Metaphor In Cognitive Linguistics Research Articles

METAPHORICAL REPRESENTATION OF THE CONCEPT CONFLICT IN AMERICAN AND BRITISH POLITICAL DISCOURSE (BASED ON IMAGE METAPHORS)

The article is devoted to the metaphorical representation of the concept CONFLICT in the English-language political discourse, namely American and British. The figurative content of the concept CONFLICT is realized through a metaphorical image, which clarifies the essence of the CONFLICT more profoundly by means of its figurative assimilation to other entities in the context of modern English-language political discourse. Metaphorical images are revealed on the basis of the cognitive-discursive interpretation of the discursive contexts of the metaphorical nomination with the involvement of the tools of the cognitive metaphor theory. The article defines the notion of conceptual metaphor in cognitive linguistics, explains the definition of image metaphor and establishes the specifics of the metaphorical actualization of the concept CONFLICT in modern political discourse by representatives of American and British culture. The analysis of the speeches of English-speaking political leaders between 2000-2020 showed that CONFLICT is represented by the following image metaphors: CONFLICT is ideological STRUGGLE, CONFLICT is LAST RESORT, CONFLICT is TEST, CONFLICT is CONTEST, CONFLICT is METAPHOR, CONFLICT is CLASH, CONFLICT is MISTAKE, CONFLICT is SPORT, CONFLICT is EXPERIENCE, CONFLICT is CALLING, CONFLICT is BIG MATTER, CONFLICT is DIFFICULT PROPOSITION, CONFLICT is BIG CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE, CONFLICT is AN INTERESTING WAY TO DESCRIBE THE WORLD WE LIVE IN, CONFLICT is COMPLEX MISSION, CONFLICT is IMAGE, CONFLICT is ENFORCING DOCTRINE, CONFLICT is TRAGEDY, CONFLICT is RESPONSIBILITY, CONFLICT is NOT OPTIMISTIC THOUGHT, CONFLICT is SUBJECT, CONFLICT is DAMAGE, CONFLICT is DISASTER, CONFLICT is BLOODY AND BRUTAL BUSINESS, CONFLICT is MEASUREMENT, CONFLICT is BOND, CONFLICT is PARALLEL, CONFLICT is VICTORY, CONFLICT is primarily intelligence and law enforcement operation,CONFLICT is SCAR, CONFLICT is DISEASE, CONFLICT is LOSER, CONFLICT is REALM OF UNCERTAINTY, CONFLICT is CREATION, CONFLICT is PLEDGE, CONFLICT is RELICS, CONFLICT is EXPRESSION OF HUMAN FOLLY, CONFLICT is CHAPTER OF HISTORY, CONFLICT is DISTANT MEMORY, CONFLICT is REMORSELESS SCAVENGER, CONFLICT is SURPASSING IRONY, CONFLICT is (not) WORD, CONFLICT is (not) CRUSADE, CONFLICT is UNJUSTIFIED PROVOCATION, CONFLICT is WORST POSSIBLE SOLUTION, CONFLICT is TASK, CONFLICT is MORAL, CONFLICT is OPTION, CONFLICT is ANSWER, CONFLICT is FESTING WOUND. Image metaphors depict the CONFLICT in the most unusual comparisons and similes, which are actualized both by political representatives of American and British society.

The problem of metaphor in cognitive linguistics

This article is devoted to the problem of the study of metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics, the conceptual theory of metaphor. The article deals with the works of such research scientists as Earl McCormack, G.Lakoff and M.Johnson, as well as Raymond W.Gibbs Jr., Dedra Gentner, Brian Bowdle, Lynn Cameron, Gilles Fauconier, Michael J. Reddy, David Pantner and others. Definitions are given for two types of metaphors: orientational and ontological metaphors. The article also discusses such aspects as conceptual mapping or conceptual matching, there are three types of this mapping. The article also touches upon the levels of the metaphorical, cognitive process. The conceptual theory of metaphor is well represented in the books by G.Lakoff and M.Johnson «Metaphors we live by». The article also provides examples of conceptual metaphors. The main function of metaphor is its cognitive aspect, the function of obtaining new knowledge. Metaphor in the aspect of cognitive linguistics is considered through the prism of the conceptual theory of metaphor. Metaphorical thinking is inherent not only to modern man, but from time immemorial, metaphor has been skillfully used in the everyday habitual way of life of a person. Conceptual metaphor in the aspect of cognitive linguistics is one of the main cognitive operations, a way of thinking, understanding, cognition, perception and interpretation of the environment around us. This is the transition of experience, information, knowledge about one semantic area to another semantic area.

On the Conceptual Metaphors of Business in Chinese Negotiation Discourses

In this paper, the conceptual metaphor in cognitive linguistics is used as a theoretical framework for the study of conceptual metaphors in business negotiation in English and Chinese discourse. Firstly, conceptual metaphors in English and Chinese business negotiation discourse are collected and classified. Secondly, the similarities and differences of metaphors in English and Chinese discourse are compared. In this paper, by means of comparison and illustration, the method of qualitative research is adopted. It collected a large number of business cases and business negotiation dialogues, summed up several kinds of metaphors in English and Chinese business negotiation which are in a higher frequency. Through the comparative analysis of these categories, the same points and different points are summed up. Finally, it’s the effects on business English Major Students through the analysis of the results, and how should more reasonable teaching methods be taken. However, due to cultural differences, the usages of conceptual metaphors in different cultures are also different. In a word, conceptual metaphor plays an important role in business negotiation. Based on the conclusion of the comparative study, it is helpful to the study and research of business English leaders. At present, since the research is not comprehensive, we are looking forward to the theory and method of more developed and applied to the business negotiation.

When romantic love in Gĩkũyũ becomes a human body part

Studies in Cognitive Linguistics show that metaphors are fundamental to the structuring of people’s thought and language (Sweetser 1990; Kövecses 2009). It is against this backdrop that this study discusses human body parts as metaphors of conceptualizing love in Gĩkũyũ. To achieve this objective, an interview schedule was administered to 48 respondents of different gender by the researcher assisted by four research assistants. The Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) and the main principles of the Metaphor Identification ProcedureVrije Universiteit(MIPVU) (see Steen et al. 2010) were used in this study. The principles of the MIPVU were employed to find out whether the lexical items collected were metaphorical or not. Using three annotators and the researcher, the study identified 100 Metaphor Related Words (MRWs) as per the annotation guidelines adapted from the MIPVU procedures and three lexical units which were annotated as Discard From Metaphor Analysis (DFMA). From the MRWs, the study identified eight metaphors of human body parts which play an indispensable role in the conceptualization of love in Gĩkũyũ. Further, the study noted that gender is a vital variable that provides people with the prism through which they view love since males registered more lexical frequencies for LOVE IS A HUMAN BODY PART than females. The study concludes that metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics is not only a creative device, but an important mental facility and cognitive instrument.

Getting to the Truth: The “Wandering” Metaphor of Mistakenness in Roman Culture

Getting to the Truth: The “Wandering” Metaphor of Mistakenness in Roman Culture W. M. SHORT Every metaphor is the tip of a submerged model. —M. Black, “More About Metaphor,” 1979 Eve Sweetser’s study of English lie argues that the meaning of this word depends on a “folk theory” of discourse —closely resembling the Gricean “cooperative principle ”—in which the normal expectation is that a “speaker’s saying something entails the truth of the thing said.”1 Under this theory, a prototypical lie is defined as an intentionally false statement—that is, a statement the speaker knows to be untrue and which is meant to be deceptive—with less clearcut cases (compliments out of politeness, fictions or jokes for entertainment, “white” lies) occurring when the statement’s truth value is beside the point.2 A mistake is instead the case in which someone believes but does not know the truth value of a statement, and speaks or acts on these grounds.3 At a more basic level English speakers’ conventional understanding of truth—and hence also of mistakenness—also presupposes a figurative understanding of language and thought that corresponds to what Michael Reddy called the “conduit ” metaphor.4 In this metaphor, which has predominated in English speakers’ conception at least since the Industrial Revolution in Britain,5 words are imagined as “containers” for the ideas (propositions) they express. The “truth” is thus a correspondence of (verbally expressed) propositions to real-world states of affairs, and a mis-take the failure to metaphorically “get” or “obtain” or “extract” the propositional content that fits a state of affairs existing in the world.6 arion 21.2 fall 2013 “Making a mistake” is also a metaphor in Greek and Latin. Indeed, evidence suggests that Greek and Latin speakers understood mistakenness, as an aspect of thought and action, more or less entirely metaphorically, through a network of images that worked together to characterize this concept in definite ways. In this paper, I focus on the concept of mistakenness in Latin that is delivered metaphorically by erro and its derivatives, which literally denote “wandering from a path,” as when traveling on a journey. As Latin speakers’ most conventionalized metaphorical understanding of mistakenness, this can be compared to the conceptualization captured in Greek by words—in particular forms of ἁμαρτάνω and its derivatives—referring literally to “missing a target,” as when throwing a spear or shooting an arrow . I argue that although these metaphors are comparable in sharing what is probably the same “image-schematic” basis , the difference between them—that Greek and Latin rely on images drawn from quite different domains to capture the same concept—unfolds, however, at a “cultural” level.7 Specifically, I suggest that whereas elaboration of the Greek metaphor tends to be limited to expert philosophical and rhetorical contexts, the Latin metaphor functions as a “covert model” or “hidden ideology” that implicitly guides getting to the truth 140 ܼȝĮȡIJȐȞȦ ʌȜĮȞȐȦ ʌĮȡȩȡĮȝĮ ܻȕȜȑʌIJȘȝĮ ܻȜȩȖȘȝĮ ıij‫ޠ‬ȜȜȦ ʌIJĮȓȦ !"#$$#% ܼȝĮȡ ĮȡIJȐȞȦ ܼ ʌIJĮȓȦ ȓȦ ıij‫ޠ‬ȜȜȦ ʌȜ ʌȜĮȞ ܼȝĮȡ ĮȡIJȐȞȦ ܼ ȞȐȦ ܻȜȩȖȘȝ ȘȝĮ ܻ ܻȕ ܻȕȜ ȕȜȑʌIJȘȝ ȘȝĮ ʌĮȡ Įȡȩȡ ȩȡĮȝ ĮȝĮ % ! !"#$$# Latin speakers’ reasoning and attitudes towards—and thus behaviors and practices in respect of—making mistakes in diverse contexts of social practice. 1. METAPHORS OF MISTAKENNESS IN GREEK AND LATIN as the contemporary theory of metaphor in cognitive linguistics has shown, abstract concepts are represented in understanding metaphorically.8 Cognitive linguists typically argue that the clustering of metaphorical linguistic expressions around many difficult-to-comprehend, mostly abstract concepts reflects inherently metaphorical understandings that speakers of a given language possess of those concepts. Speakers of that language talk about certain domains of experience metaphorically, that is, because they actually conceive of them—unconsciously and automatically—in terms of other more concrete, more easily comprehensible experiences . Linguistic metaphors thus reflect the systematic projections or “mappings” of knowledge that occur in the conceptual system as a way of representing and reasoning about domains not directly grounded in physical experience. Highly abstract concepts, moreover, tend to be conceptualized in terms of networks of conceptual metaphors that jointly provide structure and content to those concepts: for W. M. Short 141 HUUR & '( IDOORU & SHUSHUDP GHSUDYDWXV & SHUS USHUDP I ID IDOORU U & HUUR & & GH GHS HSUDYDWXV '( example, Latin speakers conceptualized—and hence conventionally spoke about—the mind in metaphorical terms of physical interaction with and manipulation of objects (dividing , weighing, shaping, grasping); visual...

The Cognitive Study of Metaphor and its Application in English Language Teaching

Metaphor in cognitive linguistics is not only a rhetorical device, but an important mental facility and cognitive instrument. Metaphors provide people a new perspective of perceiving the world and the application of cognitive theories of metaphor creates a new field of research to English teaching. After a brief analysis of the cognitive view on metaphor, this paper mainly focuses on how to apply the cognitive theories of metaphor to English language teaching.Key words: cognitive linguistics; metaphor; conceptual metaphor; English teaching

Reviewing imagery in resemblance and non-resemblance metaphors

Abstract This article analyses the nature of mental imagery in metaphoric thought as envisaged by the contemporary theory of metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics (Lakoff, Cambridge University Press, 1993). Our study of metaphor in the field of marine biology draws on two crucial aspects of mental imagery, namely dynamicity and pervasiveness. Image metaphors and behaviour-based metaphors have generally been regarded as two different types of resemblance metaphor. In our view, the dynamicity of certain mental images highlights inherent similarities between these two types of metaphor, and makes the differences between them more apparent than real. For this reason, we propose a more refined description of resemblance metaphors in terms of the static or dynamic nature of the mental images underlying them. Our study also underlines the fact that mental images permeate all classes of metaphor, and that the pervasiveness and dynamicity of mental images affords insights into both resemblance metaphors and non-resemblance metaphors.

Heart and Cognition in Ancient Chinese Philosophy

AbstractFollowing the theory of conceptual metaphor in cognitive linguistics, this paper studies a predominant conceptual metaphor in the understanding of the heart in ancient Chinese philosophy: THE HEART IS THE RULER OF THE BODY. The most important conceptual mapping of this metaphor consists in the perceived correspondence between the mental power of the heart and the political power of the ruler. The Chinese heart is traditionally regarded as the organ of thinking and reasoning, as well as feeling. As such, it is conceptualized as the central faculty of cognition. This cultural conceptualization differs fundamentally from the Western dualism that upholds the reason-emotion dichotomy, as represented by the binary contrast between mind and heart in particular, and mind and body in general. It is found that the HEART AS RULER metaphor has a mirror image, namely THE RULER IS THE HEART OF THE COUNTRY. The ruler as the "heart" of the country leads his nation while guided by his own heart as the "ruler" of his body. It is argued that the two-way metaphorical mappings are based on the overarching beliefs of ancient Chinese philosophy in the unity and correspondence between the microcosm of man and the macrocosm of universe. It is suggested that the conceptualization of the heart in ancient Chinese philosophy, which is basically metaphorical in nature, is still spread widely across Chinese culture today.

Methodological problems in the analysis of metaphors in a corpus of conversations about cancer

In this paper, we discuss a number of methodological problems we have encountered in identifying and analysing metaphors in a corpus of conversations about cancer. These problems relate particularly to: (i) the boundary between the literal and the metaphorical in the identification of linguistic metaphors; (ii) the precise identification of tenor and vehicle in relation to each linguistic metaphor; (iii) the extrapolation of conceptual metaphors from linguistic metaphors; and (iv) the extrapolation of conventional metaphors from patterns in the data. We begin with a discussion of the way in which metaphors are commonly analysed within the cognitive paradigm, and introduce in detail Steen’s [From linguistic to conceptual metaphor in five steps. In: Gibbs, R., Steen, G. (Eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, p. 57, 1999] proposal for an explicit and rigorous procedure for metaphor analysis. We then present a range of examples from our corpus that pose problems at different points in Steen’s procedure, and demonstrate how different decisions in the process of analysis lead to dramatically different conclusions as to the way in which cancer appears to be metaphorically constructed in our data. In light of our discussion, we propose some adjustments to Steen’s procedure and highlight areas in which further research is needed.

Methodological problems in the analysis of metaphors in a corpus of conversations about cancer

In this paper, we discuss a number of methodological problems we have encountered in identifying and analysing metaphors in a corpus of conversations about cancer. These problems relate particularly to: (i) the boundary between the literal and the metaphorical in the identification of linguistic metaphors; (ii) the precise identification of tenor and vehicle in relation to each linguistic metaphor; (iii) the extrapolation of conceptual metaphors from linguistic metaphors; and (iv) the extrapolation of conventional metaphors from patterns in the data. We begin with a discussion of the way in which metaphors are commonly analysed within the cognitive paradigm, and introduce in detail Steen’s [From linguistic to conceptual metaphor in five steps. In: Gibbs, R., Steen, G. (Eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, p. 57, 1999] proposal for an explicit and rigorous procedure for metaphor analysis. We then present a range of examples from our corpus that pose problems at different points in Steen’s procedure, and demonstrate how different decisions in the process of analysis lead to dramatically different conclusions as to the way in which cancer appears to be metaphorically constructed in our data. In light of our discussion, we propose some adjustments to Steen’s procedure and highlight areas in which further research is needed.

Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics: Selected Papers from the Fifth International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, July 1997 (review)

Reviewed by: Metaphor in cognitive linguistics: Selected papers from the Fifth International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, July 1997 ed. by Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr., Gerard J. Steen Kenneth A. McElhanon Metaphor in cognitive linguistics: Selected papers from the Fifth International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, July 1997. Ed. by Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. and Gerard J. Steen. (Amsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science. Series IV-Current issues in linguistic theory, 175.) Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1999. Pp. viii, 225. $72.00. The book consists of eleven diverse articles on metaphor. Noteworthy articles include Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano’s [End Page 605] ‘Metaphorical mappings in the sense of smell’, which rejects suggestions that the sense of smell is mapped metaphorically and proposes a process of property selection within an inherent structure that is similar to the concept of radial structure. Joseph E. Grady, Todd Oakley, and Seana Coulson (‘Blending and metaphor’) argue that conceptual metaphor theory (CMT) and conceptual blending theory (BT) represent complementary approaches that differ mainly in (1) the number of mental representations each allows (CMT—two, BT—more than two); (2) basic unit of cognitive organization (CMT—semantic domain, BT—mental spaces as scenarios structured by given domains); (3) strict directionality (CMT—yes, BT—no); and (4) the kinds of relationships they posit between mental representations (CMT—entrenched and conventional, BT—short-lived and novel). They propose a principle of BT, that a blend is based upon particular connections within the network of input spaces not upon a systematic mapping of one domain onto another. Noticeably absent, however, is a consideration of whether or not such mental spaces are grounded in ICMs (Idealized Cognitive Models) and, if so, how the ICMs might frame the scenes and contribute encyclopedic knowledge. Gerard Steen, ‘From linguistic to conceptual metaphor in five steps’, attempts to develop a procedure for identifying conceptual metaphors in discourse. The primary task of the linguist who wishes to describe and explain the structure and function of language is metaphor analysis, not metaphor understanding—a purely cognitive process. Nevertheless, his procedures are very much grounded in understanding inasmuch as metaphor identification ‘is fundamentally a matter of conceptual analysis’, and an ‘analysis . . . lays bare how metaphors can differ from each other with respect to important dimensions of conceptual structure’ (64–65). The proposed methodology seems complex, perhaps because it is bound to a theory that requires a propositional analysis of literal and nonliteral meaning and is designed to assist an analyst who is apparently not a native speaker of the language under analysis. Joseph E. Grady, ‘A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: Correlation vs. resemblance’, explores systematic analyses of conventional and novel metaphorical expressions to discover ‘primary metaphors’, those fundamental, experientially motivated metaphors which serve as the basis for further mappings. Grady suggests two distinct classes of metaphors which differ in terms of directionality, ontology, and conventionality: One is based upon resemblance (rather than similiarity) and the other upon correlation. Four papers address the relationship between cultural metaphors and cultural models and claim that cognition is inextricably culturally-based. Raymond Gibbs, ‘Taking metaphor out of our heads and putting it into the cultural world’, suggests that metaphorical mappings are grounded in embodied behavior which in turn is connected with cultural experience. Zoltán Kövesecs, “Metaphor: Does it constitute or reflect cultural models?’, claims that basic experiences select the appropriate, simple, generic cultural metaphors that constitute the cultural models that structure abstract concepts. Alan Cienki, ‘Metaphors and cultural models as profiles and bases’, adopts Ronald Langacker’s base-profile model and claims that metaphors are profiled against cultural models. Michele Emanation, ‘Congruence by degree: On the relation between metaphor and cultural models’, suggests that a scale of congruence may be useful in accounting for the varying relationships between cultural models and conceptual metaphors. Kenneth A. McElhanon Summer Institute of Linguistics Copyright © 2002 Linguistic Society of America