Metaphor As A Stylistic Device In Text Linguistics
Keywords:
metaphor, text linguistics, literature, translation, cognitive theory, stylistic device.
Abstract
the research aims to identify the conceptual metaphor underlying metaphorical linguistic expressions in key texts by five of the greatest English language stylists. It then compares these expressions to their Bulgarian translations to see if the metaphor is lost or changed in any way. Conclusions about translated literature are drawn, outlining instances when the kind and quantity of metaphors are similar to those in original material.
References
1. Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in Educational Discourse. London. New York: Continuum.
2. Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Palgrave, Macmillan.
3. Dagut, M. (1976). Can “metaphor be translated? Babel 22 (1): 21-33.
4. Fernadez, E. S. et al., (2005). Translations we live by: the impact of metaphor translations in target systems. Servicio de Publicaciones e Intercambio Editorial de la UVA, edited by Fuertes Olivera, Cood,.61-81. Available from Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera, Aug 17, 2017.
5. Kloepfer, R. (1967). Die Theorie der literarischen Übersetzung. Romanisch-deutscher Sprachbereich, Munich, W. Fink (Freiburger Schriften zur Romanischen Philologie 12).
6. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7. Mandelblit, N. (1995). The cognitive view of metaphor and its implications for translation theory. In Translation and Meaning, Part 3, 483 − 495.
8. Newmark, P. (1981). Approaches to Translation. Oxford, Pergamon.
9. Reiss, K. (2000). Translation criticism, the potentials and limitations: categories and criteria for translation quality assessment. Translated by Erroll F. Rhodes, Manchester, U.K, St. Jerome Pub.
10. Richards, Iv. (1936). The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford University Press.
11. Schäffner, C. (2004). Metaphor and translation: some implications of a cognitive approach. In Journal of Pragmatics 36, 1253-1269.
12. Stockwell, P. (2002). Cognitive Poetics. An Introduction. London and New York: Routledge, 2002.
13. Abdurasulovna, E. Z. (2023). REMARKS ON CAUSAL COMPLEX PREPOSITIONS. SCIENCE AND INNOVATION IDEAS IN MODERN EDUCATION, 1(6).
14. Ziyoda, E. (2023). PREDLOGLARNING OʻZGARISHI VA DERIVATSIYASI XUSUSIDA. International Journal of Contemporary Scientific and Technical Research, 455-457.
15. Nasrullaeva, N. (2016). THE CONCEPTS “MAN” AND “WOMAN” IN THE ENGLISH PHRASEOLOGY. Scientific enquiry in the contemporary world: theoretical basiсs and innovative approach, 74.
2. Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Palgrave, Macmillan.
3. Dagut, M. (1976). Can “metaphor be translated? Babel 22 (1): 21-33.
4. Fernadez, E. S. et al., (2005). Translations we live by: the impact of metaphor translations in target systems. Servicio de Publicaciones e Intercambio Editorial de la UVA, edited by Fuertes Olivera, Cood,.61-81. Available from Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera, Aug 17, 2017.
5. Kloepfer, R. (1967). Die Theorie der literarischen Übersetzung. Romanisch-deutscher Sprachbereich, Munich, W. Fink (Freiburger Schriften zur Romanischen Philologie 12).
6. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7. Mandelblit, N. (1995). The cognitive view of metaphor and its implications for translation theory. In Translation and Meaning, Part 3, 483 − 495.
8. Newmark, P. (1981). Approaches to Translation. Oxford, Pergamon.
9. Reiss, K. (2000). Translation criticism, the potentials and limitations: categories and criteria for translation quality assessment. Translated by Erroll F. Rhodes, Manchester, U.K, St. Jerome Pub.
10. Richards, Iv. (1936). The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford University Press.
11. Schäffner, C. (2004). Metaphor and translation: some implications of a cognitive approach. In Journal of Pragmatics 36, 1253-1269.
12. Stockwell, P. (2002). Cognitive Poetics. An Introduction. London and New York: Routledge, 2002.
13. Abdurasulovna, E. Z. (2023). REMARKS ON CAUSAL COMPLEX PREPOSITIONS. SCIENCE AND INNOVATION IDEAS IN MODERN EDUCATION, 1(6).
14. Ziyoda, E. (2023). PREDLOGLARNING OʻZGARISHI VA DERIVATSIYASI XUSUSIDA. International Journal of Contemporary Scientific and Technical Research, 455-457.
15. Nasrullaeva, N. (2016). THE CONCEPTS “MAN” AND “WOMAN” IN THE ENGLISH PHRASEOLOGY. Scientific enquiry in the contemporary world: theoretical basiсs and innovative approach, 74.
Published
2023-11-05
How to Cite
Xolbayev Farrux Uskanovich, & Mahmudova Komila Sobirjanovna. (2023). Metaphor As A Stylistic Device In Text Linguistics. International Journal of Human Computing Studies, 5(10), 82-85. https://doi.org/10.31149/ijhcs.v5i10.4918
3.png)
