대중적 의사소통 속에서 나타나는 은유의 사용과 구현 - 상업광고 속의 사례들을 중심으로 = Using and Realising Metaphor in Public Communication: Focusing on the Cases in Commercial Advertisements

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this paper is to build up a pragmatic account of using and realising metaphor, particularly shown in public communication such as commercial advertisements. According to the traditional point of view, metaphor is a “figure of speech in which a linguistic expression normally belonging to one field of reference is extended analogously to another”(Huang 2012: 191-192). Beyond this way of rhetorical perspective on metaphor, however, this paper pursues to re-recognition of the linguistic nature of metaphor with a more active insight(e.g., from a viewpoint based on experientialist epistemology) and seeks the rational explanation of metaphor in accordance with it. Especially, in some influential studies of cognitive pragmatics(i.e., Relevance Theory: RT) such as Sperber and Wilson(1995, 2006), Yus(2009) and Carston(2000, 2002, 2010), metaphor has been evaluated as a linguistic mechanism which shows ordinary language users’ cognitive reasoning and conceptualization abilities, not just as a method of expression. Based on the RT approach to metaphor, this paper presents an alternative way of explaining metaphor used in public communication, the goal of which is to perform argumentation for persuading consumers to purchase an advertiser’s products, services and ideas.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 논문은 대중적 의사소통(특히 광고담화)속에서 나타나는 은유의 사용과 구현양상에 초점을 맞추고 이를 화용론적 접근(적합성이론)을 통해 분석/규명하는 것을 그 목표로 삼는다. 은유와 관련한 전통적인 시각은 은유를 ‘의미적으로 양립 불가능한 두 개의 서로 다른 대상들을 “A is B”와 같은 등치관계로 설정하고 그로부터 도출되는 ‘A is C’와 같은 새로운 추론적 의미를 전달하는 것이라고 여겨왔다. 그러나 본 논문은 은유에 대한 이런 식의 수사학적 인식을 넘어서 보다 적극적인 차원(예를 들면 체험주의 인식론에 입각한 관점)에서 은유를 재인식하고, 그에 따른 합리적인 설명을 추구하고자 한다. 특히 화용론 분야에서 스퍼버와 윌슨, 유스, 카스턴 등은 은유를 단순한 표현기제가 아닌, 일상 언어사용자들의 인지적 추론능력과 개념화 능력을 드러내주는 하나의 매카니즘으로 평가한다. 본 논문은 바로 이러한 은유에 대한 적합성이론의 접근을 바탕으로 하여 대중적 의사소통, 특히 광고담화 속에서 이루어지는 은유의 작용 양상(특히 청자를 설득하는 논증적 기제로서의 은유사용과 구현)을 규명하는 화용론적 설명논리를 제시할 것이다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 최경봉, "은유표현에서 단어의 선택과 해석원리" 7 : 215-241, 2000
• 2 김건수, "은유와 광고" 한국중앙영어영문학회 44 (44): 11-33, 2002
• 3 이성범, "광고 언어의 비진실성에 대한 화용적 접근" 언어정보연구소 18 : 167-198, 2012
• 4 Mercier, Hugo, "Why Do Human Reason?: Arguments for and Argumentative Theory" 34 (34): 57-74, 2011
• 5 Blakemore, Diane, "Understanding Utterances: An Introduction to Pragmatics" Blackwell 2004
• 6 Perelman, Chaïm, "Traité de l’argumentation: la Nouvelle Rhétorique" Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles 2008
• 7 Carston, Robyn, "Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication" Blackwell 2002
• 8 Habermas, Jürgen, "The Theory of Communicative Action, vol. 1" Boston Press 1984
• 9 Grice, Paul, "The Philosophy of Language" Oxford UP 41-58, 1975
• 10 Huang, Yan, "The Oxford Dictionary of Pragmatics" Oxford UP 2012
• 11 Cook, Guy, "The Discourse of Advertising" Routledge 2001
• 12 Sperber, Dan, "The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought" Cambridge UP 84-105, 2006
• 13 Martin, Brice, "Strategic Brand Management" ED-Tech Press 2020
• 14 Sperber, Dan, "Relevance: Communication and Cognition" Blackwell 1995
• 15 Larson, Brian, "Relevance and Irrelevance Theories, Factors and Challenges" Mouton de Gruyter 69-95, 2018
• 16 Clark, Billy, "Relevance Theory" Cambridge UP 2013
• 17 Bakhtin, Mikhail, "Rabelais and His World" Indiana UP 1984
• 18 Wilson, Deidre, "Parallels and Differences in the Treatment of Metaphor in Relevance Theory and Cognitive Linguistics" 8 (8): 177-196, 2011
• 19 Yus, Francisco, "Multimodal Metaphor" Mouton de Gruyter 145-172, 2009
• 20 Lakoff, George, "Metaphors We Live By" U of Chicago P 1980
• 21 Wilson, Deidre., "Metaphor, Relevance and the ‘Emergent Property’ Issue" 21 : 404-433, 2006
• 22 Percy, Walker, "Metaphor as Mistake" 66 : 79-99, 1958
• 23 Wearing, Catherine, "Metaphor and What is Said" 21 : 310-332, 2006
• 24 Santibáñez, Cristiàn, "Metaphor and Argumentation : The Case of Chilean Parliamentarian Media Participation" 42 : 973-989, 2010
• 25 Schiffer, Stephen, "Meaning" Oxford UP 1972
• 26 Grice, Paul, "Meaning" 66 : 377-388, 1957
• 27 Plantin, Christian, "L’argumentation" Seuil 1996
• 28 Carston, Robyn, "Lexical Pragmatics, Ad Hoc Concepts and Metaphor : A Relevance Theory Perspective" 22 (22): 153-180, 2010
• 29 Ducrot, Oswald, "Le Dire et le Dit" Les Éditions de Minuit 1985
• 30 Anscombre, Jean-Claude, "Jean-Claude. "De l’argumentation dans la langue à la théorie des topoï. "Théorie des Topoï" Les Édition Kimé 11-47, 1995
• 31 Carston, Robyn, "Explicature and Semantics" 12 (12): 1-46, 2000
• 32 Renkema, Yan, "Discourse Studies" John Benjamins Publishing Company 1993
• 33 Bovée, Courtland, "Contemporary Advertising" McGraw-Hill 1992
• 34 Van Eemeran, Frans H, "Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies: A Pragma-Dialectical Approach" Cambridge UP 1992
• 35 Moeschler, Jacques, "Argumentation et Conversation: Élements pour une Analyse Pragmatique du Discours" Hatier 1985
• 36 Felon, George, "Advertising: Concept and Copy" Prentice Hall 1994
• 37 Tanaka, Keiko, "Advertising Language: A Pragmatic Approach to Advertisements in Britain and Japan" Routledge 1996
• 38 Wright, John S, "Advertising" McGraw-Hill 1982
• 39 Deleuze, Gilles, "A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia" U of Minnesota P 1987
• 40 Van Eemeran, "A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach" Cambridge UP 2004