1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. 外國語文學院
  4. 學位論文
  5. Item

學術產出-學位論文

文章檢視/開啟

書目匯出

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

引文資訊

TAIR相關學術產出

題名 從隱喻與轉喻的觀點看人類思考過程的中文辭彙體現
Lexical Manifestation of Human Thinking Process in Mandarin:A Metaphoric and Metonymic Account
作者 高惠珊
Gao, Hui-shan
貢獻者 賴惠玲
Lai, Huei-Ling
高惠珊
Gao, Hui-shan
關鍵詞 思考過程
隱喻
轉喻
認知語意機制
thinking process
metaphor
metonymy
cognitive mechanism
日期 2004
上傳時間 17-九月-2009 16:28:19 (UTC+8)
摘要 本研究旨在探究有關「思考｣ 的中文辭彙，藉以一窺人類思考過程的全貌，並進一步透過隱喻與轉喻等認知語意機制 (參看Kövecses and Radden 1998, Lakoff 1993, Ruiz de Mendoza 2000, Diez Velasco’s 2003等人之論著)，分析人類思考過程的中文辭彙體現。
首先，我們修改認知心理學中所提的訊息處理模型 (參看Palmer and Kimchi 1986, Sternberg 1969, and Neisser 1967等人之論著)，根據修改過後的模型，得到人類思考過程的中文辭彙體現可分為七種類型。在進一步分析後發現，有關「思考｣ 的中文辭彙所牽涉的認知語意機制包括Lakoff (1993)提出的隱喻類型，Kövecses & Radden (1998)及Diez Velasco’s (2003)提出的轉喻類型，及Ruiz de Mendoza (2003)所提出來的隱喻和轉喻的交互模式，而本研究另外發現需透過三重轉喻及兩個新的隱喻和轉喻的交互模式才能完整建立起人類思考過程的中文辭彙體現的字面語意與其象徵語意之間的連結。
In this study, we intend to claim that the backstage cognition of thinking process, through linguistic manifestation, can be explicitly detected with six dynamic continuing stages. In addition, each stage reifies itself with linguistic expressions of concrete observable parts or organs of body, which in turn demonstrate that lexical manifestation of thinking is heavily based on such mechanisms as metaphor and metonymy. (cf. Kövecses and Radden 1998, Lakoff 1993, Ruiz de Mendoza 2000, Diez Velasco’s 2003).
First of all, we refine the information processing model proposed in cognitive psychology (cf. Palmer and Kimchi 1986, Sternberg 1969, and Neisser 1967). Based on the refined model, the Mandarin lexical reification of thinking is claimed to fall into six stages corresponding to six types. A special case linking two or more stages is observed as the seventh type.
Then, we probe into the linguistic data from the seven types of thinking. The analysis discovers that a full explanation of those linguistic data from the six stages of the thinking process requires the activation of some types of metaphor. We have also found metonymy provides mental access to thinking activities.
As to the interaction of metonymy, the three types of double metonymy are not sufficient to account for the lexical manifestation of thinking. Triple metonymy also needs to be employed to explain the meaning derivations of the data.
Finally, it is found that the three interaction models of metaphor and metonymy are insufficient to cover all the possible interactions of cognitive mechanisms behind the lexical manifestation of thinking in Mandarin. This study reveals two new interaction models not mentioned by Ruiz de Mendoza (2000).
參考文獻 1. English Version
Ashcraft, Mark H. 1994. Human memory and cognition. Human memory and cognition
Atkinson, R. and Shiffrin, R. 1968. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 2), ed by K Spence and J Spence. New York: Academic Press.
Best, John B. 1999. Cognitive psychology. Brooks/ Cole Wadsworth
Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hagne, Mouton.
________.1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, MIT. Press, Cambridge, Mass.
________.1980. Rules and Representations, Blackwell, Oxford.
Dijk, T.A. van and Kintsch, W. 1983. Strategies of Discourse Comprehension, Academic Press, New York.
Fortescue, Micheal. 2001. Thoughts about thought. Cognitive Linguistics 12, 15-45.
Ho, Chio-yueh (何秋月). 2003. A Semantic Study of Auditory Perception Metaphors in Chinese. M.A. Thesis. Taipei: Providence University.
Jäkel, Olaf. 1995. The metaphorical conception of the mind: “Mental activity is manipulation”. Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World, ed. by Taylor, J. R. and R. E. Maclaury, 197-229. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kess, Joseph F. 1992. Psycholinguistics : psychology, linguistics, and the study of natural language. Amsterdam ; Philadelphia : John Benjamins Pub. Co.
Kövecses and Radden. 1998. Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguisitcs 9-1, 37-77.
Lakoff, George. 1993. The contemporary theory of metaphor: Metaphor and thought, ed. by Andrew Ortony, 202-51. Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
________. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Neisser, Ulric. 1967. Cognitive psychology. Englewood Cliff: Prentice-Hall.
Palmer, S. E., and Kimchi, R. 1986. The information processing approach to cognition. Approaches to cognition: Contrasts and controversies, ed. by Knapp, T. J., and Robertson, L. C., 37-77. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Piaget, J. 1950. The Psychology of Intelligence, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
Radden, Günter. 2003. How metonymic are metaphors. Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: a cognitive perspective, ed. by Barcelona A., 93-108. Berlin; New York : Mouton de Gruyter.
Reddy, Michael. 1979. The conduit Metaphor. Metaphor and Thought, ed. by A. Ortony, 284-297. Cambridge, England: At the University Press.
Rips, L. J. and Conrad, F. G.. 1989. The folk psychology of mental activities. Psychological Review, 96, 187-207.
Ruiz de Mendoza. 2000. The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: a cognitive perspective, ed. by Barcelona A., 109-132. Berlin; New York : Mouton de Gruyter.
Ruiz de Mendoza and Diez Velasco. 2003. Patterns of conceptual interaction. Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast, ed. by Dirven R. and PÖrings R., 489-532. Berlin; New York : Mouton de Gruyter.
Sapir, E. 1944. Grading: A study in semantics. Philosophy of Science, 11, 93-116
Sternberg, S. 1969. The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donder’s Method. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276-315.
Stevenson, Rosemary J. 1993. Language, thought, and representation. Chichester, England ; New York : J. Wiley & Sons.
Sweetser, Eve E. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tsai, Li-zhong (蔡立中). 1994. The Metaphor of Body-Parts in Chinese. M.A. Thesis. Taipei: National Tsing Hua University.
Watson, J.B. 1925. Behaviorism. New York, Norton.
Webster’s World Dictionary of The American Language. 1997. The Official Dictionary of the Associated Press.
Whorf, B.L. 1941. The relation of habitual thought and behaviour to language, Language, Culture and Personality, ed. by L. Spier, 75-93. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Yang, Chun-ting (楊純婷). 2000. Synaesthetic Words in Mandarin: Perceptual Metaphor and Metaphorical Extension. M.A. Thesis. Taipei: National Chung Cheng University.
Yen, Chao-tai (顏兆泰). 2000. A Semantic Study of Chinese Metaphors Derived from Visual Perception. M. A. Thesis. Taipei: Fu Jen Catholic University.
Yu, Ning. 2003. Chinese metaphors of Thinking. Cognitive Linguistics 14, 141-165.
________. 2004. The eyes for sight and mind. Journal of Pragmatics 36, 663-686.
Zhung, Feng Ya (鍾風雅). 2002. A Semantic Study of Mandarin Perception Verbs Kan, Ting and Wen. M.A. Thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
2. Chinese Version
CKIP(中央研究院平衡語料庫)
成語典[The Dictionary of Idioms], 天母書城. Cheng Yu Dian [Dictionary of Chinese Idioms]. TianMu Books.
辭海[Chinese Dictionary],智揚出版社 Ci Hai [Chinese Dictionary]. ZhiYang Press.
形音義規範字典[Chinese Dictionary], 2003, 五南出版社 Xing Yin Yi Guifan Zidian [Form Pronunciation and Meaning of Chinese Character Dictionary]. WuNan Press
常用字引申義辭典[Chinese Dictionary], 1992, 吉林 人民出版 新華發行 Chang Yong Zi Yin Shen Yi Cidian [Definition of Common Phrases Dictionary]. Jilin: People Press.
東方國語辭典[Chinese Dictionary], 1994, 臺北市 東方出版社 Dongfang Guoyu Cidian [Mandarin Dictionary]. Taipei: Dongfang Press.
新編國語日報辭典[Chinese Dictionary], 2000, 國語日報 Xinbian Guoyu Ribao Cidian [Revised Mandarin Dictionary]. Mandarin Daily News Press.
現代漢英字典[A Chinese-English Dictionary], 1988, 萬人出版社 Xindai Han Ying Zidian [Modern Chinese-English Dictionary]. Wanren Press.
3. Online Resources:
Academia Sinica balanced Corpus of Modern Chinese
http://www.sinica.edu.tw/~tibe/2-words/modern-words/
Dictionary of Chinese Idioms
http://140.111.34.46/chengyu/sort_pho.htm
Chinese-English Dictionary of Modern Usage
http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/Lindict/
Mandarin Dictionary
http://140.111.34.46/dict/
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
語言學研究所
91555009
93
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0915550091
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 賴惠玲zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Lai, Huei-Lingen_US
dc.contributor.author (作者) 高惠珊zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (作者) Gao, Hui-shanen_US
dc.creator (作者) 高惠珊zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Gao, Hui-shanen_US
dc.date (日期) 2004en_US
dc.date.accessioned 17-九月-2009 16:28:19 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 17-九月-2009 16:28:19 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 17-九月-2009 16:28:19 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0915550091en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33395-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 語言學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 91555009zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 93zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究旨在探究有關「思考｣ 的中文辭彙，藉以一窺人類思考過程的全貌，並進一步透過隱喻與轉喻等認知語意機制 (參看Kövecses and Radden 1998, Lakoff 1993, Ruiz de Mendoza 2000, Diez Velasco’s 2003等人之論著)，分析人類思考過程的中文辭彙體現。
首先，我們修改認知心理學中所提的訊息處理模型 (參看Palmer and Kimchi 1986, Sternberg 1969, and Neisser 1967等人之論著)，根據修改過後的模型，得到人類思考過程的中文辭彙體現可分為七種類型。在進一步分析後發現，有關「思考｣ 的中文辭彙所牽涉的認知語意機制包括Lakoff (1993)提出的隱喻類型，Kövecses & Radden (1998)及Diez Velasco’s (2003)提出的轉喻類型，及Ruiz de Mendoza (2003)所提出來的隱喻和轉喻的交互模式，而本研究另外發現需透過三重轉喻及兩個新的隱喻和轉喻的交互模式才能完整建立起人類思考過程的中文辭彙體現的字面語意與其象徵語意之間的連結。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) In this study, we intend to claim that the backstage cognition of thinking process, through linguistic manifestation, can be explicitly detected with six dynamic continuing stages. In addition, each stage reifies itself with linguistic expressions of concrete observable parts or organs of body, which in turn demonstrate that lexical manifestation of thinking is heavily based on such mechanisms as metaphor and metonymy. (cf. Kövecses and Radden 1998, Lakoff 1993, Ruiz de Mendoza 2000, Diez Velasco’s 2003).
First of all, we refine the information processing model proposed in cognitive psychology (cf. Palmer and Kimchi 1986, Sternberg 1969, and Neisser 1967). Based on the refined model, the Mandarin lexical reification of thinking is claimed to fall into six stages corresponding to six types. A special case linking two or more stages is observed as the seventh type.
Then, we probe into the linguistic data from the seven types of thinking. The analysis discovers that a full explanation of those linguistic data from the six stages of the thinking process requires the activation of some types of metaphor. We have also found metonymy provides mental access to thinking activities.
As to the interaction of metonymy, the three types of double metonymy are not sufficient to account for the lexical manifestation of thinking. Triple metonymy also needs to be employed to explain the meaning derivations of the data.
Finally, it is found that the three interaction models of metaphor and metonymy are insufficient to cover all the possible interactions of cognitive mechanisms behind the lexical manifestation of thinking in Mandarin. This study reveals two new interaction models not mentioned by Ruiz de Mendoza (2000).		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents Acknowledgements…………………………………………………..iv
Chinese Abstract…………………………………………………..vii
English Abstract………………………………………………………..viii
Figures and tables…………………………………………………….ix
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………1
1.1 Motivation and purpose………………………………………1
1.2 Organization of the thesis………………………………….5
II. LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………..7
2.1 Talking about thinking……………………………………….8
2.2 MIND-AS-BODY metaphor……………………………………………..12
2.3 Information processing model………………………………………17
2.4 Remarks…………………………………………………………….20
III.COGNITIVE MECHANISMS…………………………………………..23
3.1 Metonymy………………………………………………………………..23
3.2 Metaphor…………………………………………………………………29
3.3 The interaction between metaphor and metonymy………………33
IV. DATA CATEGORIZATION………………………………………………37
4.1 Modified thinking model……………………………………………37
4.2 Data categorization……………………………………………….39
4.2.1 Type One: perception……………………………………………39
4.2.2 Type Two: reasoning…………………………………………….43
4.2.3 Type Three: storing and recalling…………………………….47
4.2.4 Type Four: reached decision………………………………….49
4.2.5 Type Five: encoding…………………………………………..53
4.2.6 Type Six: transmission………………………………………..55
4.2.7 Type Seven: mixed stages…………………………………….57
V. THE METONYMIC AND METAPHORIC ACCOUNT………………60
5.1 Metonymic models……………………………………………………..61
5.1.1 Single metonymy: Parts of an ICM………………………………61
5.1.2 Double metonymy………………………………………………...62
5.1.3 Triple metonymy………………………………………………….64
5.2 Metonymy-based metaphor…………………………………………..66
5.2.1 Target-in-source metonymy within the metaphoric source. ….67
5.2.2 Source-in-target metonymy within the metaphoric source……….69
5.2.3 Double metonymy within the metaphoric source……………72
5.3 Metaphor………………………………………………………………..73
5.3.1 BELIEVING IS SEEING…………………………………………73
5.3.2 THINKING IS PERCEIVING……………………………………74
5.3.3 THINKING IS OBJECT MANIPULATION……………………..75
5.3.4 ACQUIRING IDEAS IS EATING..........................77
5.3.5 THINKING IS MOVING.................................78
5.3.6 ENCODING IS OBJECT MANIPULATION........................79
5.3.7 Image metaphor.........................................80
5.4 Reflection of the Theories…………………………………………81
5.4.1 Reflections of the Theory of Metonymy………………………81
5.4.2 Reflections of the interaction of metonymies………………82
5.4.3 Reflections of the Theory of Metaphor……………………..83
5.4.4 Reflections of the Interaction Models of Metaphor and Metonymy. ……………………………………………………………………84 5.5 Remarks…………………………………………………………………85
VI. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………….88
6.1 Summary of the thesis……………………………………………….88
6.2 Future study……………………………………………………….91
Appendix…………………………………………………………………..93
References……………………………………………………………...107		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 29963 bytes-
dc.format.extent 20121 bytes-
dc.format.extent 78516 bytes-
dc.format.extent 12831 bytes-
dc.format.extent 54749 bytes-
dc.format.extent 11085 bytes-
dc.format.extent 10419 bytes-
dc.format.extent 22520 bytes-
dc.format.extent 89359 bytes-
dc.format.extent 73803 bytes-
dc.format.extent 167900 bytes-
dc.format.extent 176644 bytes-
dc.format.extent 41603 bytes-
dc.format.extent 176890 bytes-
dc.format.extent 54998 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0915550091en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 思考過程zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 隱喻zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 轉喻zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 認知語意機制zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) thinking processen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) metaphoren_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) metonymyen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) cognitive mechanismen_US
dc.title (題名) 從隱喻與轉喻的觀點看人類思考過程的中文辭彙體現zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Lexical Manifestation of Human Thinking Process in Mandarin:A Metaphoric and Metonymic Accounten_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 1. English Versionzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ashcraft, Mark H. 1994. Human memory and cognition. Human memory and cognitionzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Atkinson, R. and Shiffrin, R. 1968. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 2), ed by K Spence and J Spence. New York: Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Best, John B. 1999. Cognitive psychology. Brooks/ Cole Wadsworthzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hagne, Mouton.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ________.1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, MIT. Press, Cambridge, Mass.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ________.1980. Rules and Representations, Blackwell, Oxford.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dijk, T.A. van and Kintsch, W. 1983. Strategies of Discourse Comprehension, Academic Press, New York.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Fortescue, Micheal. 2001. Thoughts about thought. Cognitive Linguistics 12, 15-45.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ho, Chio-yueh (何秋月). 2003. A Semantic Study of Auditory Perception Metaphors in Chinese. M.A. Thesis. Taipei: Providence University.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Jäkel, Olaf. 1995. The metaphorical conception of the mind: “Mental activity is manipulation”. Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World, ed. by Taylor, J. R. and R. E. Maclaury, 197-229. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kess, Joseph F. 1992. Psycholinguistics : psychology, linguistics, and the study of natural language. Amsterdam ; Philadelphia : John Benjamins Pub. Co.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kövecses and Radden. 1998. Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguisitcs 9-1, 37-77.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lakoff, George. 1993. The contemporary theory of metaphor: Metaphor and thought, ed. by Andrew Ortony, 202-51. Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ________. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Neisser, Ulric. 1967. Cognitive psychology. Englewood Cliff: Prentice-Hall.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Palmer, S. E., and Kimchi, R. 1986. The information processing approach to cognition. Approaches to cognition: Contrasts and controversies, ed. by Knapp, T. J., and Robertson, L. C., 37-77. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Piaget, J. 1950. The Psychology of Intelligence, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Radden, Günter. 2003. How metonymic are metaphors. Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: a cognitive perspective, ed. by Barcelona A., 93-108. Berlin; New York : Mouton de Gruyter.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Reddy, Michael. 1979. The conduit Metaphor. Metaphor and Thought, ed. by A. Ortony, 284-297. Cambridge, England: At the University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Rips, L. J. and Conrad, F. G.. 1989. The folk psychology of mental activities. Psychological Review, 96, 187-207.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ruiz de Mendoza. 2000. The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: a cognitive perspective, ed. by Barcelona A., 109-132. Berlin; New York : Mouton de Gruyter.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ruiz de Mendoza and Diez Velasco. 2003. Patterns of conceptual interaction. Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast, ed. by Dirven R. and PÖrings R., 489-532. Berlin; New York : Mouton de Gruyter.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sapir, E. 1944. Grading: A study in semantics. Philosophy of Science, 11, 93-116zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sternberg, S. 1969. The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donder’s Method. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276-315.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Stevenson, Rosemary J. 1993. Language, thought, and representation. Chichester, England ; New York : J. Wiley & Sons.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sweetser, Eve E. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tsai, Li-zhong (蔡立中). 1994. The Metaphor of Body-Parts in Chinese. M.A. Thesis. Taipei: National Tsing Hua University.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Watson, J.B. 1925. Behaviorism. New York, Norton.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Webster’s World Dictionary of The American Language. 1997. The Official Dictionary of the Associated Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Whorf, B.L. 1941. The relation of habitual thought and behaviour to language, Language, Culture and Personality, ed. by L. Spier, 75-93. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Yang, Chun-ting (楊純婷). 2000. Synaesthetic Words in Mandarin: Perceptual Metaphor and Metaphorical Extension. M.A. Thesis. Taipei: National Chung Cheng University.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Yen, Chao-tai (顏兆泰). 2000. A Semantic Study of Chinese Metaphors Derived from Visual Perception. M. A. Thesis. Taipei: Fu Jen Catholic University.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Yu, Ning. 2003. Chinese metaphors of Thinking. Cognitive Linguistics 14, 141-165.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ________. 2004. The eyes for sight and mind. Journal of Pragmatics 36, 663-686.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Zhung, Feng Ya (鍾風雅). 2002. A Semantic Study of Mandarin Perception Verbs Kan, Ting and Wen. M.A. Thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 2. Chinese Versionzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) CKIP(中央研究院平衡語料庫)zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 成語典[The Dictionary of Idioms], 天母書城. Cheng Yu Dian [Dictionary of Chinese Idioms]. TianMu Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 辭海[Chinese Dictionary],智揚出版社 Ci Hai [Chinese Dictionary]. ZhiYang Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 形音義規範字典[Chinese Dictionary], 2003, 五南出版社 Xing Yin Yi Guifan Zidian [Form Pronunciation and Meaning of Chinese Character Dictionary]. WuNan Presszh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 常用字引申義辭典[Chinese Dictionary], 1992, 吉林 人民出版 新華發行 Chang Yong Zi Yin Shen Yi Cidian [Definition of Common Phrases Dictionary]. Jilin: People Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 東方國語辭典[Chinese Dictionary], 1994, 臺北市 東方出版社 Dongfang Guoyu Cidian [Mandarin Dictionary]. Taipei: Dongfang Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 新編國語日報辭典[Chinese Dictionary], 2000, 國語日報 Xinbian Guoyu Ribao Cidian [Revised Mandarin Dictionary]. Mandarin Daily News Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 現代漢英字典[A Chinese-English Dictionary], 1988, 萬人出版社 Xindai Han Ying Zidian [Modern Chinese-English Dictionary]. Wanren Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 3. Online Resources:zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Academia Sinica balanced Corpus of Modern Chinesezh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) http://www.sinica.edu.tw/~tibe/2-words/modern-words/zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dictionary of Chinese Idiomszh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) http://140.111.34.46/chengyu/sort_pho.htmzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chinese-English Dictionary of Modern Usagezh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/Lindict/zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Mandarin Dictionaryzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) http://140.111.34.46/dict/zh_TW