解讀奧巴馬就職演說(shuō)辭中的概念隱喻【開(kāi)題報(bào)告+文獻(xiàn)綜述+畢業(yè)論文】

1、<p><b>　　畢業(yè)論文開(kāi)題報(bào)告</b></p><p><b>　　英語(yǔ)</b></p><p>　　A Study of Conceptual Metaphors in Obama’s Inaugural Address</p><p>　　一、選題的背景、意義（所選課題的歷史背景、國(guó)內(nèi)外研究現(xiàn)狀和發(fā)展趨

2、勢(shì)）</p><p>　　演說(shuō)是西方政論文體的一種主要形式，在其政治生活中扮演著極其重要的角色。政治家們通常通過(guò)演說(shuō)來(lái)表達(dá)一定的政治目的，而演說(shuō)中的政治術(shù)語(yǔ)對(duì)民眾來(lái)說(shuō)是相當(dāng)抽象、陌生的。為了讓民眾接受政黨的價(jià)值觀，形成共同的意識(shí)形態(tài)，演說(shuō)者必須將抽象的政治概念以一種具體的、通俗易懂的方式表達(dá)出來(lái)。而他們最常用的方式是隱喻。Jeffery 認(rèn)為隱喻為政治事件提供解決方案。政治家希望通過(guò)隱喻說(shuō)服民眾接受自己的觀點(diǎn)。另

3、外，Stone講政治問(wèn)題和故事敘述聯(lián)系起來(lái)。他認(rèn)為，在政策分析中，隱喻是一種重要的戰(zhàn)略再現(xiàn)方式。表面上，隱喻只是將兩個(gè)事物進(jìn)行簡(jiǎn)單類(lèi)比。而更確切地說(shuō)，隱喻通常暗含一個(gè)敘述性故事和一個(gè)行動(dòng)方案。Miller 認(rèn)為，既然政治事件不能被直接感知，那隱喻就必須幫助人們定義相關(guān)的問(wèn)題。</p><p>　　總統(tǒng)就職演說(shuō)是政治演說(shuō)的一種重要形式。它不僅有著濃厚的宗教色彩，而且使用大量的修辭手段，如層遞、排比、重復(fù)、隱喻、頭韻

4、等，從而有效地實(shí)現(xiàn)其勸說(shuō)和鼓勵(lì)民眾的目的。在全球經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)的大背景下，奧巴馬就職演說(shuō)勢(shì)必要鼓勵(lì)美國(guó)民眾，給予他們希望。本文試圖分析奧巴馬如何通過(guò)概念隱喻贏得民心，并描述與解釋并重，將理論與實(shí)踐相結(jié)合，拓展概念隱喻的應(yīng)用。</p><p>　　二、相關(guān)研究的最新成果及動(dòng)態(tài) </p><p>　　隱喻經(jīng)歷了從傳統(tǒng)觀到現(xiàn)代認(rèn)知觀的發(fā)展歷史。傳統(tǒng)觀認(rèn)為隱喻是一種修辭手法，是一種語(yǔ)言現(xiàn)象。自從1986

5、年Lakoff和Johnson在《我們賴(lài)以生存的隱喻》一書(shū)中提出概念隱喻，標(biāo)志著隱喻研究進(jìn)入一個(gè)新的發(fā)展階段。不同于傳統(tǒng)的隱喻理論，概念隱喻將隱喻看作是人們思維、行為和表達(dá)思想的認(rèn)知方式。</p><p>　　概念隱喻的哲學(xué)基礎(chǔ)是非主觀主義的體驗(yàn)哲學(xué)，即人們對(duì)隱喻的認(rèn)識(shí)靠的是以前的身體的經(jīng)驗(yàn)和知識(shí)。一般的，人們用自己能感知的、直觀的、具體的概念來(lái)認(rèn)識(shí)那些無(wú)形的、抽象的概念。這樣兩個(gè)概念通過(guò)認(rèn)知相互關(guān)聯(lián)。據(jù)Lako

6、ff理論，隱喻是從一個(gè)認(rèn)知域向另一個(gè)認(rèn)知域的結(jié)構(gòu)映射，即從源域向目的域的映射。源域與目的域之間存在一定的相似性。這一相似性使得人們能以源域的經(jīng)驗(yàn)來(lái)建構(gòu)目的域的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，源域的部分特點(diǎn)被映射到目的域上，后者因前者而得到部分理解。</p><p>　　自Lakoff和Johnson發(fā)表《我們賴(lài)以生存的隱喻》以來(lái)，概念隱喻理論有了二十余年的發(fā)展，內(nèi)容已經(jīng)比1980年的時(shí)候豐富多了?？v觀目前狀況，我認(rèn)為，隱喻研究必須與神經(jīng)語(yǔ)

7、言學(xué)研究結(jié)合起來(lái)揭開(kāi)隱喻性語(yǔ)言的本質(zhì)。</p><p>　　三、課題的研究?jī)?nèi)容及擬采取的研究方法、技術(shù)路線(xiàn)及研究難點(diǎn)，預(yù)期達(dá)到的目標(biāo)</p><p><b>　　一、基本內(nèi)容：</b></p><p>　　A Study of Conceptual Metaphors in Obama’s Inaugural Address</p>

8、<p>　　Introduction</p><p>　　1.1 Introduction of metaphor</p><p>　　1.2 Purpose of writing</p><p>　　2. Literature review(Lakoff&Johnson’s mapping theory)</p><p&g

9、t;　　3.Cognitive mechanism of conceptual metaphors in Obama’s Inaugural Address</p><p>　　3.1 Cognitive mechanism of orientational metaphors</p><p>　　3.2 Cognitive mechanism of ontological metapho

10、rs</p><p>　　3.3 Cognitive mechanism of structural metaphors</p><p>　　4.Conclusion</p><p>　　二、研究的方法與技術(shù)路線(xiàn)：</p><p>　　研究方法：文獻(xiàn)檢索法、分析歸納法。</p><p>　　技術(shù)路線(xiàn)：通過(guò)借閱圖書(shū)館書(shū)本

11、，以及網(wǎng)上搜索有關(guān)這個(gè)課題的資料，結(jié)合兩者及自己的想法，擬定出該論文。</p><p>　　三、研究難點(diǎn)與預(yù)期達(dá)到的目標(biāo)</p><p>　　本文試圖利用Lakoff的概念隱喻理論梳理奧巴馬就職演說(shuō)中的隱喻體系，揭示奧巴馬總統(tǒng)如何利用隱喻激發(fā)人們情感，從而贏得人們最廣泛的支持。</p><p>　　四、論文詳細(xì)工作進(jìn)度和安排</p><p>

12、　　2010年6月20日－6月30日 確定論文題目</p><p>　　2010年7月1日－2010年7月23日 指導(dǎo)老師下達(dá)任務(wù)書(shū)，學(xué)生提交開(kāi)題報(bào)告，文獻(xiàn)綜述</p><p>　　2011年1月底前 提交論文初稿</p><p>　　2011年2月底前

13、 初稿、二稿的修改</p><p>　　2011年4月底前 三稿、四稿的修改</p><p>　　2011年5月中旬前 定稿，提交按要求裝訂的論文終稿一式四份</p><p><b>　　五、主要參考文獻(xiàn)</b></p><p>　　[1

14、] 陳定安.英語(yǔ)修辭與翻譯[M].北京：中國(guó)青年出版社,2004.</p><p>　　[2] 王廣蓀.英漢修辭叢談[M].天津：天津教育出版社,1999.</p><p>　　[3] 李玉英，李慧燕.奧巴馬就職演說(shuō)詞的修辭解讀[J].上饒師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào),2009,(5): P57—62</p><p>　　[4] 束定芳.隱喻學(xué)研究[M].上海：上海教育出版社，20

15、00.</p><p>　　[5] 趙艷芳.認(rèn)知語(yǔ)言學(xué)概論[M].上海：上海外語(yǔ)教育出版社，2001.</p><p>　　[6] 劉正光.隱喻映射的本質(zhì)特征[J].外語(yǔ)學(xué)刊,2003,(3):P72—73.</p><p>　　[7] 楊家勤.奧巴馬就職講辭的符號(hào)修辭模式[J].求索,2010,(3):P81-82.</p><p>　　[

16、8] Corbett Edward,P.J.Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student[M].New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.1990.</p><p>　　[9] Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. Metaphors We Live by [M]. Chicago: University of

17、Chicago Press. 1980.</p><p>　　[10] Mio Jeeffry, Albert N. Katz Metaphor: Implications and Applications[M]. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associations Publishers. 1996.</p><p><b>　　畢業(yè)論文文獻(xiàn)綜述&

18、lt;/b></p><p><b>　　英語(yǔ)</b></p><p>　　A Study of Conceptual Metaphors in Obama’s Inaugural Address</p><p>　　一、前言部分（說(shuō)明寫(xiě)作的目的，介紹有關(guān)概念，扼要說(shuō)明有關(guān)主題爭(zhēng)論焦點(diǎn)）</p><p>　　演說(shuō)是

19、西方政論文體的一種主要形式，在其政治生活中扮演著極其重要的角色。政治家們通常通過(guò)演說(shuō)來(lái)表達(dá)一定的政治目的，而演說(shuō)中的政治術(shù)語(yǔ)對(duì)民眾來(lái)說(shuō)是相當(dāng)抽象、陌生的。為了讓民眾接受政黨的價(jià)值觀，形成共同的意識(shí)形態(tài)，演說(shuō)者必須將抽象的政治概念以一種具體的、通俗易懂的方式表達(dá)出來(lái)。而他們最常用的方式是隱喻。</p><p>　　隱喻經(jīng)歷了從傳統(tǒng)觀到現(xiàn)代認(rèn)知觀的發(fā)展歷史。傳統(tǒng)觀認(rèn)為隱喻是一種修辭手法，是一種語(yǔ)言現(xiàn)象。自從1986年

20、Lakoff和Johnson在《我們賴(lài)以生存的隱喻》一書(shū)中提出概念隱喻，標(biāo)志著隱喻研究進(jìn)入一個(gè)新的發(fā)展階段。不同于傳統(tǒng)的隱喻理論，概念隱喻將隱喻看作是人們思維、行為和表達(dá)思想的認(rèn)知方式。概念隱喻的哲學(xué)基礎(chǔ)是非主觀主義的體驗(yàn)哲學(xué)，即人們對(duì)隱喻的認(rèn)識(shí)靠的是以前的身體的經(jīng)驗(yàn)和知識(shí)。一般的，人們用自己能感知的、直觀的、具體的概念來(lái)認(rèn)識(shí)那些無(wú)形的、抽象的概念。這樣兩個(gè)概念通過(guò)認(rèn)知相互關(guān)聯(lián)。據(jù)Lakoff理論，隱喻是從一個(gè)認(rèn)知域向另一個(gè)認(rèn)知域的結(jié)構(gòu)

21、映射，即從源域向目的域的映射。源域與目的域之間存在一定的相似性。這一相似性使得人們能以源域的經(jīng)驗(yàn)來(lái)建構(gòu)目的域的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，源域的部分特點(diǎn)被映射到目的域上，后者因前者而得到部分理解。</p><p>　　人的思維大部分是隱喻的，這體現(xiàn)在日常的交際、書(shū)面文章以及具有政治性目的的演說(shuō)篇章中。本文用概念隱喻分析奧巴馬就職演說(shuō)詞，旨在讓人們對(duì)話(huà)語(yǔ)中不同隱喻的功能有更深層次的了解。</p><p>　　二、

22、主題部分（闡明有關(guān)主題的歷史背景、現(xiàn)狀和發(fā)展方向，以及對(duì)這些問(wèn)題的評(píng)述）</p><p>　　作為一種特殊的話(huà)語(yǔ)體裁，總統(tǒng)就職演說(shuō)近年來(lái)受到人們的普遍關(guān)注。政治家們通常通過(guò)演說(shuō)來(lái)表達(dá)一定的政治目的，而演說(shuō)中的政治術(shù)語(yǔ)對(duì)民眾來(lái)說(shuō)是相當(dāng)抽象、陌生的。為了讓民眾接受政黨的價(jià)值觀，形成共同的意識(shí)形態(tài)，演說(shuō)者必須將抽象的政治概念以一種具體的、通俗易懂的方式表達(dá)出來(lái)。而他們最常用的方式是隱喻。</p><

23、p>　　Jeffery 認(rèn)為隱喻為政治事件提供解決方案。政治家希望通過(guò)隱喻說(shuō)服民眾接受自己的觀點(diǎn)。另外，Stone講政治問(wèn)題和故事敘述聯(lián)系起來(lái)。他認(rèn)為，在政策分析中，隱喻是一種重要的戰(zhàn)略再現(xiàn)方式。表面上，隱喻只是將兩個(gè)事物進(jìn)行簡(jiǎn)單類(lèi)比。而更確切地說(shuō)，隱喻通常暗含一個(gè)敘述性故事和一個(gè)行動(dòng)方案。Miller 認(rèn)為，既然政治事件不能被直接感知，那隱喻就必須幫助人們定義相關(guān)的問(wèn)題。</p><p>　　隱喻經(jīng)歷了從

24、傳統(tǒng)觀到現(xiàn)代認(rèn)知觀的發(fā)展歷史。傳統(tǒng)觀認(rèn)為隱喻是一種修辭手法，是一種語(yǔ)言現(xiàn)象。其中組要包括三種學(xué)說(shuō)對(duì)比說(shuō)、替代說(shuō)和相互作用說(shuō)。</p><p>　　對(duì)比說(shuō)是由古希臘哲學(xué)家Aristotle提出的，他認(rèn)為隱喻是一個(gè)詞替代另一個(gè)詞來(lái)表達(dá)同一意義的語(yǔ)言手段，兩者屬于一種對(duì)比關(guān)系。替代說(shuō)可追溯到羅馬修辭學(xué)家Quintilina。在他看來(lái)，所謂隱喻就是由一個(gè)表達(dá)式去替代某一個(gè)意義相等的，進(jìn)取其字面意義的表達(dá)式。相互作用理論代

25、表人物是Richards。他認(rèn)為隱喻中有兩個(gè)要素（本體和喻體），其中一個(gè)通過(guò)另一個(gè)得到理解，隱喻意義的產(chǎn)生是兩個(gè)要素相互作用的結(jié)果，一個(gè)要素的特征被映射到另一個(gè)要素上。</p><p>　　自從1986年Lakoff和Johnson在《我們賴(lài)以生存的隱喻》一書(shū)中提出概念隱喻，標(biāo)志著隱喻研究進(jìn)入一個(gè)新的發(fā)展階段。不同于傳統(tǒng)的隱喻理論，概念隱喻將隱喻看作是人們思維、行為和表達(dá)思想的認(rèn)知方式。</p>&

26、lt;p>　　概念隱喻的哲學(xué)基礎(chǔ)是非主觀主義的體驗(yàn)哲學(xué)，即人們對(duì)隱喻的認(rèn)識(shí)靠的是以前的身體的經(jīng)驗(yàn)和知識(shí)。一般的，人們用自己能感知的、直觀的、具體的概念來(lái)認(rèn)識(shí)那些無(wú)形的、抽象的概念。這樣兩個(gè)概念通過(guò)認(rèn)知相互關(guān)聯(lián)。據(jù)Lakoff理論，隱喻是從一個(gè)認(rèn)知域向另一個(gè)認(rèn)知域的結(jié)構(gòu)映射，即從源域向目的域的映射。源域與目的域之間存在一定的相似性。這一相似性使得人們能以源域的經(jīng)驗(yàn)來(lái)建構(gòu)目的域的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，源域的部分特點(diǎn)被映射到目的域上，后者因前者而得到部

27、分理解。</p><p>　　自Lakoff和Johnson發(fā)表《我們賴(lài)以生存的隱喻》以來(lái)，概念隱喻理論有了二十余年的發(fā)展，內(nèi)容已經(jīng)比1980年的時(shí)候豐富多了。縱觀目前狀況，我認(rèn)為，隱喻研究必須與神經(jīng)語(yǔ)言學(xué)研究結(jié)合起來(lái)揭開(kāi)隱喻性語(yǔ)言的本質(zhì)。</p><p>　　三、總結(jié)部分（將全文主題進(jìn)行扼要總結(jié)，提出自己的見(jiàn)解并對(duì)進(jìn)一步的發(fā)展方向做出預(yù)測(cè)）</p><p>　　人

28、的思維大部分是隱喻的，這體現(xiàn)在日常的交際、書(shū)面文章以及具有政治性目的的演說(shuō)篇章中。在經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)這特別時(shí)刻，奧巴馬通過(guò)各種隱喻，讓美國(guó)人民具有危機(jī)意識(shí)，同時(shí)給予他們戰(zhàn)勝危機(jī)的信心。他在用隱喻贏得本國(guó)人民對(duì)政府的信任的同時(shí)，也不忘拉攏世界上其他國(guó)家。在穩(wěn)固好內(nèi)部的基礎(chǔ)上，為自己提供更為有利的外部環(huán)境，從而確保美國(guó)在經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)這場(chǎng)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)中取得最終勝利。</p><p>　　本文從從結(jié)構(gòu)隱喻、方位隱喻以及本體隱喻這三方面，仔細(xì)

29、分析了美國(guó)總統(tǒng)奧巴馬就職演說(shuō)詞中的概念隱喻。通過(guò)分析，得出結(jié)論：隱喻的使用可以使話(huà)語(yǔ)更容易被人理解。本文試圖解析奧巴馬如何通過(guò)概念隱喻贏得民心，將理論與實(shí)踐相結(jié)合，拓展概念隱喻在日常的交際、書(shū)面文章以及具有政治性目的的演說(shuō)篇章中的應(yīng)用。</p><p>　　四、參考文獻(xiàn)（根據(jù)文中參閱和引用的先后次序按序編排）</p><p>　　[1] 陳定安.英語(yǔ)修辭與翻譯[M].北京：中國(guó)青年出版社,

30、2004.</p><p>　　[2] 王廣蓀.英漢修辭叢談[M].天津：天津教育出版社,1999.</p><p>　　[3] 李玉英，李慧燕.奧巴馬就職演說(shuō)詞的修辭解讀[J].上饒師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào),2009,(5): P57—62</p><p>　　[4] 束定芳.隱喻學(xué)研究[M].上海：上海教育出版社，2000.</p><p>　　[5

31、] 趙艷芳.認(rèn)知語(yǔ)言學(xué)概論[M].上海：上海外語(yǔ)教育出版社，2001.</p><p>　　[6] 劉正光.隱喻映射的本質(zhì)特征[J].外語(yǔ)學(xué)刊,2003,(3):P72—73.</p><p>　　[7] 楊家勤.奧巴馬就職講辭的符號(hào)修辭模式[J].求索,2010,(3):P81-82.</p><p>　　[8] Corbett Edward,P.J.Classi

32、cal Rhetoric for the Modern Student[M].New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.1990.</p><p>　　[9] Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. Metaphors We Live by [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1980.</p&g

33、t;<p>　　[10] Mio Jeeffry, Albert N. Katz Metaphor: Implications and Applications[M]. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associations Publishers. 1996.</p><p><b>　?。?0_ _屆）</b></p><p&g

34、t;<b>　　本科畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)</b></p><p><b>　　英語(yǔ)</b></p><p>　　解讀奧巴馬就職演說(shuō)辭中的概念隱喻</p><p>　　A Study of Conceptual Metaphors in Obama’s Inaugural Address</p><p><

35、b>　　內(nèi)容摘要</b></p><p>　　認(rèn)知語(yǔ)言學(xué)的研究表明，隱喻不僅是一種修辭手段，更是人類(lèi)的一種思維方式，是人類(lèi)基本的認(rèn)知方式。它廣泛存在于日常生活中，存在于任何學(xué)科領(lǐng)域。政治術(shù)語(yǔ)和政府的經(jīng)濟(jì)政策對(duì)民眾來(lái)說(shuō)是相當(dāng)抽象、陌生的，為了讓民眾接受政黨的價(jià)值觀、形成共同的意識(shí)形態(tài)，美國(guó)總統(tǒng)奧巴馬在其就職演說(shuō)詞中通過(guò)隱喻說(shuō)服民眾接受自己的觀點(diǎn)。演說(shuō)中旅程隱喻、建筑隱喻和沖突隱喻的巧妙運(yùn)用積極發(fā)揮

36、了隱喻的說(shuō)服功能。</p><p>　　本文以概念隱喻理論為基礎(chǔ)，通過(guò)對(duì)奧巴馬就職演說(shuō)詞中隱喻的分析，探討概念隱喻的理解機(jī)制，旨在提高英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者對(duì)概念隱喻的解讀能力，加強(qiáng)聽(tīng)眾對(duì)演講語(yǔ)篇的深層理解。</p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞：概念隱喻理論；說(shuō)服功能；奧巴馬就職演說(shuō)</p><p><b>　　Abstract</b></p>&l

37、t;p>　　The studies of cognitive linguistics show that metaphor is not only a means of rhetoric, but more importantly it is a way of thinking, a fundamental cognitive style of human beings. It is pervasive in every subj

38、ect area as well as in everyday life. As it is rather abstract for most people to understand the political terminologies and the economic strategies of a government, metaphor is applied as a mapping to illustrate Barack

39、Obama’s beliefs and values in his inaugural address.</p><p>　　Based on the theory of conceptual metaphor, this thesis exemplifies a number of metaphors used in Obama’s inaugural address. The mechanism of con

40、ceptual metaphors are discussed with three of them ― “journey metaphor” , “building metaphor”, “conflict metaphor” ―being elaborated, and the persuasive functions of conceptual metaphors are concluded, in an effort to en

41、hance English learners’ interpreting ability of conceptual metaphors and facilitate audiences’ understanding of public speaking discour</p><p>　　Key words: conceptual metaphor theory; persuasive function; Ob

42、ama’s inaugural address</p><p><b>　　Contents</b></p><p>　　Abstract……………………………………………………………………………....II</p><p>　　1. Introduction...........................................

43、...................................................................1</p><p>　　2. Various Approaches toward Metaphor………………………………………..1</p><p>　　3. Elucidation of Conceptual Metaphors in Obama’s I

44、naugural Address………. 4</p><p>　　3.1 Journey metaphors…………………………………………………………….…...4</p><p>　　3.2 Building metaphors………………………………………………………………..6</p><p>　　3.3 Conflict metaphors……………………

45、…………………………………………...7</p><p>　　4 Persuasive Function of the metaphors in Obama’s Inaugural Address…….......8</p><p>　　4.1 Metaphor and persuasion……………………………………………………….….8</p><p>　　4.

46、2 Metaphor and intention……………………………………………………………9</p><p>　　5 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………11</p><p>　　Bibliography………………………………………………………………………....12</p><p>　　Acknowledgements

47、………………………………………………………………….13</p><p>　　1 Introduction</p><p>　　Metaphor is a universal phenomenon. British rhetorician I.A. Richards once said, in every three sentences of our daily conversation,

48、 there is a possible metaphor (quoted in Shu Dingfang 2000:1). According to Aristotle’s view, metaphor is mainly, and for most people nowadays, a device of the poetic imagination and the rhetorical flourish. When a new v

49、iew of metaphor, later known as the cognitive linguistic view of metaphor, was first developed by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson in the book Metapho</p><p>　　By analyzing conceptual metaphors in President Ob

50、ama’s inaugural address, this paper attempts to explore the effective use of metaphors. This linguistic analysis is expected to provide a crystal clear insight into the nature of how ideologies are conveyed and maintaine

51、d and how persuasive function is accomplished in public speaking discourses.</p><p>　　2 Various Approaches toward Metaphor</p><p>　　There are five main views on metaphor in the field of linguist

52、ics and the traditional three are substitution theory, the comparison theory and the interaction theory. The substitution theory was developed by Roman rhetorician Quintilian in the 1st century. He holds that a metaphori

53、cal expression is used in place of some equivalent literal expression (quoted in Shu Dingfang 2000:3). The comparison theory can be traced back to Aristotle. Aristotle regarded metaphor as “implicit comparison between &l

54、t;/p><p>　　The contemporary theories of metaphor are two: the mapping theory and the blending theory.</p><p>　　Lakoff and Johnson’s conceptual metaphor theory marked the beginning of a new understa

55、nding of metaphor. The most fundamental notion of conceptual metaphor theory（CMT）is the “mapping”. Metaphor can be thought of as a mapping of features from a source domain to a target one. This mapping is ubiquitous, uni

56、directional, systematic, invariable and grounded in physical and sociocultural experience（Lakoff and Johnson 1980）.</p><p>　　The systematic projection of elements from one conceptual domain onto elements of

57、 another involves not merely the objects and properties characteristic of the domain but also the relations, events, and scenarios that characterize the domain. Single sub-metaphors have a coherent structure in their own

58、 right, but also show coherence with other sub-metaphors at the same level, yielding a structured concept. Any given metaphor will be productive for certain parts of its source domain. Only selected </p><p>

59、　　Besides systematicity, the asymmetrical directionality of conceptual metaphors is one of the features most strongly emphasized by Lakoff and Johnson and other cognitive linguists. While a term like weather may be used

60、metaphorically to refer to a set of economic and political circumstances, the reverse metaphor is not possible, linguistically or conceptually. This directionality is more than an interesting and characteristic feature o

61、f metaphorical conceptualizations; it is evidence against a tr</p><p>　　The emphasis on “experiential motivation” is another central principle of CMT. Lakoff and Johnson outline an “experientialist” theory t

62、hat defines meaning and truth in terms of “embodied understanding”. Conceptual structure is embodied in so far as it arises from preconceptual experience, which is itself claimed to be “directly meaningful” ( Lakoff 1987

63、: 267). Preconceptual experiences are structured in terms of basic-level categories, which are “characterized by gestalt perception, mental imag</p><p>　　To sum up, conceptual metaphor allows us to understa

64、nd one domain of experience in terms of another, thus it is likely for us to make use of relatively familiar, tangible domain of experience to deal with relatively unfamiliar, less tangible domain of experience. Altogeth

65、er, for our conceptualization of abstract concepts we rely on basic experiences.</p><p>　　The most important recent trend in cognitive metaphor studies was the advent of blending theory in the mid 1990s. The

66、 conceptual blending theory was introduced by some American scholars represented by Gills Fauconnier and Mark Turner. They developed a comprehensive theory to account for cognitive process, a frame work for exploring hum

67、an information integration. Like metaphor in CMT terms, blending is understood as a pervasive phenomenon in human thought, one which shows its effects regularly in</p><p>　　In conclusion, the establishment o

68、f conceptual metaphor theory symbolizes the emancipation from the bondage of traditional literature-and-rhetoric based metaphoric theories and the entry of evolutionary cognitive sciences. Metaphor has been acknowledged

69、to be not only a figure of speech in the language, but also a unique approach to experience and comprehend one thing in terms of another. The study of conceptual metaphors mainly follows the Lakoff and Johnson’s methodol

70、ogy― the mapping theory, t</p><p>　　3 Elucidation of Conceptual Metaphors in Obama’s Inaugural Address </p><p>　　The most substantial type of behavior by which speakers mobilize their followers

71、is their linguistic performance, or on most formal occasions, speech delivery. Speakers, whether they are American presidents on their inaugural ceremonies or they are contestants on speaking competitions, have to rely o

72、n speeches to convince others of the benefits that may arise from their suggestions. Speakers must try their best to arouse, engage and satisfy the motives of their followers by means of speeches.</p><p>　　T

73、he prevalence of metaphor in public speaking discourses is attested to in the contemporary literature. One of the most distinguishing features of public speaking discourse is that it is a goal-driven discourse. Analysis

74、of metaphors can add to our understanding of how specific ideological goals are achieved through the use of metaphors that match the speakers’ intentions with the audiences’ experience and knowledge of their familiar dom

75、ains. Therefore, the purpose of analyzing metaphors in publ</p><p>　　3.1 Journey metaphors</p><p>　　Journey metaphors have quite an outstanding history in the tradition of cognitive linguistic r

76、esearch. Originally, Lakoff and Johnson (1980:44) propose conceptual metaphor “l(fā)ove is a journey” encompassing expressions such as “l(fā)ook how far we have come”, “we are at the crossroads”, “our marriage is on the rocks” e

77、tc. Lakoff and Johnson (1993:78) continue to suggest “ life is a journey” and then enlarge the journey metaphor as “purposeful activity is traveling along a path towards a destination.” </p><p>　　Journeys ar

78、e one of the most commonplace metaphoric source domains and are a defining feature of public speaking discourse. Evidence of this idea can be found in metaphoric uses of “journey”, “path”, “route”, “way”, etc, which in t

79、urn serve the function of linguistic forms of the source domain for journey metaphors. All these are conventional ways of talking about progress towards a goal and are employed by the president in his inaugural address.

80、This is illustrated by the following examples:</p><p>　　(1) Our journey has never been one of shortcuts or settling for less.</p><p>　　(2) It has not been the path for the faint-hearted, for tho

81、se who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame.</p><p>　　In example (1), the journey is conceived as the movement of the American people over a path towards prosperity and fre

82、edom. In example (2), we have this mapping onto the target domain: striving for establishing the United States of America is starting on a painstaking path.</p><p>　　In journey metaphors the purposes of Obam

83、a’s actions are conceptualized as the destination of travelers. Obama emphasizes that the prosperity and freedom of American can only be gained through a long struggle. It must be earned, however long it may take. Likewi

84、se, in all cases it is assumed that we want to attain a predetermined end. So journey metaphors imply social efforts towards worthwhile goals and can be represented by the conceptual metaphor “purposeful activity is trav

85、eling along a path </p><p>　　As a matter of fact, all journey metaphors have strong positive orientations such as morale enhancement and creation of a feeling of optimism: even when negative aspects of journ

86、eys are highlighted by the metaphor, such as burdens to bear, the effort necessary to achieve anything appraised as worth undertaking. These burdens are perfect reminders to impel the audience to take actions. Just as ex

87、ample (2) implies, not all journeys are pleasant. We may encounter dangers and, at times, may slip, st</p><p>　　3.2 Building metaphors</p><p>　　The building metaphor has been commonly used in di

88、scourses in a variety of forms to emphasize different aspects of a sociocultural phenomenon. Building is taken to be an archetypal creative activity and therefore symbolizes constructive human endeavors and there is clea

89、r evidence that the underlying conceptual metaphor is “worthwhile activity is building ( Lakoff and Johnson 1980：89).” Generally speaking, words from the lexical field of building have a literal reference but the word th

90、at is most</p><p>　　(3) And we will act not only to create new jobs but to lay a new foundation for growth.</p><p>　　In example (3), the idea that lay a new foundation for economic growth in Ame

91、rica is regarded as the symbol of a worthwhile endeavor. Here, Obama calls on all the American people to take bold and swift action to make contribution to the economy.</p><p>　　Building metaphors are motiva

92、ted by the conceptual metaphor “society is a building” and constantly convey a positive evaluation because a cherished outcome requires social cooperation between parties that may hold different opinions. As in example (

93、3), such metaphor conveys a positive evaluation of an activity because its outcome is valuable. Metaphors from the source domain of building are typically evaluative, carrying a strong positive connotation and are employ

94、ed to express aspiration toward</p><p>　　As with journey metaphors, building metaphors highlight the need for patience since it also takes time and effort to construct a building. This is evidently effective

95、 in giving a sense of purpose to the suffering and difficulty that people encounter in their everyday lives. After all, it is a common sense that a soaring skyscraper can’t be completed within a single day.</p>&l

96、t;p>　　3.3 Conflict metaphors</p><p>　　Metaphors from the source domain of conflict include words such as “fight”, “battle”, “threat”, “defeat”, etc. In its original sense, if an army or a group fights a b

97、attle with another army or group, they oppose each other with weapons. We can also say that two armies or groups fight a battle. In a more abstract sense, to live in contemporary society is far from easy and leisurely, a

98、nd we are constantly encountered with challenges and difficulties. An effort to survive in today’s world is to kee</p><p>　　(4) Our nation is at war against a far- reaching network of violence and hatred.<

99、;/p><p>　　(5) You cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.</p><p>　　In example (4), terrorism and economic crisis are conceptualized as enemies. Here, conflict metaphors are well employed to clar

100、ify the transparent standpoint that these enemies are strongly opposed to by the American people. In example (5), Obama does not mention the parties concerned directly. It is a better policy to avoid offending parties co

101、ncerned and to illustrate one’s own opinions unilaterally. Naturally, this strategy has been adopted by the president consciously.</p><p>　　Conflict metaphors commonly have an important role in the evaluatio

102、n of abstract social goals. It is suggested that the domain of conflict highlights the personal sacrifice and physical struggle necessary to achieve social goals. We could employ conflict metaphors to imply that some for

103、m of short-term hardship is necessary to attain long-term worthwhile goals. Much effort should be expended towards the attainment of a worthwhile goal. This is clearly effective in giving a sense of purpose to the</p&