2011). Contrasting body parts: metaphors and metonymies of MOUTH in English, Danish and Spanish. In Z. Maalej , & N. Yu, Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages cultures (pp. 71-92). Amsterdam / Philadephia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.31.07nis Patterson, K. J. (2018). Understanding metaphor through corpora: A case study of metaphors in nineteenth century writing. Routledge. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351241090 Pustejovsky, J. (1998). The generative lexicon. Computational Linguisitcs, 17(4), 409-441. doi: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3225.001.0001 Radden, G. (2001). The folk model of language. Metaphorik.de, 01, 55-86. Radden, G. (2002). How metonymic are metaphors? In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings, Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 407-434). New York: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.3.407 Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z. (2006). Towards a Theory of Metonymy. Metonymy in language and thought, 4, 17-60. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.03rad Sharifian, F. (2017). Cultural linguisitcs: the state of the art. In F. Sharifian, Advances in Cultural Linguistics. Singapore: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-4056- 6_1 Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford University Press. Steen, G. (2008). When is metaphor deliberate? Second Metaphor Festival. Stockholm. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0001 Steen, G. (2011). The contemporary theory of metaphor—now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Published under the auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association, 6(1), 26-64. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.9.1.03ste Steen, G. (2017). Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues. Intercultural Pragmatics, 14(1), 1-24. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0001 Steen, G. (2023). Thinking by metaphor, fast and slow: Deliberate Metaphor Theory offers a new model for metaphor and its comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology(14), 1-16. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1242888 Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2010). A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amesterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 Stern, J. (2000). Metaphor in context. Cambridge, Massachusetts, England: The MIT Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4568.001.0001 Stubbs, M. (2007a). An example of frequent English phraseology: distributions, structures and functions. In R. Facchinetti, Corpus Linguistics 25 Years on. Amsterdam: Brill. Stubbs, M. (2007b). Quantitative data on multi-word sequences in English: The case of the word 'world'. In M. Hoey, M. Mahlberg, M. Stubbs, & W. Teubert, Text, Discourse and Corpora: Theory and Analysis. London: Continuum. Stubbs, M. (2009). The Search for Units of Meaning: Sinclair on Empirical Semantics. Applied Linguistics, 30(1), 115-137. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn052 Su, H. (2017). Local grammars of speech acts: An exploratory study. Journal of Pragmatics, 111, 72-83. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.02.008 Su, H. (2020). Patterns, local grammars, and the design of English teaching. materials. ELT Journal, 74(1), 73-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccz046 Su, H., & Wei, N. (2018). “I’m really sorry about what I said” A local grammar of apology. Pragmatics, 28(3), 439-462. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.17005.su Su, H., & Zhang, L. (2020). Local grammars and discourse acts in academic writing: A case study of exemplification in Linguistics research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 43, 100805. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100805 Trantescu, A. M. (2018). English mouth idioms and their Romanian equivalents: A cognitive perspective. Annals of the University of Craiova, Series: Philology, English, 1(XIX), 173-186. Wilks, Y. (2005). REVEAL: the notion of anomalous texts in a very large corpus. Tuscan Word Centre International Workshop, (p. 83). Tuscany, Italy. Yu, N. (2011). Speech organs and linguistic activity/function in Chinese. In Z. Maalej, & N. Yu, Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages cultures (pp. 117-148). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: http://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.31.10yu Zhang, L., Jiang, R., & Zhang, J. (2024). ‘Table 1 shows that...’: A local grammar of graphic data commentary in discourse of Economics. English for Specific Purposes, 74, 68-81. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2024.01.001zh_TW