The Cognitive Aspect of the Genesis of Intellectual Metaphors

Abstract

This article identifies and interprets the genesis of the “sensory perception of an object – understanding an object” cognitive metaphor, which is a key means of conceptualising intellectual activity. This object is considered from the point of view of the interaction of mental and linguistic units. The reflection of the process of understanding in consciousness is interpreted using the concept of a scenario-type concept, which is gestalt. The study uses a complex methodology such as methods of conceptological modeling, component, and contextual analysis. The complex methodology makes it possible to comprehend the origin of the cognitive metaphor considering the role of perception reflected in the structure of the scenario-type gestalt and the selection of linguistic means to denote the process of cognition in speech. The author demonstrates that two mental models are widely represented as ways of designating the process and the result of cognition: the metonymic model of sensory perception of an object – understanding of the object and the metaphorical model of sensory perception of an object – understanding of the object. The metonymic model reflects the relationship of contiguity between sensory perception as the initial stage of cognition and the cognitive process as a whole and is a scenario type of lexical metonymy. The author establishes that the formation of a cognitive metaphor is preceded by the metonymic identification of the sensory stage of cognition and the entire process of cognition including the intellectual act of understanding the object. Consequently, the metonymic identification of the sensory and intellectual stages of cognition provides conditions for their comparison, “creating” similarities between them as a result of the comparison and thereby predetermines the emergence of the cognitive metaphor of sensory perception of an object – understanding of an object. The author reveals a specific feature of the cognitive metaphor that distinguishes it from other metaphorical types, i. e. a regular correlation with the metonymic model of the same name, which is also widespread in this denotative sphere. The discursive aspect of considering the metonymic and metaphorical mental models of the same name that combine the same components (sensory perception of the object and understanding of the object) makes it possible to establish the presence of a transition zone between metonymic and metaphorical expressions, in which metonymy and metaphor cannot be told apart unambiguously.