Preface and Introduction

East European Journal of Psycholinguistics, 2021

The author of the reviewed book is Zoltán Kövecses, a renowned cognitive linguist from Central and Central-Eastern Europe, but lesser-known from the Ukrainian academic literature. He is Emeritus Professor at Eötvös Loránd University (Budapest, Hungary). He is one of the four editors of the international scholarly journal, Metaphor and Symbol, and he also serves on the advisory board of Cognitive Linguistics and several other international professional journals. He carried out research and taught as visiting lecturer at several world-famous American and European universities (e.g. the University of Nevada at Las Vegas, Rutgers University, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, the University of California at Berkeley, Hamburg University, and Odense University). Cognitive linguistic bases of the conceptual metaphor theory (CMT) were laid down by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) in their book Metaphors We Live By. This was the basic work on which cognitive linguists based their further resea...

1993

concepts like time, states, change, causation, and pur pose also turn out to be metaphorical. The result is that metaphor (that is, cross-domain mapping) is absolutely central to ordinary natural language semantics, and that the study of literary metaphor is an extension of the study of everyday metaphor. Everyday metaphor is characterized by a huge system of thousands of cross-domain mappings, and this system is made use of in novel metaphor. Because of these empirical results, the word metaphor has come to be used differently in contemporary metaphor research. The word metaphor has come to mean a cross-domain mapping in the conceptual system. The term metaphorical expression refers to a linguistic expression (a word, phrase, or sentence) that is the surface realization of such a cross-domain mapping (this is what the word metaphor referred to in the old theory). I will adopt the contemporary usage throughout this chapter. Experimental results demonstrating the cognitive reali ty of the extensive system of metaphorical mappings are discussed by Gibbs (this volume). Mark Turner's 1987 book, Death is the mother of beauty, whose title comes from Stevens' great line, demonstrates in detail how that line uses the ordinary system of everyday mappings. For further examples of how literary metaphor makes use of the ordinary metaphor system, see More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor, by Lakoff and Turner (1989) and Reading Minds: The Study of English in the Age of Cognitive Science, by Turner (1991). Since the everyday metaphor system is central to the understanding of poetic metaphor, we will begin with the everyday system and then turn to poetic examples.

This paper outlines a multi-dimensional/multi-disciplinary framework for the study of metaphor. It expands on the cognitive linguistic approach to metaphor in language and thought by adding the dimension of communication, and it expands on the predominantly linguistic and psychological approaches by adding the discipline of social science. This creates a map of the field in which nine main areas of research can be distinguished and connected to each other in precise ways. It allows for renewed attention to the deliberate use of metaphor in communication, in contrast with non-deliberate use, and asks the question whether the interaction between deliberate and non-deliberate use of metaphor in specific social domains can contribute to an explanation of the discourse career of metaphor. The suggestion is made that metaphorical models in language, thought, and communication can be classified as official, contested, implicit, and emerging, which may offer new perspectives on the interaction between social, psychological, and linguistic properties and functions of metaphor in discourse. Keywords: metaphor, language, thought, communication, linguistics, psychology, social science

This paper aims at shedding light on some theories and views behind meaning transference in metaphor. The main motive behind handling this article is to show the complexity and pervasiveness of this linguistic device. Metaphor obscures its literal meaning while allowing a new understanding to emerge. Also, it can give concrete illustrations of objects. Most readers find abstractions alien to them that they need a concrete statement such as the one the analogy provides. In fact, metaphor is considered as a powerful device whenever one describes a new situation in terms of what has been described before.

Cognition, communication, discourse, 2017

This paper reviews some of the central insights on metaphor that come from the domain of cognitive linguistics and originate, for the most part, from the conceptual metaphor theory in its standard version. The review focuses upon the nature, origin, function, components, systematicity and types of metaphor, and upon metaphorical meaning; lays a special emphasis upon the mapping mechanism of metaphor; contrasts metaphor to metonymy and addresses the interaction and overlap of these. A large portion of this paper is a review on the issue of metaphorical creativity. Metaphorical creativity is, to the best of my knowledge, a little-studied topic in cognitive linguistics. There are some claims concerning metaphorical creativity in the review that might appear rigid, decisive and conclusive, but they are definitely not intended as such. Research on metaphorical creativity is still being launched, and numerous aspects of creative metaphorical concepts remain undisclosed so far. This, on the one hand, is reflected in the at times cursory nature of my review and, on the other, indicates a need for further investigations. In my review, I cite literature with a fundamental standing in the cognitive linguistic field mainly. The literature selection for this paper is ultimately shaped by my affiliation with the cognitive linguistic community and by my ambition to eventually formulate a conceptualization of metaphor and of creative metaphor that would lend these to computation. I introspect and comment on some of the assumptions and claims that the literature puts forward. In the review are Modern English metaphorical expressions that come from the cited literature, or are prompted by my own research and introspection; these data help support or, though scarcely, challenge the assumptions and claims. In prospect, this paper will grow into a larger scale research on the issue of metaphorical creativity. The review might have implications for cognitive linguistic theorizing and research, and be of particular purpose for Ukrainian cognitive linguists aiming their research at the international, in particular European, scholarly community.

Półrocznik Językoznawczy Tertium

Respectus Philologicus

KESSLER, Stephan, 2013. Theories of Metaphor Revised. Berlin: Logos Verlag. 150 pp.

in this document, a review of traditional definitions and theories of metaphor suggests that they err in equating metaphors with comparisons rather than merely implying comparisons. Empirical research is then reviewed, revealing serious problems, particularly in developmental research. TheSe:problems include-inadequate theories about the nature of metaphore inadequate control over.preexisting knowledge, and hasty conclusions that children cannot understand metaphors, drawn becauseein certain experimental conditions children do not select metaphorical interpretations. Related research on the comerehensien of proverbs and analogies is discussed and recommendations for future research are-made. These depend on a redefiniticn of metaphor and on adequate controls of preexisting knowledge, surface structure, and meaning. The approach suggested emphasizes the context-dependent nature-of metaphors. Finally, it is argued that, even if metaphors can be transformed into comparisons, these comparisons are themselves nonliteral and, consequently, still need to be explained. Abstract Metaphor plays a major role in our understanding of language and of the world we use language to talk about. Consequent y, theories of language comprehension and of lan uage itself are incomplete if they do not handle metaphor, and they are inadequate if tl-.ey cannot. Traditional definitions and.theories of me ,nhor are revle A. It is suggested that they err in equating metaphors ith co pari,ons rather than merely implicat ng comparsons. Empirical research is then reviewed, revealing, for the most part, serious problems, particularly in the developmental research. These problems often relate to inadequate underlying theories as t_ the nature of metaphor. Other difficulties include inadequate controls over preing knowledge, and over-has y conclusions that children cannot understand metaphors because in certain experhnental conditions they do not select metaphorical interpretations. Related research on the comprehension of proverbs and analo ies is discussed. S me recommendations for future research are made. These depend on a re-d._ inition of me aphor and the case of an inves_ gative approach which will permit adequate controls of pre-existing knowledge, surface-structure, and meaning. The approach emphasizes the context-dependent nature of me!-aphors, and takes advantage of it.

Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) sustains that non-literal language is a key element in human understanding and expression. CMT’s fundamental premise is that metaphor is not an adornment or a merely entertaining device of human expression and communication, but reflects how an abstract and conceptual domain (e.g. love, life, war) is cognitively structured. Conventional expressions such as “time is money” or “life is a journey”, among many others, exemplify the correspondence between a source conceptual domain (e.g. time) and a target conceptual domain (e.g. money). These mappings reflect how conceptual metaphors are deeply rooted in linguistic expressions and allow for human experience to be coherently organized. At the heart of its innovative proposal, CMT argues that this mental structuring is actively informed by human physicality, moving the study of language beyond the traditional boundaries of conventional linguistics. This entry provides an introduction to conceptual metaphor theory history, seminal ideas and criticism, contextualizing its intellectual path.

Traditionally regarded as a mere figure of speech, metaphor has emerged as a focal point of scholarly inquiry within contemporary theoretical frameworks, reflecting its profound significance in understanding human cognition and communication. This paper undertakes a comprehensive investigation into the evolution of metaphor theory, tracing its development from classical perspectives to modern interpretations that underscore its integral role in shaping thought processes. We specifically highlight key contemporary approaches, including Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), which posits that metaphors are not merely linguistic constructs but fundamental cognitive mechanisms that influence our perception and interaction with the world. Additionally, we explore the Dynamic Systems Theory of Metaphor, which offers a nuanced understanding of metaphor as a fluid and contextdependent phenomenon, responsive to the dynamics of social interaction. Furthermore, we examine the relevance of metaphor within the realms of cognitive linguistics, social interaction, and communication, illustrating how metaphors serve as vital tools for meaningmaking and identity construction in diverse contexts. By critically analyzing various theoretical contributions, this paper aims to elucidate the complexities and multifaceted nature of metaphor in contemporary discourse, ultimately arguing for its essential role as a foundational element of human cognition and social engagement. The findings presented herein not only contribute to the ongoing discourse on metaphor theory but also underscore the necessity for interdisciplinary research that bridges cognitive science, linguistics, and social theory to further unravel the intricate relationship between metaphor, thought, and communication in a rapidly evolving societal landscape.