Dear Ernst-August,
Thank you for your reply!
In addition to tightening and loosening, construction of ad hoc
concepts may also include conceptual metaphoric mapping (as
suggested by Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez et al. 2001).
Since Lakoff&Johnson (1980 - unfortunately, being the only title of theirs
available to me) claim that conceptual metaphoric mapping (ARGUMENT IS
WAR, TIME IS MONEY etc.) is culture-specific, I was thinking maybe translating "Your are
wasting my time" into a language of a culture, which is "taking it's
time" (chilling and following their Tao) and does not perceive it as a "valuable commodity" at all, would
entail a construction of a set of ad hoc concepts, different from that
of, for example, English?
Best wishes,
Andre
Friday, November 12, 2004, 9:42:13 PM, you wrote:
easo> 2) Assuming that I have now understood the background of your question more
easo> adequately, I am still not sure what you are getting at. As far as I am
easo> aware, the term 'adhoc concept' has been introduced to account for the fact
easo> that there can be significant differences (through tightening or loosening)
easo> between the concept occurring in an explicature and the lexical concept by
easo> which it was triggered. Translation as interpretive use relies on
easo> interpretive resemblance between utterances which I have proposed to define
easo> in terms of the sharing of explicatures and implicatures of original and
easo> translated utterance. Whether the concepts occurring in the explicatures are
easo> identical to any lexically specified concepts or are adhoc does not seem to
easo> make any difference to interpretive resemblance, as far as I can see. Also,
easo> I am not sure of what significance "Lakoff-mapping" is here. But perhaps I
easo> am missing something.
easo> With best wishes,
easo> Ernst-August
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 12 2004 - 17:30:49 GMT