语言结构与社会隐喻:对“上厕所下厨房”搭配规则的文化语言学分析
Language Structure and Social Metaphor: Cultural Linguistic Analysis of the Matching Rules of “Going to the Toilet and Going to the Kitchen”
摘要: 从文化语言学视角探讨汉语中“上厕所”与“下厨房”搭配规则的不对称性及其背后的社会隐喻。通过分析词典释义、BCC语料库数据分析及用法演变,揭示“上/下”的语义不仅指向空间方位,更映射社会等级与性别分工。“上厕”关联排泄场所的高位设置与避讳心理,“下厨”则隐含厨房劳作的低微属性,反映传统社会对体力劳动的贬抑。人们的认知经验影响着语言的结构,上/下动词性组合的不对称性受到地理空间布局、等级隐喻及语言经济原则等多重因素的共同作用。
Abstract: From the perspective of cultural linguistics, this paper explores the asymmetry of the collocation rules of “going to the toilet” and “going to the kitchen” in Chinese and the social metaphors behind it. By analyzing the dictionary definition, BCC corpus data analysis and usage evolution, it is revealed that the semantics of “up/down” not only point to spatial orientation, but also map social hierarchy and gender division of labor. “Going to the toilet” is associated with the high setting and avoidance of excretion places, while “cooking” implies the lowly attribute of kitchen work, reflecting the depreciation of manual labor in traditional society. People’s cognitive experience affects the structure of language, and the asymmetry of up/down verbal combinations is affected by multiple factors such as geospatial layout, hierarchical metaphors, and linguistic economic principles.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
卢华岩. 由“到”义动词“上/下”构成的动宾组合[J]. 语言教学与研究, 2001(3): 18-22.
|
|
[2]
|
吴慧, 胡敏瑶. “上/下+N处所”结构的历史来源及其认知理据——以“上厕所”和“下厨房”为例[J]. 唐山师范学院学报, 2022, 44(2): 27-33.
|
|
[3]
|
刘俊莉. “上/下+馆子/厨房”差异辨析[J]. 江西师范大学学报, 2005, 38(6): 83-85.
|
|
[4]
|
张玥. 为什么说“上厕所, 下厨房”而不是相反[J]. 新课程研究(职业教育), 2008(6): 183-184.
|
|
[5]
|
钟检秀. 上/下动词性组合不对称性的认知考察[J]. 文教资料, 2013(31): 174-176.
|
|
[6]
|
杨子, 王雪明. “上”、“下”动词性组合的不对称性解析——缘何不能说“下厕所”与“上馆子” [J]. 语言科学, 2009, 8(1): 42-47.
|
|
[7]
|
冯韬, 郭熙煌. 语言空间结构不对称性现象的认知解释——以空间介词“上”、“下”为例[J]. 湖北社会科学, 2013, 27(6): 132-135.
|
|
[8]
|
邹积会. 英语词汇中的概念隐喻研究[J]. 齐齐哈尔大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2009(4): 123-125.
|