The conceptual metaphor theory and the development of alternative theories within the cognitive approach to metaphor (a review of European and American metaphor studies)
The article presents results of an analytical review of European and American publications devoted to the theoretical concepts currently united under the term "theory of metaphor" as well as to the development of its key notions within the framework of cognitive metaphor studies. The purpose of the analysis is to present the essence of a number of theories of metaphor from a comparative perspective in order to reflect a gradual and consistent course of development in the field of cognitive metaphor studies. The significant number of hypotheses and theories proposed to the scientific community confirms the fact that there is researchers' stable interest in this phenomenon and a desire to give a comprehensive and convincing explanation of its essence, patterns of use in various texts and discourses, interpretation mechanisms, etc. This comparison of theoretical concepts allowed to establish the fact that the theory of conceptual metaphor focuses on an analysis of decontextualized metaphorical units verbalized in some language, which in its turn, enabled researchers to identify a range of underlying metaphorical formations at the conceptual level. Alternative theoretical concepts (the theory of conceptual integration, the career theory of metaphor, the theory of attributive categorization, the theory of relevance, the graded salience hypothesis) are aimed at explaining the process of how people manage to understand and interpret the content of verbal metaphorical expressions, i.e. they focus on various stages of a broader and phased process of their cognitive processing. Over the past decades, these theories have undergone repeated "testing" in the works written by supporters and opponents, which allowed them to identify their strengths and weaknesses, and where necessary, to supplement or clarify the notions and conclusions. Although the accumulated research results contributed to a "breakthrough" in understanding and evaluating such a phenomenon as the metaphor, it is still premature to consider them final. The article shows that the theory of conceptual integration and the theory of relevance are in demand in modern metaphor studies, since they focus on explaining the processes of information integration in the construction of metaphorical meanings based on the selection of significant features in various discursive practices. The existence of a number of theories of metaphor confirms the opinion of researchers that in their present state none of these well-known theories can be considered the only one capable of describing and explaining the phenomenon of metaphor in a consistent and comprehensive manner.
Keywords
теория концептуальной метафоры,
теория концептуальной интеграции,
теория карьеры метафоры,
теория атрибутивной категоризации,
теория релевантности,
теория значимостной маркированности,
conceptual metaphor theory,
theory of conceptual blending / integration,
career of metaphor theory,
category inclusion theory,
relevance theory,
graded salience hypothesisAuthors
| Novitskaya I.V. | Tomsk State University | irno2012@yandex.ru |
Всего: 1
References
Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors we live by. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1980.
Lakoff G. The contemporary theory of metaphor // Metaphor and Thought. 2nd ed. / ed. by A. Ortony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1993
Lakoff G. The Neural Theory of metaphor // The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought / ed. by. R.W. Gibbs. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2008. P. 17-38.
Kovecses Z. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. 2nd ed. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2010.
Tendahl M. A hybrid theory of metaphor: Relevance theory and cognitive linguistics. Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
Stover H. Metaphor and Relevance Theory: A New Hybrid Model. 2010. URL: http://uobrep.openrepository.com/uobrep/handle/10547/145619
Veale T., Keane M. An Integrated Model of Lexico-Semantic and Conceptual Processing for the Treatment of Natural Language Metaphors. 2005. URL: http://afflatus.ucd.ie/Papers/scaffold92+97. pdf
Stockl H. Metaphor Revisited Cognitive-conceptual versus Traditional Linguistic Perspec tives // AAA: Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik. 2010. Vol. 35, №. 2. P. 189-208.
Kovecses Z. Recent developments in metaphor theory: Are the new views rival ones? // Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Published under the auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association. 2011. № 9 (1). P. 11-25.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez F.J., Perez Hernandez L. The contemporary theory of metaphor: Myths, developments and challenges // Metaphor and symbol. 2011. № 26 (3). P. 161-185.
Knowles M. Moon R Introducing Metaphor. London ; New York : Routledge, 2006.
Gibbs Jr R.W. (Ed.). The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Wilson D. Parallels and differences in the treatment of metaphor in relevance theory and cognitive linguistics // Intercultural Pragmatics. 2011. № 8 (2). P. 177-196.
Ritchie L.D. Metaphor (Key Topics in Semantics and Pragmatics) // Cambridge University Press. 2013. № 1 (2). P. 2-1.
Dancygier B. Figurativeness, conceptual metaphor, and blending // The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language. Routledge, 2016. P. 46-59.
Зубкова О. С. Метафора в философской парадигме // Ученые записки. Электронный научный журнал Курского государственного университета. 2010. № 1 (13).
Gibbs Jr R.W. When is metaphor? The idea of understanding in theories of metaphor // Poetics today. 1992. P. 575-606.
Beardsley M. The Metaphorical Twist // Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 1962. № 22. P. 293-307.
Matthews R.J. Concerning a'linguistic theory'of metaphor // Foundations of language. 1971. № 7. P. 413-425.
Mac Cormac E.R. A cognitive Theory Of Metaphor. Cambridge : A Bradford Book, 1985.
Sanford D. Figuration & Frequency: A Usage-Based Approach to Metaphor : Doctoral dissertation, PhD thesis. 2010.
Steen G.J. The contemporary theory of metaphor - now new and improved! // Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Published under the auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association. 2011. № 9 (1). P. 26-64.
Cienki A., MUller C. (eds). Metaphor and Gesture. Amsterdam ; Philadelphia : John Benjamins, 2008.
Forceville C., Urios-Aparasi E. (eds). Multimodal Metaphor. Berlin ; New York : Mou-ton de Gruyter, 2009.
Koller V. Metaphor Clusters in Business Media Discourse: A Social Cognition Approach. PhD thesis. Vienna : University of Vienna, 2003.
Barcelona A. Introduction. The cognitive theory of metaphor and metonymy // Topics in English Linguistics. 2000. № 30. Р. 1-30.
Lakoff G. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1987.
Steen G.J., Dorst A.G., Herrmann J.B., Kaal A.A., Krennmayr T., Pasma T. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification. Amsterdam : John Benjamins, 2010.
Grady J.E. Theories are Buildings revisited // Cognitive Linguistics. 1997. № 8. Р. 267290.
Kovecses Z. Embodiment, experiential focus, and diachronic change in metaphor // Selected Proceedings of the 2005 Symposium on New Approaches in English Historical Lexis (HEL-LEX) / ed. by R.W. McConchie et al. Somerville, MA : Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 2006. Р. 1-7.
McGlone M.S. Conceptual metaphors and figurative language interpretation: Food for thought? // Journal of memory and language. 1996. № 35 (4). Р. 544-565.
Kovecses Z. Conceptual metaphor theory. Some criticisms and alternative proposals // Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics. 2008. № 6. P. 168-184. DOI: 10.1075/arcl.6.08kov
Gentner D. Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy // Cognitive Science. 1983. № 7. Р. 155-170.
Gentner D., Bowdle B.F. Convention, form, and figurative language processing // Metaphor and Symbol. 2001. № 16. Р. 223-247.
Самигуллина А.С. Теория метафоры в современной англистике: принципы, подходы, перспективы // Вестник Челябинского государственного университета. 2008. № 9. С. 115-120.
Giora R. On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language // Journal of Pragmatics. 1997. № 31. Р. 919-929.
Giora R. On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. Oxford University Press, 2003.
Glucksberg S., Keysar B., McGlone M.S. Metaphor understanding and accessing conceptual schema: Reply to Gibbs // Psychological Review. 1992. № 99. Р. 578-581.
Wilson D., Sperber D. Relevance theory // The handbook of pragmatics / eds. by L.R. Horn, G. Ward. Oxford : Blackwell, 2004. Р. 607-632.
Sperber D., Wilson D. A deflationary account of metaphors // The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought / ed. by R.W. Gibbs, Jr. Cambridge University Press, 2008. Р. 84-105.
Glucksberg S., Keysar B. Understanding metaphorical comparisons: Beyond similarity // Psychological Review. 1990. № 97. Р. 3-18.
Ortony A Beyond literal similarity // Psychological Review. 1979. № 86. Р. 161-180.
Glucksberg S. How metaphors create categories - quickly // The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought / ed. by R.W. Gibbs. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2008. Р. 67-83.
Glucksberg S., McGlone M.S. When love is not a journey: What metaphors mean // Journal of Pragmatics. 1999. № 31. Р. 1541-1558.
Glucksberg S. Beyond literal meanings: The psychology of allusion // Psychological Science. 1991. № 2. Р. 146-152.
Gentner D., Bowdle B.F. Metaphor as structure-mapping // The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought / ed. by R.W. Gibbs. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2008. Р. 109-128.
Bowdle B.F., Gentner D. The career of metaphor // Psychological Review. 2005. № 112 (1). Р. 193-216.
Wilson D., Carston R. Metaphor, relevance and the 'emergent property'issue // Mind & Language. 2006. № 21 (3). Р. 404-433.
Carston R. Metaphor and the literal/nonliteral distinction // Cambridge handbook of pragmatics. 2012. Р. 469-492.
Fauconnier G. Mental spaces: aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge, Mass : MIT Press, 1985.
Fauconnier G., Turner M. Conceptual Projection and Middle Spaces // UCSD Cognitive Science Technical Report. 1994.
Fauconnier G., Turner M. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities. New York : Basic Books, 2002.
Fauconnier G., Turner M. Principles of conceptual integration // Discourse and cognition. 1998. Р. 269-283.
Grady J.E., Oakley T., Coulson S. Blending and metaphor // Gibbs & Steen. 1999. Р. 101-124. URL: http://www.wam.umd.edu/~mturn/WWW/blendaphor.html.
Lakoff G., Johnson M. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York : Basic Books, 1999.
Dijk Т.А. van. Principles of critical discourse analysis // Discourse & Society. 1993. № 4.2. Р. 249-283.
Dijk T.A Discourse analysis as ideology analysis // Language and Pace / eds by C. Schaffner, A. Wenden. 1995. Р. 17-33.
Eubanks P. A War of Words in the Discourse of Trade: The Rhetorical Constitution of Metaphor. Carbondale, IL : Southern Illinois University Press, 2000.
Barsalou L. Perceptual symbol systems // Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1999. № 22. Р. 577-609.
