《语言学与翻译》课程教学资源（PPT课件讲稿，Part 3）Unit 3 More than a way with words：The interface between Cognitive Linguistics and Cognitive Translatology

Unit so Three

Unit Three

More than a way with words: The interface between Cognitive Linguistics and Cognitive Translatology

• More than a way with words： The interface between Cognitive Linguistics and Cognitive Translatology

° Objectives At the end of this unit students will a, be familiar with the interface between Cognitive Linguistics and a Cognitive Translatology; b. be able to apply metaphor, prototype, frame, etc in Translation Studies

• Objectives: • At the end of this unit, students will • a. be familiar with The interface between Cognitive Linguistics and Cognitive Translatology; • b. be able to apply metaphor, prototype, frame, etc. in Translation Studies

Warm-up questions 1. What is the prototype theory? 2 What is frame?

• Warm-up questions: • 1. What is the prototype theory? • 2. What is frame?

Introduction The aim of this text is to contribute to mapping out the interaction between linguistics and translatology within second-generation Cognitive Science, the scientific study of mind that emphasizes the role of the body and the environment. As a consequence, Cognitive Linguistics" and Cognitive Translatology are understood in ways that deserve previous elaboration. Natural language structures are taken to reflect cognitive features and mechanisms intluenced both by experience and the environment

Introduction • The aim of this text is to contribute to mapping out the interaction between linguistics and translatology within second-generation Cognitive Science, the scientific study of mind that emphasizes the role of the body and the environment. As a consequence, “Cognitive Linguistics” and “Cognitive Translatology” are understood in ways that deserve previous elaboration. Natural language structures are taken to reflect cognitive features and mechanisms influenced both by experience and the environment

1. Contributions of Cognitive Linguistics to c Cognitive Translatology 1.1 Prototype semantics Prototype semantics is an approach to lexical meaning based on the work by D Eleanor rosch and colleagues on concepts and categorization in the 1970s. the basic o0 tenet is that category membership is not based on necessary and sufficient conditions and may be graded. Tabakowska(1993) was probably the first translatologist to draw from Rosch's(1978) prototype theory

1. Contributions of Cognitive Linguistics to Cognitive Translatology • 1.1 Prototype semantics • Prototype semantics is an approach to lexical meaning based on the work by Eleanor Rosch and colleagues on concepts and categorization in the 1970s. The basic tenet is that category membership is not based on necessary and sufficient conditions and may be graded. Tabakowska (1993) was probably the first translatologist to draw from Rosch’s (1978) prototype theory

She used it to reject objectivist, truth- conditional. referential semantics, and several classical dichotomies such as literal D) vs figurative meaning, denotation Vs connotation grammatical vs communicative Lo competence, semantics and pragmatics (Tabakowska 1993: 22-24).This is a fundamental step towards Cognitive Trans latology, but not all cognitive translatologists seem to have assumed the consequences. 0

• She used it to reject objectivist, truth￾conditional, referential semantics, and several classical dichotomies such as literal vs. figurative meaning, denotation vs. connotation, grammatical vs. communicative competence, semantics and pragmatics (Tabakowska 1993: 22-24). This is a fundamental step towards Cognitive Trans￾latology, but not all cognitive translatologists seem to have assumed the consequences

1.2 Conceptual metaphor theory First proposed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980), conceptual metaphor theory sees metaphors as conceptual phenomena, rather than mere linguistic operations and assumes they are basic scaffolds to our conceptual system. Central to this theory is the concept DOf“ domain”. Domains are described as sets of entities, attributes, processes and relationships that seem to be linked in the mind

• 1.2 Conceptual metaphor theory • First proposed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980), conceptual metaphor theory sees metaphors as conceptual phenomena, rather than mere linguistic operations, and assumes they are basic scaffolds to our conceptual system. Central to this theory is the concept of “domain”. Domains are described as sets of entities, attributes, processes and relationships that seem to be linked in the mind

In metaphors, a source domain is mapped onto a target domain, thereby structuring it in such a way that the relationships between entities, attributes and processes in the target domain are similar to those found in the source domain although with some or t many“ blind spots”( Brunner1987),ie mapping discontinuities. These metaphorical Loo operations can be traced in language, for attributes and processes in the target domain may use words and expressions that belong to the source domain

• In metaphors, a source domain is mapped onto a target domain, thereby structuring it in such a way that the relationships between entities, attributes and processes in the target domain are similar to those found in the source domain, although with some or many “blind spots” (Brunner 1987), i.e. mapping discontinuities. These metaphorical operations can be traced in language, for attributes and processes in the target domain may use words and expressions that belong to the source domain

1.3 Frame Semantics Frame semantics may be considered just one stop in the intellectual journey Charles Fillmore started with his Case grammar (1968), followed by Frame Semantics( 1985) and then by Berkeley] Construction Grammar( Fillmore and Kay 1987). The aim ,e of Frame Semantics(e.g Petruck 1996; see also Boas, this volume) is to relate language to experience by connecting semantic meaning in a strict sense with encyclopedic knowledge

• 1.3 Frame Semantics • Frame Semantics may be considered just one stop in the intellectual journey Charles Fillmore started with his Case Grammar (1968), followed by Frame Semantics (1985) and then by [Berkeley] Construction Grammar (Fillmore and Kay 1987). The aim of Frame Semantics (e.g. Petruck 1996; see also Boas, this volume) is to relate language to experience by connecting semantic meaning in a strict sense with encyclopedic knowledge