The general idea of this paper is to compare different approaches to metaphor, viz. lexicographical definitions by means of dictionaries, specialists′ definitions by means of Lakoff and Johnson′s definition, theoretical background (Turner, Langacker and Sweetser) and lexical definitions by Kövecses. These approaches seem to be quite contradictory at first glance and the question whether it is a contradiction or not will be addressed in the fourth chapter. The definitions will be discussed in the first chapter, together with a short definition of the crucial terminology.
An important aspect of metaphors according to Lakoff and Johnson is the transfer of meaning form a target domain to a source domain. The second chapter is about the internal structure of domains, based on Langacker′s approach, and about the process of the transfer of meaning used in metaphors. This transfer is called mapping and the description rather than definition is based mainly on Turner and Sweetser. Another important aspect of metaphor according to Lakoff and Johnson is the experiential basis used in the meanings expressed, which will be based mainly on Sweetser.
The case study is about Kövecses′ concept of the conceptual metaphor ANGER, a sub-category of the higher-up domain EMOTION, is based upon what Kövecses calls the "prototype scenario" - i.e. the probable way anger builds up, is conceived of and expressed in language and bodily experience.
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 DEFINITIONS OF METAPHOR
1.1.1 Dictionaries
1.1.2 Lakoff and Johnson
1.1.3 Turner’s approach
1.2 TERMINOLOGY
1.2.1 Conceptual Metaphor
1.2.2 Metonymy
1.2.3 Folk Theory
2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF DOMAINS
2.3 MAPPING
2.4 EXPERIENTIAL BASIS
2.5 FOLK THEORY AND METONYMY
3 CASE STUDY: THE STRUCTURE OF ANGER
3.1 THE CONCEPT ANGER
3.2 STAGES OF ANGER
3.3 THE PROTOTYPE SCENARIO
3.4 THE CONCEPTUAL STRUCTURE OF ANGER
4 CONCLUSION
Research Objectives and Themes
This paper investigates the multifaceted nature of metaphors by comparing traditional lexicographical definitions with cognitive linguistic perspectives, specifically focusing on the conceptual domain of ANGER. The primary objective is to analyze how bodily experiences, prototypical scenarios, and conceptual mappings constitute our understanding of emotional states in language.
- Comparison of dictionary definitions and specialist theories of metaphor.
- Examination of the internal structure of cognitive domains and mapping processes.
- Analysis of the experiential basis of metaphor and its role in semantic change.
- Case study of the conceptual metaphor ANGER and its prototype scenario.
- Exploration of how conceptual models influence emotional expression and behavior.
Excerpt from the Book
3.3 The prototype scenario
Kövecses has observed that “the metaphors and metonymies that we have investigated so far converge on a certain prototypical cognitive model of anger” (28), which is by far not the only course anger can take, and express itself. This prototype scenario (28-30) can be summarised as follows:
Stage 1: Offending event
A wrongdoer does intentionally something directly to the innocent S(elf) which displease S. The offending act is perceived as an injustice which calls for retribution. The intensity of the offence and retribution must be equally high. S feels obliged to retaliate.
Stage 2: Anger
The entity anger has a certain intensity which increases and is ‘measurable’, S experiences physiological effects (see chapter 2.5). A high intensity of anger exerts a force on S to perform an act of retribution who is culturally obliged to control himself (it could also be self-damaging).
Stage 3: Attempt at control
S attempts to control his anger
Stage 4: Loss of control
The intensity of anger goes beyond the limit of self-control, S loses control and is forced to an attempt at retribution
Stage 5: Act of Retribution
S performs an act of retribution on the wrongdoer. The intensity of anger drops to zero if the intensity of retribution is roughly equal to that of the offence.
Summary of Chapters
1 INTRODUCTION: This chapter introduces various approaches to metaphor, from dictionary definitions to scholarly theories, and outlines the basic terminology used throughout the paper.
2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND: This section explores the cognitive architecture of domains, defining concepts like mapping, experiential basis, and the internal structure of domains as posited by Langacker and others.
3 CASE STUDY: THE STRUCTURE OF ANGER: This chapter applies theoretical frameworks to the specific domain of ANGER, examining its prototype scenario, various stages, and conceptual metaphors like ANGER IS HEAT.
4 CONCLUSION: The final chapter synthesizes the findings, arguing that the various definitions of metaphor are complementary and emphasizing the role of bodily experience in linguistic cognition.
Keywords
Metaphor, Metonymy, Conceptual Metaphor, ANGER, Mapping, Domain, Experiential Basis, Prototype Scenario, Cognitive Linguistics, Semantics, Emotion, Langacker, Lakoff, Kövecses, Imagery
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this academic paper?
The paper fundamentally explores the nature of metaphors by contrasting dictionary-based definitions with the cognitive linguistic approaches developed by scholars such as Lakoff, Johnson, and Kövecses.
What are the central thematic areas covered?
The central themes include the internal structure of cognitive domains, the mechanisms of metaphorical mapping, the role of bodily experience in language, and the structured conceptualization of the emotion ANGER.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to determine how metaphors function beyond rhetoric, specifically analyzing whether different definitions are contradictory or complementary, and how the concept of ANGER is organized around prototypical models.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The author employs a comparative analytical method, evaluating existing linguistic literature and definitions, followed by a case study approach to deconstruct the specific conceptual domain of ANGER.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body covers the definition of metaphor, cognitive terminology, the theory of internal domain structures, mappings, and a detailed breakdown of the prototype scenario of anger.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include Metaphor, Conceptual Metaphor, ANGER, Mapping, Domain, Experiential Basis, Prototype Scenario, and Cognitive Linguistics.
How does the author define the "prototype scenario" of anger?
The prototype scenario is defined as a sequence of five stages: the offending event, the arousal of anger, an attempt at self-control, the loss of that control, and the final act of retribution.
Why is the "cool anger" response significant to the author's argument?
Cool anger is significant because it lacks the typical physiological markers of the prototype scenario, yet it is still categorized as anger, illustrating that our conceptualization of emotions can extend beyond standard physical models.
- Quote paper
- M.A. Thorsten Witting (Author), 2003, Metaphor - The Structure of the Domain "Anger", Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/21212
