- 上一篇：《美国牧歌》的主题思想美国梦衰败下犹太裔美国人的焦虑
- 下一篇：《冰与火之歌》中角色视点手法的运用
1.1 Previous Studies on Nicknames
With the development of the theory of metaphor and metonymy, many experts studied nicknames in these two theories, but most of them used just one theory to analyze, or just do research about its social function. There are many experts studied nicknames in different aspects. For example, some experts studied nicknames in its perspective of metaphor (Cao Chao, 2009: 62-65, 70). Some experts discussed the true meaning of the nickname (Cheng Junfang, Guo Yanwen, 2006: 60-61); some studied the rhetorical device of nickname (Lu Weizhong, 2003: 13-17); some studied the name attribute and characteristics of nicknames (Xie Canglin, 2003: 100-103); and some others studied its social function (Hou Guangxu, 2001: 28-33).
Although there are numerous studies on nicknames, only a few people can studied nicknames in both perspective of metaphor and metonymy, also combine with the concept of social pragmatics to analyze its function and with this tool to analyze NBA players’ nicknames.
1.2 Research Design and Methodology
The subjects of this paper are 102 NBA players’ nicknames, these corpus selected from the website which introduce NBA stars. The reason for this is that it can guarantee the original of NBA players’ nicknames, and online corpora can partly reflect the freshness of the corpora and the profile of NBA players, but there are so many NBA players that it is impossible to choose all the nicknames, so here just select those stable and famous NBA players.文献综述
Their nicknames pided into two groups based on the theory of metaphor and metonymy. Each group of nicknames will pide into several groups based on the same feature, for example, all the group of nicknames based on animals and so on. The number of nicknames in each group will be calculated, and counted the proportion of the total nicknames. At last, this paper based on social pragmatics to analyze their social functions.
Through analysis, this paper aims at discovering the ways of making nicknames from NBA players. With the theory of metaphor, metonymy and social pragmatics, it can help the NBA players’ fans to know more about their idols.
2 Metaphor, metonymy and social pragmatics
2.1 Metaphor Theory
Metaphor is a pervasive feature in our language and it is everywhere in our daily life. Traditionally it regarded as a kind of rhetorical device, and it is an abnormal language use. In the field of metaphor analysis, George Lakoff and Mark Johnson made great contribution to the development of the metaphor theory through their study of the cognitive theory of metaphor. Based on their researches, Liu Yunhong sum up the rough contents of metaphor theory:
(1) Metaphor is not a language structure, but a kind of conceptual structure, metaphorical language is only the surface performance of the conceptual metaphors. (2) On the language, metaphor is a kind of normal expression, instead of the normal expression of deviation. (3) Metaphorical expression is not the similarity, but the cross-domain mapping. (4) Meaning is not literally, so metaphor can have true value. (5) Metaphor based on the experience of the body. It is the product of the body, brain and life experience, so not have arbitrariness. (6) Metaphor has the systemic. (7) Metaphor is administrative (Liu Yunhong, 2005: 16-18, 29).来.自/751论|文-网www.751com.cn/
2.2 Metonymy Theory
Metonymy is just like metaphor as a rhetorical method, it is a common means of discourse. The traditional research to metonymy mostly confined to rhetoric field. Rhetoricians generally believed that Metonymy is a figure of speech uses a thing to replace it related. The function of Metonymy is the same as the function of Metaphor, also is a kind of discourse expression. Mao Shuaimei (2009) in her research she classifies the metonymy in two ways:
(1) Traditional classification: traditional rhetoric has a specific classification to metonymy, showing mainly in relation list. This classification to a certain extent helps people to know and use metonymy, But the defect is more cumbersome, lack of generality, and there are still more overlap or omissions.