Abstract

The idea of metaphor classification is regarded as how felicitously they are entrenched in everyday language spoken by ordinary people. Metaphor conventionality can be regarded as a scale whose opposite ends constitute conventional and creative metaphors. Logic indicates that the majority of linguistic metaphors are well-worn and conventional rather than novel, since an excess of novel metaphors may remarkably bring about “communicative surprise” (Rabadán Álvarez, 1991) thus increase cognitive processing time and even hinder perceiving. Metaphorical creativity, as the other extreme of the scale of conventionality, can be looked at as the use of conceptual metaphors and/ or their linguistic manifestations that are creative or novel. This study seeks to scrutinize the scale of conventionality in the Persian translation of A Fraction of the Whole. MIP known as Metaphor Identification Procedure put forward by the Pragglejaz Group (2007) was employed in the study to identify metaphors. The findings reveal that, sometimes, the metaphors used in L1 are novel or creative, but the translator draws upon conventional or entrenched ones in L2, or vice versa. The aim is to show the translator's choice of metaphor in terms of a conventionality scale using some previous cognitive models in this regard.

Highlights

  • The mélange and conciliation of Translation Studies ( TS) with Cognitive Linguistics ( CL) is embryonic

  • This study, argues that: 1. it is possible for translators to construct new source domains for the same creative metaphors so that the target translation will appear as unique and creative as the source text

  • Only one example can be accounted for 2. more importantly, it is possible in some cases to draw upon conventional metaphors in the translation of novel ones

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The mélange and conciliation of Translation Studies ( TS) with Cognitive Linguistics ( CL) is embryonic. Speaking, translating is no longer deemed as a plain transfer from the Source Language (SL) to the Recipient or Target Language (TL). CL highlights the notion of experiential meaning viewing meaning as cognitively constructible through human experiences and senses; this approach, regards TS as a communicative process Lakoff and Johnson (1980/2003) discuss three main types of metaphor: Ontological, Orientational, and Structural. Orientational metaphors are defined as the ones involving spatial relationships. These metaphors, like HAPPY IS UP and SAD IS DOWN, give concepts spatial orientations. Structural metaphors are the ones in which the source domain (concrete concept) provides a knowledge structure for the more abstract one (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980/2003). The structure of the source domain makes us apprehend the target domain, as in ARGUMENT IS WAR

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call