ترکیب مفهومی در تبلیغات
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|2103||2009||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 7111 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of Business Research, Volume 62, Issue 1, January 2009, Pages 39–49
Conceptual blending occurs at the moment of perception and creates new meanings out of existing ways of thinking. Analysis of data collected in phenomenological interviews reveals the blending processes consumers use to “make sense” of advertisements. We recognize subtle similarities and differences between metaphor and blending, and examine their occurrence in three types of blending networks in ads.
The ability to map structural elements from one domain onto another is a prerequisite of metaphor. A standard definition of metaphor is “a figure of speech by which a word or phrase is transferred in application from one object to another.” Traditional metaphor theory attempts to explain the mapping of attributes in terms of similarity or difference. The conceptual metaphor theory proposed by Lakoff and Johnson (1999) demonstrates that metaphor is not just a figure of speech but a thoroughly embodied activity, generated by thought and imagination. Their insight makes possible a more abstract level of meaning because it unites two disparate domains and at the same time recognizes the asymmetry between them. For example, the metaphor “Juliet is the sun” refers in general to Juliet's happy disposition and warm nature, but more specifically to the fact that she is the center of Romeo's universe. However, “her smile lights up the room,” moves away from conventional metaphor and makes an association between happiness and brightness — an entrenched conceptual association arising from correlations in experience. Lakoff and Johnson (1999) call such associations primary metaphors. Metaphors can be both verbal and non-verbal. An example of a visual metaphor is the company logo for Prudential Insurance. It is a picture of the Rock of Gibraltar, one of the twin pedestals of the great statue of Hercules, said to have straddled the strait connecting Spain and Africa. Because of its strategic position as the entry point into Europe, Gibraltar was a target of successive waves of invaders.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Blending is a ubiquitous, fundamental cognitive activity. Fauconnier and Turner (2000) speculate that the evolution of double scope blending made human language possible. Blending theory suggests that principles for understanding metaphor also apply to non-metaphorical phenomena. Counterfactual thinking abounds in daily life and blends that allow us to do this are possible. Blending theory has been applied to the study of verbal, musical, and visual art, in cartoons and allegory, in mathematical and scientific thought, in grammar and rhetoric, and in the actions, rituals, and artifacts of every day life (Fauconnier and Turner, 2001). Blending is not restricted to language; visual representation prompts blends, often in an ingenious manner as in the State of Illinois–Palm Pilot ad. Blending works below the surface, but is also a routine cognitive operation with wide applications; it occurs in the moment of thinking about a particular ad or topic. It is an emergent phenomenon, but can reinforce entrenched ways of thinking. Blends involve the creation of temporary mental spaces that are informed by knowledge of specific domains brought together in the blend. Blends may become entrenched, but may also change over time when we manipulate them. The theoretical contribution we make is significant given that the landmark article on rhetoric in advertising (Scott 1994) contains no description of blending activities. Instead, Scott discusses figurative communication by drawing on analogy and metaphor. Although her arguments are persuasive, and despite her elaborate critique of existing theories of communication, she overlooks an essential element by restricting her argument to meanings constructed through the typical two-space model used in analogy and metaphor. These two models remain unidirectional — from source to target domains — and leave no space for blending activities.