vu thi quyen-k19c-al final assignment
TRANSCRIPT
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
POST-GRADUATE DEPARTMENT
APPLIED LINGUISTICS ASSIGNMENT
METONYMY AS THE TRANSFERENCE OF MEANING: A COGNITIVE ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH
AND VIETNAMESE
Supervisor : Prof. Hoàng Văn Vân
Student : Vũ Thị Quyên
Class : K19C
Hanoi, June 2011
[Type text]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale
2. Aims of the study
3. Scope of the study
4. Methods of the study
5. Design of the study
DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
1.1. Word meaning
1.2. Meaning change phenomenon
1.3. Transference of meaning
1.3.1. Definition of meaning transference
1.3.2. Means of meaning transference
CHAPTER 2: METONYMY AS THE TRANSFERENCE OF
MEANING IN ENGLISH
2.1. Definition of metonymy
2.2. Types of metonymy
2.2.1. Direct/Primary metonymy
2.2.2. Indirect/Secondary metonymy
2.2.3. Partial metonymy
2.3. Cases of metonymy
2.3.1. Name of container instead of the things contained
2.3.2. Parts of human body as symbols
2.3.3. The concrete instead of the abstract
2.3.4. Materials instead of the things made of the materials
2.3.5. Name of the author instead of his works
2.3.6. Part for the whole and vice versa
2.3.7. Symbol to refer to representative
2.3.8. Others
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
4
4
5
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
1
i
CHAPTER 3: METONYMY AS THE TRANSFERENCE OF
MEANING IN VIETNAMESE
3.1. Container – contained
3.2. Concrete – abstract
3.3. Name of author – his works
3.4. Part – whole and whole – part
3.5. Owner – things owned
3.6. Specific quantities – general quantities
3.7. Others
CHAPTER 4: SIMILATITIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
METONYMY IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE
4.1. Similarities
4.2. Differences
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
10
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
12
14
15
2ii
INTRODUCTION
I. Rationale
Metonymy is a distinct type of generating new meanings for existing
expressions. A metonymic description of a subject is an essential part of any
language. Therefore, metonymic thinking can be considered as an element of the
cultural identity of a person. However, we use metonymy in everyday life without
realizing it. Even in linguistics, metonymy is often regarded as a subtype of
metaphor and gets little attention. English learners at elementary and pre-
intermediate levels find it hard to understand the sentences like:
The ham sandwich is waiting for his check.
Or they tend to spend a lot of time looking for English equivalents for
Vietnamese expressions like:
Áo chàm đưa buổi chia ly
Cầm tay nhau biết nói gì hôm nay.
These problems are results of learners’ unawareness of metonymy as the
transference of meaning in English and Vietnamese. Therefore, I choose metonymy
as the subject of my study and make a contrastive analysis between metonymy in
English and that in Vietnamese.
II. Aims of the study
The study is aimed at providing a thorough and systematic knowledge of
metonymy as the transference of meaning in English and Vietnamese so that
English learners can enrich their vocabulary, avoid and self-correct mistakes in
communication and translation.
III. Scope of the study
For the limitation of personal knowledge and ability, my study only focuses
on the most common cases of metonymy that are traditionally used in
communication in English and Vietnamese.
IV. Methods of the study
The main research methods include description, translation and deduction.
1
V. Design of the study
This paper is divided into three main parts: Introduction, Development and
Conclusion.
Introduction: briefly introduces the rationale, the aims, the scope, the
methods and the design of the study.
Development: has four chapters.
Chapter 1: Theoretical background
Chapter 2: Metonymy as the transference of meaning in English.
Chapter 3: Metonymy as the transference of meaning in Vietnamese.
Chapter 4: Similarities and differences between metonymy in English and
that in Vietnamese.
Conclusion: briefly sums up the study
2
DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
1.1. Word meaning
Nguyen Hoa in his book “An introduction to Semantics” (2001) has
discussed many theories of meaning, of which I hereby mention some majors ones
as follows.
According to the referential/denotational approach, the meaning of a word or
expression is what it refers to, denotes or stands for.
Linguists follow the ideational/mentalist theory support the idea that the
speaker’s meaning of a word is the idea in the speaker’s mind associated with the
word. Communication is successful when a similar stream of idea is produced in the
hearer’s mind.
The meaning of a word, according to the verification theory is determined by
the verifiability of the sentences, or propositions containing it, i.e. the meaning of a
word is verified by concrete situation.
Whatever the theory is, they share the same feature that word meaning does
not stay the same all the time, but change slightly or clearly in different situations.
1.2. Meaning change phenomenon
Definition of meaning change: meaning change is the phenomenon in which
new meanings of the words appear or old meanings drop out of the language or co-
exist with the new ones
E.g. immoral: not customary unethical
silly: happy, prosperous foolish
Causes of semantic change (meaning change): McMahon (1994) points out
at least two causes of semantic change: structural and referential causes. The former
ones refer to the linguistic structures of lexical items. They are also called linguistic
causes. The later ones refer to the referents. They are also called extra linguistic
causes (connected with the development of society, changes in social, political,
economic, cultural life, in science and technology)
3
Types of semantic change: according to McMahon (1994), the four most
widely recognized types of semantic change are extension, narrowing, amelioration,
and pejoration.
Extension is the widening of a word’s range of meanings, often by analogy
or simplification.
E.g. ready prepared for a ride
prepared for everything.
Narrowing is the reduction in a word’s range of meanings, often limiting a
generic word to a more specialized or technical use.
E.g. meat any food
animal flesh.
Amelioration occurs as a word loses negative meaning or gains positive ones.
E.g. minister servant or attendant
head of a state department.
Pejoration occurs as a word develops negative meanings or loses positive ones.
E.g. villain labourer attached to a farm
a wicked schemer.
1.3. Transference of meaning
1.3.1. Definition of meaning transference
“Transference of meaning refers to the situation when one object is named
and understood in terms of another”. (Nguyen Hoa, 2001)
E.g. He often nods his head to express his agreement.
(“head” means “the top part of a body”)
She is the head of our group.
(“head” means “the leader”)
The average income in this country is about $500 per head per month.
(“head” means “person”)
The three examples above have shown us that one word can be used
differently to name different things because those things and the original referent of
the word have somewhat relation.
4
1.3.2. Means of meaning transference.
There are various means of meaning transference like metaphor, metonymy,
euphemism, hyperbole, irony, and litotes.
Metaphor and metonymy are two basic types of meaning transference.
Metaphor is the transference of meaning from one object to another based on
similarities between these two. For example, in the sentence the internet is an
information superhighway, the internet is compared with the superhighway. On the
other hand, metonymy bases on the contiguity of notions. This means of meaning
transference is the focus of this study and will be discussed in detail later.
Other types of metonymy involve euphemism, hyperbole, irony, and litotes.
Euphemism is the use of a milder expression for something unpleasant. Hyperbole is
an exaggerated statement not meant to be understood literally, but with powerful effect.
Irony expresses meaning by words of the opposite sense. Litotes is an understatement
expressing something in the affirmative by the negative of its contrary.
Sometimes we may find an overlap between the uses of these means of
semantic transference. For example, the phrase lend me your ear can be interpreted
in two ways. First, we can analyse ear metonymically which means attention.
Second, we can analyse lend me your ear metaphorically to mean turn your ear in
my direction.
5
CHAPTER 2: METONYMY AS THE TRANSFERENCE OF
MEANING IN ENGLISH
2.1. Definition of metonymy
Perhaps the most familiar definition of metonymy from the literature is that it
is a figure of speech in which the speaker is “using one entity to refer to another
that is related to it” (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980)
Another definition given by Panther and Radden (1999) is that “metonymy is
cognitive process in which one conceptual entity, the vehicle, provided mental access
to another conceptual entity, the target, within the same idealized cognitive model”.
Nguyen Hoa (2001) defines metonymy as the transference of meaning from
one object to another based on contiguity of notions, i.e. instead of the name of one
object or notion we use the name of another because these objects are associated
and closely related.
E.g. The crown had absolute power in the middle ages.
(“crown” is used instead of “monarchy”)
In short, metonymy is transference of meaning based on a logical or physical
connection between things. It is an important means of forming new meanings of
words in the language.
2.2. Types of metonymy
In his article “The metonymic way of an attribute description of the aspect:
cultural aspect”, A.L. Alexey divides metonymy into three types: direct/primary
metonymy, indirect/secondary metonymy and partial metonymy.
2.2.1. Direct/Primary metonymy
Direct metonymy is the direct transference of the meaning to the object on
the basis of association with the subject itself.
E.g. "Calm yourself, Hastings. Do not put on that air of injured dignity." [A.
Christie]
The participle "injured" is used with the abstract noun "dignity", although it
characterizes the subject (Hastings).
2.2.2. Indirect/Secondary metonymy
6
Indirect metonymy is the double transference of the meaning to another
object on the basis of association with the manner of action of the subject mediated
by the subject itself.
E.g. "Near them was the parking space, as yet a modest yard..." [F.S. Fitzgerald]
In this sentence, the transference of the meaning is mediated because
"modest yard" is the yard made modestly by a man (i.e. subject), but not necessarily
by a modest man.
2.2.3. Partial metonymy
Partial metonymy employs the use of an attribute which acquires a certain
degree of associativeness with the subject.
"Tyger! Tyger! burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?" [W. Blake]
As a matter of fact, the attribute "immortal" only adds to nominative
metonymy in the words "hand" and "eye", and therefore cannot by itself be regarded
as complete and self-sufficient metonymy.
2.3. Cases of metonymy
2.3.1. Name of container instead of the thing contained.
The kettle is boiling. (“kettle” instead of “water in the kettle”)
He drank a glass. (“glass” instead of “some beer or water”)
2.3.2. Parts of human body as symbols
She has a really clever head.
(“clever head” is the symbol of an intelligent person)
Everyone loves her because she has a kind heart.
(“kind heart” is the symbol of a kind person)
2.3.3. The concrete instead of the abstract.
He lived here from the cradle to the grave.
(“from the cradle to the grave” instead of “all his life”)
I can’t understand this book at all.
(“this book” instead of “the content of the physical book”)
7
2.3.4. Materials instead of the things made of the materials.
May I borrow your rubber? I can’t find mine.
(“rubber” instead of “eraser”)
There is a glass in the cupboard.
(“glass” instead of the “container” made of glass)
2.3.5. Name of the author instead of his works.
I like to read Dickens.
(“Dickens” means “Dickens’ books)
Jane loves reading plays before going to bed. Oscar Wilde is her favorite one.
(“Oscar Wilde” means “Oscar Wilde’s plays”)
2.3.6. Part for the whole and vice versa.
First, let’s look at the examples of part for the whole.
In Vietnam three or four generations often live in the same roof.
(“roof” is used to refer to “house”)
He’s always running after a skirt.
(“skirt” here means “girl/young woman”)
However, the whole object can be used to refer to a part of the object.
My camera can’t be recharged.
(“camera” refers to “camera’s battery”)
Don’t sit down! The chair has been broken. It has three legs now.
(“chair” refers to “a leg of the chair”)
2.3.7. Symbol to refer to representative.
The crown had absolute power in the middle ages.
(“crown” refers to “monarchy”)
The White House has made a decision.
(“White House” refers to “U.S president”)
2.3.8. Others
Other cases of metonymy can be found in English including spatial relation,
causal relation, functional relation and transfer of geographical names.
He was elected chair of the city council.
(spatial relation – “chair” means “the person who holds the position”)
8
Fear of failure was bred into him at an early age.
(causal relation – “fear” means “the bad feeling you have when you are in danger”)
He penned a letter to the local paper.
(functional relation - “pen” means “write”)
She has bought a new pair of morocco shoes.
(transfer of geographical name – “morocco” means “leather”)
It can be concluded from the above information that metonymy is a powerful
way to transfer meaning of a word to refer to another referent. By simply using the
contiguity between notions basing on metonymical relations, English people have
changed their language.
9
CHAPTER 3: METONYMY AS THE TRANSFERENCE OF
MEANING IN VIETNAMESE
Metonymy is used in many different contexts and becomes very familiar with
Vietnamese people without any questions about the existence of it. As in English, in
Vietnamese there is a system of metonymic relations which can help to transfer the
meaning of many words. In this study, the author will attempt to list some most
common cases from the theories of Diep Quang Ban (1999) and Dinh Trong Lac
(1997).
3.1. Container – contained
Ăn ba bát
(“ bát” (bowls) means “bowls of rice/noodle”)
Ấm nước đang sôi.
(“ấm nước” (kettle) means “water in the kettle”)
3.2. Concrete – abstract
Nhận lại của quá khứ những con đê vỡ, những nạn đói, ta đã làm nên các
mùa vàng năm tấn, bẩy tấn.
(“Đê vỡ” (broken dyke), “nạn đói” (starvation) are concrete things to refer to
the abstract noun “damage and trouble” made by the war. The concrete term “mùa
vàng năm tấn, bẩy tấn” (good crops) is used to refer to the abstract term “the new
comfortable life”).
3.3. Name of author – his works.
Đọc Nguyễn Tuân người ta dễ bàng hoàng với cách sử dụng ngôn ngữ hết
sức độc đáo và truyền cảm.
(“Nguyen Tuan” means “Nguyen Tuan’s works)
3.4. Part – whole and whole – part.
Part – whole
Đầu xanh đã tội tình gì
Má hồng đến quá nửa thì chưa thôi.
(“Đầu xanh” (green head) is used to refer to a young person. “Má hồng”
(pink cheek) refers to a girl or a young woman).
Whole – part
10
Bao nhiêu năm đã qua, đầu đã muối tiêu mà hắn vẫn còn cái tính trăng hoa ấy.
(“Đầu” (head) refers to “hair”).
3.5. Owner – things owned.
Áo chàm đưa buổi phân ly
Cầm tay nhau biết nói gì hôm nay.
(“Áo chàm” (a kind of clothes) refers to people in the north east of Viet Nam).
3.6. Specific quantities – general quantities
Trăm công nghìn việc.
Làm dâu trăm họ.
(“trăm” (hundred) and “nghìn” (thousand) do not mean the exact number
hundred or thousand but many).
3.7. Others
In daily life metonymy is used very creatively by Vietnamese people and its
meaning depends much on the context of its existence. Some metonymic meanings
are just understood by Vietnamese people and people who have a rich knowledge of
Vietnam and its people.
Huyện đã đồng ý rồi nhưng xã thì cứ chần trừ chưa giải quết. Cả làng bức
xúc lắm.
(“Huyện” (district) and “xã” (commune) are local authorities in those places.
Meanwhile, “làng” (village) is used to refer to all the people who are living in the
village).
11
CHAPTER 4: SIMILATIRIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
METONYMY IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE
4.1. Similarities
The main similarity is that Vietnamese people and English people use some
same relations as the means of metonymy like part – whole, container – things
contained, concrete – abstract, author name – his works and parts of body as
symbols.
Relations English Vietnamese
Part - whole In Vietnam three or four generations
often live in the same roof
Chúng ta cùng sống chung
dưới một mái nhà
Container –
contained
The kettle is boiling Ấm nước đang sôi.
Concrete –
abstract
He lived here from the cradle to the
grave
Nhận lại của quá khứ những
con đê vỡ, những nạn đói…
Author name
– his works
I like to read Dickens Đọc Nguyễn Tuân người ta
dễ bàng hoàng…
Part of body
as symbol
She has a really clever head Đầu xanh đã tội tình gì
Má hồng đến quá nửa thì
chưa thôi.
The second similarity is that metonymy in both English and Vietnamese
share some common in the use of particular words
Two heads are better than one = Hai cái đầu thì tốt hơn một cái
Have you read Dickens yet? = Anh đã đọc Dickens chưa?
The third similarity is that metonymy is used very creatively by both English
and Vietnamese people.
4.2. Differences
The first difference lies in the use of different words to name a thing.
He is always running after the skirt. = Hắn luôn chạy theo những bóng hồng.
An English word and its equivalent in Vietnamese can be used as an
alternative for different things.
Can I have some sweets, please? (“sweets” means “candy”)
12
Chọn (quả) ngọt vào nhé! (“ngọt” (sweet) refer to a kind of fruit)
The difference can also be seen in very particular cases. For example, when
taking the part – whole relation to transfer the meaning of a word, English people and
Vietnamese ones have different choices of what part can be used to refer to the whole.
There are about three thousand trunks in that forest.
(“trunk” refers to “trees”)
Có khoảng ba ngàn ngon/gốc (cây) trong khu rừng đó.
(“ngọn” (top part)/ “gốc” (root) refers to “trees”)
The same thing happens when metonymy bases on concrete – abstract relation.
Another difference is that some cases of metonymy which are very typical in
English but rare in Vietnamese. For example, in Vietnamese we hardly find the
name of objects called by the material which they are made from/of.
The differences in language environment, culture and people’s habit of using
language have caused all those differences between metonymy in English and
Vietnamese in particular and the two languages in general.
13
CONCLUSION
This paper has briefly revised some most common cases of metonymy as the
transference of meaning in English and Vietnamese. It also points out some
similarities and differences in terms of metonymy between these two languages.
The similarities and differences presented here can partly help Vietnamese learners
in avoiding misinterpretation during the process of learning English.
However, because of limited time and my limited knowledge, this study is
not satisfactory enough. It may not meet the demand of all readers. Therefore,
further research in this area should be done to investigate its various aspects.
14
REFERENCES
ENGLISH
Alexey, A.L. (2004), “The metonymic way of an attribute description of the subject:
cultural aspect”, http://www.inst.at/trans/15Nr/04_09/lukyanov15.htm
Driven, R. (2002), Metaphor and Metonymy in comparison and contrast, De
Gruyter, Berlin.
Gregory, H. (2000), semantics, Routledge, London.
Jackendoff, R. (1990), Semantics and Cognition, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980), Metaphors we live by, University of Chicago
Press, Chicago.
Lobner, S. (2002), Understanding Semantics, Arnold Pubishers, London.
McMahon, A.M.S. (1994), Understand Language Change, CUP, Cambridge.
Nguyen, H. (2001), An Introduction to Semantics, VNU Press, Hanoi.
Panther, K.U. & Radden, G. (1999), Metonymy in Language and Thought, John
Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam.
VIETNAMESE
Diệp Quang Ban (1999), Ngữ pháp tiếng Việt, Nxb Giáo Dục, Hà Nội.
Lê Hạnh (2005), Ca dao, tục ngữ Việt Nam, Nxb Lao Động, Hà Nội.
Đinh Trọng Lạc (2004), Phương tiện và biện pháp tu từ Tiếng Việt, Nxb Giáo Dục, Hà Nội.
Đinh Trọng Lạc (1997), Phong cách học Tiếng Việt, Nxb Giáo Dục, Hà Nội.
15