A compreensão das metáforas primárias em indivíduos surdos

• Ano de defesa: 2015
• Autor(a) principal: Aureliano, Thalita Maria Lucindo
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal da Paraíba; Brasil; Linguística; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Linguística; UFPB
• Palavras-chave em Português: Metáfora primária; Linguística cognitiva; Surdez; Primary metaphor; Cognitive linguistics; Deafness; CNPQ::LINGUISTICA, LETRAS E ARTES::LINGUISTICA
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.ufpb.br/jspui/handle/123456789/19103

The work proposes to investigate the comprehension of the primary metaphor through the assumptions of Cognitive Linguistics. This understanding will be analyzed in individuals with deafness, in counterpoint with individuals without disabilities, since according to Lakoff and Johnson (1999) and Wilcox (2000) culture is a contributing factor to the understanding of metaphors. For this work, primary metaphors based on the five sensory-motor sensations will be presented: touch, taste, smell, vision and hearing, and the informants will be exposed to an experiment developed in the qualtrics software with linguistic inputs to be related to the implicit metaphors. The sensations were chosen because, according to Lakoff & Johnson (1999), we perceive the world through the body. In this way, the work will also address the connection between the metaphors and the conceptual system of individuals. To perform this test, we selected as time independent variable, since the dependent variable is the hit frequency. We chose to work with the primary metaphor resulting from these sensations, since we believe that the differentiation between the subjects' cognitive formation will become clearer, if we cover other types of primary metaphors such as time or space. Some of the theoretical aspects in the research are: auditory deficiency / deafness (Fernandes 2012, 2006, Wilcox 2000), gestual language (Mcneill 1985, Mcneiil & Duncan 2000), sign language (Fernandes 2003, Quadros 2012), primary metaphor & Johnson 1980, 1999, Grady 1997) and comprehension (Marcushi 2008). Some preliminary results demonstrate that although conceptualization does not occur differently, it is more costly for the deaf, so metaphors are not as conscious and natural to the experimental group