Two-part allegorical sayings, although carrying the main characteristics of idioms identified by previous studies (cf. Nunberg et al. 1994, Gibbs 1995, Kövecses and Szabó 1996, Geeraerts 1995, 2003), display uniqueness of their own. All the intended meanings are motivated
metonymically or metaphorically, with some of them additionally involving sound association. A taxonomic framework is hence established to categorize this discourse form succinctly into four types—Homophonic association / Thing, Homophonic association / Situation, Conceptual association / Thing and Conceptual association / Situation. Four schematic representations are given for the four types. To recapitulate, target-in-source metonymy is always prompted by the first part of the saying. For cases that involve things, essential or inherent attributes are
highlighted; for those involving situations, results are fashioned by fictitious scenarios. Moreover, sound mechanism is involved—with the first part creating a context for the connection of the second part of the saying and the intended meaning through homophonic association for type 1
10 The spelling of this Taiwanese Southern Min example is based on the Church romanization, adopted from Chen (2004).
and type 2. For cases of type 3 and type 4, the Great Chain Metaphor is activated, mapping the imaginary scenario established by the first part onto a real-life situation, ready for inference of the intended meaning. While expressions of other forms of being are often found in the sayings, we understand them as involving human affairs.
In other words, in line with Lakoff (1987) and Lakoff and Turner (1989), this study
maintains that the relevant ICMs of two-part allegorical sayings, just like those of proverbs, are closely related to the cultural models made up by the four elements of the Great Chain
Metaphor—the Nature of Things, the Great Chain, the GENERIC IS SPECIFIC metaphor, and the Maxim of Quantity. Moreover, the study further claims that the evoked knowledge schemas are also deeply grounded in local cultural practices, on top of the prevalent Great Chain Metaphor.
Hakka examples investigated in this study clearly demonstrate how their language mirrors their cultural conception.
Although it is claimed that two-part allegorical sayings are similar to proverbs in their employment of the knowledge schemas and cultural constraints maintained by Lakoff and Turner (1989), unlike proverbs, some cases of two-part allegorical sayings need to resort to sound association for their intended meanings. Furthermore, this study takes a step further in
contributing explicit representations of the mechanisms for the intended meanings of two-part allegorical sayings. In particular, the interaction patterns of metonymy and metaphor provoked by Ruiz de Mendoza and Díez (2003) and his associates are utilized to capture the intricate layers of derivations for the interpretation of such a linguistic form. However, their five interaction patterns cannot capture the phenomena exhibited by two-part allegorical sayings. Specifically, metonymic reduction (target in source) is activated. Secondly, sound association is then triggered for those special type 1 and type 2 cases. Otherwise, a mirror image of metonymic reduction is also observed in the target domain of the metaphor. These interaction patterns are not found on their list. Because of the uniqueness of this discourse form, the study hence makes both empirical and theoretical contribution. The four schematic representations not only elucidate the typological interaction patterns for two-part allegorical sayings but also add to the list of the patterns in Ruiz de Mendoza and Díez (2003) for idioms in English. A plausible theoretical question to pursue is the level of exhaustiveness of possible interaction patterns of metonymy and metaphor, an endeavor that requires support from both theoretical and empirical investigation in the future.
Acknowledgements
Research results reported in this paper have been funded by grants from National Science Council of Taiwan (NSC 93-2411-H-004-039; NSC 94-2411-H-004-007). Previous versions of this article were presented at 9th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference (9th ICLC) in Yonsai University, Seoul, Korea, and The Joint Conference of the 14th Annual Conference of the International Association of Chinese Linguistics (IACL 14) and the 10th International Symposium
on Chinese Linguistics (IsCLL 10) in Academia Sinica, Taiwan. Special thanks are extended to Cliff Goddard, Inger Moen, Chinfa Lien, and Mei-chun Liu, James Tai, James Myers, Jane Tsai, Jung-hsing Chang, and Yueh-chin Chang for their valuable comments. I also gratefully
acknowledge the two anonymous referees for their insightful and constructive comments and suggestions. I am solely responsible for any errors remaining in the paper.
References
Barcelona, Antonio, 2003a. Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within cognitive linguistics: An update. In: Dirven, R. and Pörings, R. (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 207-277.
Barcelona, Antonio, 2003b. The case for a metonymic basis of pragmatic inferencing: Evidence from jokes and funny anecdotes. In: Panther, K.-U. and Thornburg, L. (Eds.), Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing, John Benjamins, Philadelphia, pp. 81-102.
Chappell, Hilary, 2001. Synchrony and diachrony of Sinitic languages: A brief history of Chinese dialects. In: Chappell, H. (Ed.), Sinitic Grammar, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 3-28.
Chappell, Hilary, and Lamarre, Christine, 2005. A Grammar and Lexicon of Hakka: Historical Materials from the Basel Mission Library. École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Paris.
Chen, Yi-ling, 2004. Two-Part Allegorical Sayings in Taiwanese Southern Min: A Cognitive Semantic Analysis. Master Thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei.
Dirven, René, 2003. Metonymy and metaphor: Different mental strategies of conceptualization. In:
Dirven, R. and Pörings, R. (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 75-111.
Geeraerts, Dirk, 1995. Specialization and reinterpretation in idioms. In: Everaert, M. et al. (Eds.), Idioms: Structural and Psychological Perspectives, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 57-73.
Geeraerts, Dirk, 2003. The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in composite expressions. In:
Dirven, R. and Pörings, R. (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 435-465.
Gibbs, Raymond W. Jr., 1990. Psycholinguistic studies on the conceptual basis of idiomaticity.
Cognitive Linguistics 1, 417-451.
Gibbs, Raymond W. Jr., 1995. Idiomaticity and human cognition. In: Everaert, M. et al. (Eds.), Idioms: Structural and Psychological Perspectives, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 97-116.
Goossens, Louis, 2003. Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. In Dirven, R. and Pörings, R. (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparision and Contrast, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 349-371.
Hashimoto, Mantaro J., 1973. The Hakka Dialect: A Linguistic Study of its Phonology, Syntax, and Lexicon. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
何石松 [He, Shi-sung], 2003. 客諺一百首 [One-Hundred Hakka Sayings] 2nd ed. 五南圖書 [Wunnan], Taipei.
Kövecses, Zoltán, and Szabó, Péter, 1996. Idioms: A view from cognitive semantics. Applied Linguistics 17, 326-355.
Lakoff, George, 1993. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In: Ortony, A. (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 202-251.
Lakoff, George, and Turner, Mark, 1989. More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Lai, Huei-ling, 2005. A taxonomic framework of two-part allegorical sayings. Paper presented at 9th International Cognitive Linguistic Conference, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
李盛發 [Li, Sheng-fa], 1998. 客家諺語歇後語選集 [Collections of Hakka Proverbs and Two-part Allegorical Sayings]. 安可出版 [Anke], Taipei.
廖德添 [Liao, De-tien] (Ed.), 2001. 客家師傅話 [Hakka Master’s Sayings] 2nd ed. 南天圖書 [Nantien], Taipei.
Luo, Meizhen, 1998. The continuity and variation of Hakka language and culture in Taiwan. In:
The Fourth International Conference on Hakkaology: Hakka and Modern World, Academia Sinica, Taipei, pp. 275-284.
羅肇錦[Luo, Zhao-jin], 2000. 苗栗縣客語諺語謎語集 [Collections of Miaoli Hakka Sayings and Riddles]. 苗栗縣文化局 [Culture Affairs Bureau of Miaoli County], Miaoli.
Nunberg, Geoffrey, Sag, Ivan A., and Wasow, Thomas, 1994. Idioms. Language 70, 491-538.
Radden, Günter, 2003. How metonymic are metaphors? In Barcelona, A. (Ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A Cognitive Perspective, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp.
93-108.
Radden, Günter, and Kövecses, Zoltán, 1999. Towards a theory of metonymy. In: Panther, K.-U.
and Radden, G. (Eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought, John Benjamins, Philadelphia, pp. 17-59.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José, 1998. On the nature of blending as a cognitive phenomenon. Journal of Pragmatics 30, 259-274.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José, and Díez, Olga I. Velasco, 2003. Patterns of conceptual interaction. In Dirven, R. and Pörings, R. (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparision and Contrast, Mouton de Gruyter,Berlin, pp. 489-532.
Wang, William S. Y., 1991. Language prefabs and habitual thought. In: Wang, W. S. Y. (Ed.), Explorations in Language, 金字塔出版 [Pyramid], Taipei, pp. 397-412.
徐兆泉 [Xu, zhao-quan] (Ed.), 2003. 台灣客家話辭典 [Hakka Dictionary of Taiwan]. 南天圖 書 [Nantien], Taipei.
楊兆禎 [Yang, Zhao-zhen], 1999. 客家諺語拾穗 [Selections of Hakka Sayings]. 新竹縣文化 局 [Culture Center of Xinzhu County], Xinzhu.