Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

SOME GRAMMATICAL IMPLICATIONS OF ‘PIG’

SOME GRAMMATICAL IMPLICATIONS OF ‘PIG’ SOME GRAMMATICAL IMPLICATIONS OF TIG' THOMAS J. GARDNER I have suggested elsewhere that the metaphorical type, 'pig' is not a linguistic irregularity1 and have hinted at a possible way to deal with it grammatically.2 But there I was primarily iiiterested in suggesting a few procedural points for approaching the problem of the typology of substantival metaphors in general (more or less under the broad rubric 'literature and linguistics') and not primarily concerned with examining the type in any detail. In this .paper I hope to demonstrate that there are strong empirical reasons for considering the derivation of these 'metaphors'3 in terms of some kind of regulär grammatical process. The close relationship between the metaphor and the ordinary simile is not a recent discovery; it was noticed already in antiquity. And it has not gone unnoticed in modern times, being mentioned over and over again almost ad nauseam. But no one has dealt very seriously with this relationship from the point of view of a grammatical theory.4 For obvious reasons, I shali ignore the stylistic connections between metaphor and simile and concentrate by and large on whatever purely grammatical connections might exist between the structural types: (1) and You're http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Linguistics - An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences de Gruyter

SOME GRAMMATICAL IMPLICATIONS OF ‘PIG’

Download PDF
13 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/some-grammatical-implications-of-pig-F8vvRbhaEM

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Walter de Gruyter
ISSN
0024-3949
eISSN
1613-396X
DOI
10.1515/ling.1973.11.95.13
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

SOME GRAMMATICAL IMPLICATIONS OF TIG' THOMAS J. GARDNER I have suggested elsewhere that the metaphorical type, 'pig' is not a linguistic irregularity1 and have hinted at a possible way to deal with it grammatically.2 But there I was primarily iiiterested in suggesting a few procedural points for approaching the problem of the typology of substantival metaphors in general (more or less under the broad rubric 'literature and linguistics') and not primarily concerned with examining the type in any detail. In this .paper I hope to demonstrate that there are strong empirical reasons for considering the derivation of these 'metaphors'3 in terms of some kind of regulär grammatical process. The close relationship between the metaphor and the ordinary simile is not a recent discovery; it was noticed already in antiquity. And it has not gone unnoticed in modern times, being mentioned over and over again almost ad nauseam. But no one has dealt very seriously with this relationship from the point of view of a grammatical theory.4 For obvious reasons, I shali ignore the stylistic connections between metaphor and simile and concentrate by and large on whatever purely grammatical connections might exist between the structural types: (1) and You're

Journal

Linguistics - An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences – de Gruyter

Published: Jan 1, 1973

There are no references for this article.