은유로 논증하기: 적합성이론에 의한 은유광고담화에 나타나는 논증분석과 그 함의

Abstract

This paper pursues the goal of pragmatically explaining the inferential process of argumentation by metaphor within the theoretical boundary of Relevance Theory (i.e., RT). Metaphor saying “A is B” works at the conceptual level, depends on the inference from the similarities between two different entities or experiences (Lakoff and Johnson 1980) and conveys another inferred meaning ‘A is C’ to the hearer. Beyond this well known character of metaphor as a mechanism of human cognition, however, metaphor often works as a tool of argumentation; particularly in advertisements as a type of argumentative communication, where an advertiser guides passive consumers to purchase his products or services. Some argumentation theorists such as van Eemeren and Grootendorst (1992) and Moeschler (1985) have held that argumentation is surely a part of communication. If so, it is possible to treat and integrate ‘argumentation’ by a single principle of ‘relevance,’ and it contributes to increasing the explanatory power of this theory.