”Classical” approaches to categorisation, as called by Taylor (1989, 21 ff.) and Lakoff (1987, 6 ff.), can be characterised by an understanding of linguistic categories as clearly bounded sets of members which have certain essential features in common. These categories are taken to reflect existing categories in the world which are defined by, as Aristotle called it, necessary and sufficient features. These features are binary, i.e. they determine or rule out membership and thereby establish clear boundaries. This understanding of categorisation is manifested in traditional philosophical and scientific thought as well as in ”common sense” theories about language and the world. Lakoff calls this approach ”objectivism” and identifies the following assumptions: ‘OBJECTIVIST METAPHYSICS: All of reality consists of entities, which have fixed properties and relations holding among them at any instant. [...] OBJECTIVIST ESSENTIALISM: Among the properties that things have, some are essential; that is, they are those properties that make a thing what it is, and without which it would not be that kind of thing. Other properties are accidental - that is, they are properties that things happen to have, not properties that capture the essence of the thing. [...] THE DOCTRINE OF OBJECTIVE CATEGORIES: The entities in the world form objectively existing categories based on their shared objective properties.’ (Lakoff 1987, 158-161; emphasis in the original)
Cognitive scientists have set out to prove these assumptions wrong. Categorisation, in their view, is an operation of human cognition which is determined by experiences of physiological and physical characteristics of the human body and bodily interactions with the environment. Categorisations and their realisations, however, can provide the basis for human experience once they are firmly established, so that conceptual categories can work back upon human perception. Language categories, they maintain, are reflections of conceptual categories. Thus, they disclaim the autonomy of language which is presupposed by most formalist and generative linguistic theories (cf. Lakoff 1987, ch. 9), as well as a metaphysical notion of reality which is reflected in human perception and categorisation. Rather, reality is made meaning of through these cognitive processes, which in turn are predominantly structured by bodily experiences and interactions.
Table of Contents
Introduction
PART ONE
1. Linguistic Categorisation
1.1 John R. Taylor: Prototype Theory and Basic Level Terms
1.2 George Lakoff: Radial Categories, Metonymic Models
2. Lakoff’s (et al.) Cognitive Theory of Language
2.1 ICM: Image-Schema, Metonymy and Metaphor
3. Implications for Semantic Analysis
PART TWO
4. Case Study
4.1 Analysis
4.2 The Semantics of Metaphor
5. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This paper explores cognitive-linguistic approaches to semantics, focusing specifically on how conceptual and conventional metaphors shape language and meaning. The primary research goal is to assess the potential and limitations of applying Lakoff and Johnson’s theory of Conceptual Metaphoricity to the analysis of short poetic texts.
- Principles of linguistic categorisation and prototype theory.
- Cognitive mechanisms of image-schemas, metonymy, and metaphorical mapping.
- The relationship between bodily experience, conceptual structures, and language.
- The application of cognitive theory to literary analysis and context-dependent meaning.
- The role of poetic metaphors in extending and questioning conventional cognitive models.
Excerpt from the Book
4.1 Analysis
As often in poems, the title reveals its significance and its ambiguity only in the context of the whole poem. Let me, therefore, ignore the title for the moment and start with line 1. The physiology of emotions – in this case, of sorrow – is being mapped onto the writing process: The poem is being excreted, like tears, from an overflow of sorrow, and it falls to the page. This is based on the conceptual metaphor of EMOTIONS ARE FLUIDS IN CONTAINERS (BODIES), with the physiological symptom of tears showing up when a certain emotional threshold is surpassed. Expressions like ”overflowing sorrow” clearly refer to this model. Lakoff/ Johnson argue that this conceptual metaphor originates in the bodily experience of tears welling up as a result of specific feelings, which are understood in terms of the bodily symptoms experienced with them. This metaphor is elaborated by filling in the slot for ”tears” falling with a ”poem” falling – to the page, which suits both. The mapping of the writing process to this metaphor interprets the poem as a direct and unmediated bodily expression of sorrow. Thereby, the poet highlights certain aspects of the domain of feelings as characterising the domain of writing. He thereby creates a novel (or poetic) metaphor.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Outlines the cognitive-linguistic approach to semantics, setting the stage for a study of conceptual metaphor and its application to poetry.
PART ONE: Provides the theoretical foundation, covering prototype theory, radial categories, and the cognitive theory of language including image-schemas and metaphorical mappings.
1. Linguistic Categorisation: Examines prototype theory and the shift from binary feature analysis to the understanding of categories as fuzzy, experience-based constructs.
1.1 John R. Taylor: Prototype Theory and Basic Level Terms: Discusses the emergence of prototype theory from experimental findings regarding category membership and basic level terms.
1.2 George Lakoff: Radial Categories, Metonymic Models: Explores how prototype categories rely on metonymy and chaining to connect central and peripheral members.
2. Lakoff’s (et al.) Cognitive Theory of Language: Presents the general assumptions of cognitive linguistics, where language is viewed as part of general cognitive processes rooted in embodied experience.
2.1 ICM: Image-Schema, Metonymy and Metaphor: Details the core principles of Idealised Cognitive Models and the structuring roles of image-schemas and mappings.
3. Implications for Semantic Analysis: Discusses how the cognitive theory of meaning challenges objectivism and highlights the context-dependency of language.
PART TWO: Transitions to the practical application of the discussed theories through a literary analysis.
4. Case Study: Applies the conceptual metaphor framework to a contemporary British poem to test its validity for semantic analysis.
4.1 Analysis: Performs a line-by-line cognitive analysis of the poem to illustrate how novel metaphors are constructed.
4.2 The Semantics of Metaphor: Reflects on how poetic language extends everyday metaphors and challenges fixed definitions of meaning.
5. Conclusion: Summarizes findings, acknowledging the power of the framework while noting the reliance on the interpreter’s intuitive plausibility judgments.
Keywords
Cognitive Linguistics, Semantics, Conceptual Metaphor, Prototype Theory, Metonymy, Image-Schema, Embodiment, Poetic Metaphor, Idealised Cognitive Models, Categorisation, Meaning Production, Linguistic Analysis, Pragmatics.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper focuses on cognitive-linguistic approaches to semantics, specifically examining how cognitive models such as conceptual metaphors, metonymy, and prototype theory explain how meaning is constructed in language.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
Key themes include the embodiment of cognition, the rejection of "objectivist" semantics, the role of image-schemas in reasoning, and how conventional metaphors are extended in poetic language.
What is the primary goal of the study?
The study aims to evaluate the efficacy of Lakoff and Johnson’s theory of Conceptual Metaphoricity by applying it to the analysis of a specific contemporary British poem.
Which methodology is employed in the work?
The author employs a qualitative, analytical methodology, using cognitive-linguistic frameworks to perform a detailed, line-by-line interpretation of poetic text to uncover the conceptual structures underpinning it.
What topics are discussed in the main part of the paper?
The main part reviews theoretical frameworks regarding categories and cognitive models (Part One) and performs a case study (Part Two) that maps metaphors of emotion, life, and financial transactions within a specific poem.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
The work is best characterized by terms such as Cognitive Linguistics, Conceptual Metaphor, Embodiment, Prototype Theory, and Poetic Metaphor.
How does the author analyze the poem "Along These Lines"?
The author breaks down the poem by mapping its imagery onto specific conceptual metaphors, such as "EMOTIONS ARE FLUIDS IN CONTAINERS" and "LIFE IS A LOAN," to show how the poet subverts conventional understanding.
What is the author's final conclusion regarding the framework's limitations?
The author concludes that while the framework is a powerful tool for explaining the motivation behind language use, it lacks predictive "generative" rules and relies heavily on the interpreter's intuitive plausibility judgements.
- Quote paper
- Michael Obenaus (Author), 2000, A Cognitive Theory of Language. Semantic Theory and Analysis., Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/23526
