개념은유이론의 발전과 평가
Conceptual Metaphor Theory: Developments and Evaluations
1
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this paper is to discuss some claims of the earlier and later versions of the Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), assess two objections directed at it: (1) circularity and (2) faulty typology, and suggest, revising Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez & Otal Campo’s taxonomic criterion, a new classification of metaphors. Unlike previous theories, Lakoff & Johnson (1980), who first proposed CMT, argued that metaphor is not primarily a matter of language but of cognition. Later Lakoff (1987) and Johnson (1987) argued that metaphor is not simply linguistic and conceptual but also bodily in nature. In recent years, Lakoff and Johnson (1999) have developed a more complex version of CMT with the introduction of primary metaphors which are considered as one important advance in it. It is also argued that the evidence for conceptual metaphors comes from cognitive linguistic analyses of conventional expressions, novel extensions, and polysemy. And it is shown that evidence abounds that makes objection (1) obsolete, but objection (2) is justified. Therefore, this paper proposes, revising Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez & Otal Campo’s taxonomic criterion, a new classification of metaphors as shown in figure 2. The basic division is between similarity and correlation metaphors. Similarity is at work in the case of ontological, image, and situational metaphors. Orientational, image-schematic, and propositional metaphors are based upon the correlation between two experiential domains.
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to discuss some claims of the earlier and later versions of the Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), assess two objections directed at it: (1) circularity and (2) faulty typology, and suggest, revising Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez & Otal Campo’s taxonomic criterion, a new classification of metaphors. Unlike previous theories, Lakoff & Johnson (1980), who first proposed CMT, argued that metaphor is not primarily a matter of language but of cognition. Later Lakoff (1987) and Johnson (1987) argued that metaphor is not simply linguistic and conceptual but also bodily in nature. In recent years, Lakoff and Johnson (1999) have developed a more complex version of CMT with the introduction of primary metaphors which are considered as one important advance in it. It is also argued that the evidence for conceptual metaphors comes from cognitive linguistic analyses of conventional expressions, novel extensions, and polysemy. And it is shown that evidence abounds that makes objection (1) obsolete, but objection (2) is justified. Therefore, this paper proposes, revising Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez & Otal Campo’s taxonomic criterion, a new classification of metaphors as shown in figure 2. The basic division is between similarity and correlation metaphors. Similarity is at work in the case of ontological, image, and situational metaphors. Orientational, image-schematic, and propositional metaphors are based upon the correlation between two experiential domains.
참고문헌 (24)
- Calbris, G., "The semiotics of French gestures" (1990), Indiana University Press
- Fauconnier, G., "Conceptual structure, discourse, and language", pp.113~130 (1996), Cambridge University Press
- Gibbs, R., "Evaluating conceptual metaphor theory", Discourse Processes, 48, pp.529~562 (2011)
- Gibbs, R., "Mental imagery in interpreting poetic metaphor", Metaphor and Symbol, 14, pp.37~44 (1999)
- Grady, J., "Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes", 박사, pp.1997
- Johnson, C., "Cultural, Psychological and typological issues in cognitive linguistics: Selected papers of the bi-annual ICLA meeting in Albuquerque, July 1995", pp.155~169 (1999), John Benjamins
- Johnson, M., "The body in mind" (1987), University of Chicago Press
- Kovecses, Z., "Language, mind, and culture: A practical introduction" (2006), Oxford University Press
- Lakoff, G., "Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind" (1987), University of Chicago Press
- Lakoff, G., "Metaphor and thought", pp.202~251 (1993), Cambridge University Press
- Lakoff, G., "Metaphors we live by" (1980), University of Chicago Press
- Lakoff, G., "Philosophy in the flesh" (1999), Basic Books
- Lakoff, G., "Metaphor we live by", pp.243~276 (2003), University of Chicago Press
- Lakoff, G., "More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor" (1989), The University of Chicago Press
- McGlone, M., "Conceptual metaphors and figurative language interpretation: Food for thought?", Journal of Memory and Language, 35, pp.544~565 (1996)
- McGlone, M., "Understanding figurative language: From metaphors to idioms", pp.90~107 (2001), Oxford University Press
- McGlone, M., "What is the explanatory value of a conceptual metaphor?", Language & Communication, 27, pp.109~126 (2007)
- Murphy, G. L., "On metaphoric representations", Cognition, 60, pp.173~204 (1996)
- Narayanan, S., "Embodiment in language understanding: Sensory-motor representations for metaphoric reasoning about event descriptions", 박사, pp.1997
- Pinker, S., "The stuff of thought" (2007), Basic Books
- Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez, F. J., "Metonymy, grammar, and communication" (2002), Comares
- Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez, F. J., "The contemporary theory of metaphor : myths, developments and challenges", Metaphor and Symbol, 26, pp.161~185 (2011)
- Sweetser, E., "From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure" (1990), Cambridge University Press
- Szwedek, A., "Language and meaning: Cognitive and functional perspectives", pp.312~327 (2007), Peter Lang