phân tích đối chiếu biểu thức ẩn dụ anger is heat sự tức giận là nhiệt trong tiếng anh và các biểu thức tương đương trong tiếng việt

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES  LƯU THỊ HẢI VÂN A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE METAPHOR “ANGER

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES



LƯU THỊ HẢI VÂN

A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE METAPHOR “ANGER IS HEAT” IN ENGLISH AND THE POSSIBLE EQUIVALENT

EXPRESSIONS IN VIETNAMESE

(PHÂN TÍCH ÐỐI CHIẾU BIỂU THỨC ẨN DỤ “ANGER IS HEAT”

(SỰ TỨC GIẬN LÀ NHIỆT) TRONG TIẾNG ANH VÀ CÁC BIỂU THỨC

TƯƠNG ÐƯƠNG TRONG TIẾNG VIỆT)

Thesis Summary

Field: English Linguistics Code: 60.22.15

HANOI - 2012

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES



LƯU THỊ HẢI VÂN

A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE METAPHOR “ANGER IS HEAT” IN ENGLISH AND THE POSSIBLE EQUIVALENT

EXPRESSIONS IN VIETNAMESE

(PHÂN TÍCH ÐỐI CHIẾU BIỂU THỨC ẨN DỤ “ANGER IS HEAT” (SỰ TỨC GIẬN LÀ

NHIỆT) TRONG TIẾNG ANH VÀ CÁC BIỂU THỨC TƯƠNG ÐƯƠNG

TRONG TIẾNG VIỆT)

M.A MINOR THESIS

Field: English Linguistics Code: 60.22.15

Course: M.A 19 Supervisor: Associate Professor VÕ ÐẠI QUANG, Ph.D

HANOI - 2012

Tables of contents Page

Part A: Introduction……… 1

1 Rationale……… 1

2 Aims and objectives of the study……… 1

3 Research questions……… 1

4 Scope of the study……… 2

5 Methodology……… 2

5.1 Principles governing the research……… 2

5.1.1 Principles governing the choice of research type……… 2

5.1.2 Data-related issues……… 2

5.2 Methods of the study……… 3

5.2.1 Major methods and supporting methods……… 3

5.2.2 Data collection instruments……… 3

5.2.3 Data analysis techniques……… 3

6 Structure of the thesis……… 3

Part B: Development 5 Chapter 1: Literature Review……… 5

1.1 Review of the previous studies……… 5

1.2 Theoretical background……… 6

1.2.1 Traditional approach to metaphors……… 6

1.2.1.1 Substitution theory……… 6

1.2.1.2 Comparison theory……… 6

1.2.2 Cognitive approach to metaphors……… 7

1.2.2.1 What is a conceptual metaphor? 7

1.2.2.2 Metaphorical mapping……… 8

1.2.2.3 Structure of a conceptual metaphor……… 9

1.2.2.4 Types of conceptual metaphors……… 9

1.2.2.4.1 Structural metaphors……… 9

1.2.2.4.2 Orientational metaphors……… 10

1.2.2.4.3 Ontological metaphors……… 11

1.2.2.4.4 Conduit metaphors……… 12

1.2.2.5 Metaphorical entailment……… 13

1.2.3 The role of conceptual metaphors in description of emotions…… 14

1.2.4 Summary……… 14

Chapter 2: A contrastive Analysis of the Metaphor “Anger is Heat”

in English and the Possible Equivalent expression in Vietnamese 15

2.1 The cognitive basis of the metaphor “Anger is Heat” in English and in Vietnamese……… 15

2.1.1 The cognitive basis of the English metaphor “Anger is Heat” … 15

2.1.2 The cognitive basis of the equivalent metaphor “Anger is Heat” in Vietnamese……… 16

2.2 The metaphor “Anger is Heat” in English and the equivalent in Vietnamese……… 18

2.2.1 The version “Anger is the Heat of a Hot Fluid in a Container” in English and the Vietnamese equivalent……… 18

2.2.1.1 The entailment “Increase in the intensity of anger is the rising of the fluid”……… 20

2.2.1.2 The entailment “Intense anger produces steam and pressure on the container”……… 22

2.2.1.3 The entailment “When anger becomes too intense, the person explodes”……… 23

2.2.1.4 The entailment “When a person explodes, parts of him go up in the air”……… 25

2.2.1.5 The entailment “When a person explodes what was inside him comes out……… 26

2.2.2 The English version “Anger is Fire” and the Vietnamese equivalent……… 27

2.3 Explanation for the differences of the metaphor “Anger is Heat” in English and in Vietnamese……… 31

2.4 Summary……… 34

Part C: Conclusion……… 35

1 Recapitulation……… 35

2 Concluding remarks……… 35

3 Suggestions for further studies……… … 36

References……… 38

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

It is common knowledge that metaphors, especially conceptual metaphors are not only an effective device for representing the world outside language but also a tool for thinking, speaking and acting According to Ortony (1975) there are at least three communicative functions that metaphor might perform

Lakoff and Johnson (1980:3) state that “metaphor is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action” and “our conceptual system is largely metaphorical, then the way we think, what we experience, and what we do every day is very much a matter of metaphor.”

During my study, I have been interested in metaphors especially conceptual

metaphors for emotions; therefore I choose conceptual metaphors as my thesis topic Of many everyday conceptual metaphorical expressions I would like to take a

careful study on the conceptual metaphor “Anger is Heat” “Anger” is one of

abstract concepts of people’s emotions that are highly used in English and in

Vietnamese How is this metaphor used differently in the two languages? These are

the main reasons for my study “A Contrastive Analysis of the Metaphor “Anger is

Heat” in English and the Possible Equivalent Expressions in Vietnamese”

2 Aims and objectives of the study

The study tries to:

- give a systematic account of the theoretical background on conceptual metaphors

- make explicit the similarities and differences between the English metaphor

“Anger is Heat” and the possible equivalent expressions in Vietnamese

- propose implications for teaching metaphors

3 Research questions

The objectives mentioned above can be elaborated into the following research

questions:

- What are similarities and differences in regard to how the English metaphor

“Anger is Heat” and the Vietnamese equivalent are perceived?

- What causes the differences in cognitive mechanism of this metaphor between the two languages?

- What are the possible recommendations for teaching English metaphors?

4 Scope of the study

In this thesis, I only work on the metaphor “Anger is Heat” in English and the

possible equivalents in Vietnamese to work out the contrast of cognitive model/ mechanism and to give explanation for the differences in the metaphor usage

between the two languages

5 Methodology of the study

5.1 Principles governing the research

5.1.1 Principles governing the choice of research type

This study is intended to provide an overview and a contrastiveness of the metaphor

“Anger is Heat” in English and the Vietnamese equivalent To achieve the aims,

the type of research chosen is basic research

A combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches is employed with priority given to qualitative analysis The qualitative method is used to describe and analyze

the common and distinctive features of the metaphor “Anger is Heat” in English

and the equivalent expressions in Vietnamese

5.1.2 Data-related issues

The researcher examines different samples containing metaphorical expressions

belonging to the central conceptual metaphor “Anger is Heat” from books,

previous studies, novels, stories, and the Internet in both English and Vietnamese Then the commonly used metaphorical expressions are selected to be analyzed The samples are authentic sources of data Research procedure follows the research design and principles strictly So the validity and the reliability of the study can be guaranteed

5.2 Methods of the study

5.2.1 Major methods and supporting methods

The study has been carried out with the combination of different methods The major method employed in this thesis is contrastive analysis to compare and

contrast mechanism of the metaphor “Anger is Heat” in the two languages The

intended instrumental language herein assumed is Vietnamese and the target

language is English Besides, the descriptive method is used as supporting one

5.2.2 Data collection instruments

Document analysis and observation are employed as data collection instruments

Document analysis is used to seek instances of the metaphor “Anger is Heat” in

English and the Vietnamese equivalents in books, previous studies, novels, and on the Internet The observation technique is used to enhance qualitative analysis of the established details related to cognitive mechanism in the specified area of research

5.2.3 Data analysis techniques

After being collected, the data are analyzed by using the following techniques:

- Classifying the samples collected into two sub-versions of the central metaphor

“Anger is Heat” based on the corresponding source domains

- Systematizing is used to categorize the samples into metaphorical entailments in accordance with their meanings

- Inferring the similarities and differences of the metaphor “Anger is Heat” in

English and the possible equivalents in Vietnamese

6 Structure of the thesis

The paper is divided into three parts as follows:

Part A is “Introduction” This part gives a brief account of the rationale of the study, the aims of the study, the scope of the study, the methods of the study, and the thesis structure

Part B is “Development” This part consists of two chapters Chapter one is

“Literature Review” This chapter provides the background for the study Chapter

two, “A Contrastive Analysis of the Metaphor “Anger is Heat” in English and the

Possible Equivalent Expressions in Vietnamese”, provides a contrastive analysis of

the English metaphor “Anger is Heat” and the Vietnamese equivalents

Part C, “Conclusion”, provides a recapitulation of the main points raised,

concluding remarks on each of the objectives, and suggestions for further studies

reasoning and understanding Typically, an abstract domain is understood

metaphorically in terms of a more concrete domain To a large degree, they argue, the human conceptual system is metaphorical This is very different from the

classical model of metaphor, which claims that metaphors are artifacts of language use, and have nothing to do with meaning or understanding This study is the main theoretical basis for my study

The second is the research “The Cognitive Model of Anger Inherent in American English” of Gorge Lakoff and Zoltan Kovecses (1983) In this research, the authors give basis of the cognitive model of anger in English as well as examples of a

system of metaphorical expressions for anger From this work I chose the central

metaphor “Anger is Heat” for contrastive analysis with the equivalents in

Vietnamese

The third is “Ẩn Dụ Về Sự Tức Giận Và Niềm Vui Trong Tiếng Anh Và tiếng Việt”

by Trần Bá Tiến (2009) In this study, the author gives a brief account of

metaphorical expressions for anger and happiness in English and In Vietnamese

The central metaphor “Anger is Heat” is the most general metaphor which is

pervasive in both English and Vietnamese Of all previous studies that I have read, there has not been any one which makes a contrastive analysis of this metaphor in English and the possible equivalent expressions in Vietnamese This inspired me to make a contrastive analysis of this metaphor in the two languages

1.2 Theoretical background

1.2.1 Traditional approach to metaphors

Put very generally, there are two main approaches in the study of metaphor: the traditional approach and the cognitive approach The traditional approach

encompasses many different theories but shares some fundamental presumptions The traditional theory of metaphor dates back to Aristotle’s view that metaphor is

"the application of an alien name by transference" (350 BC b [1950]: par.4 cited from Koller (2003)) and the following are the most important views of metaphor within this approach:

1.2.1.1 Substitution theory

The substitution theory describes metaphors as expressions, which are simply

substitutes for literal expressions (Black: 1955) Thus, for example, the speaker who uses the metaphorical expression “He is a fox” could, according to the substitution view, have used a literal expression “He is cunning” that means the same The word

"fox" in this case communicates something that could have been expressed literally and the metaphor here is simply used in a novel or poetic way to decorate and embellish one's speech The substitution view implies that metaphorical expression performs no greater function than to please and amuse readers or listeners

The problem with this view is that a metaphor may evoke a large number of

connotations and it would be difficult to paraphrase them all; and paraphrasing of a metaphorical expression cannot present all the meanings that the original

metaphorical expression has (Ohkura: 2003)

1.2.1.2 Comparison theory

The comparison view is one of the most popular dualistic theories of metaphor According to comparison theory, metaphor is grounded in the similarity existing between two concepts involved in it, so metaphor is considered to be an implicit comparison between principal subject and subsidiary subject, Black (1955), Hoang Tat Truong (1993) On such a view, the interpretation of a metaphor is a matter of

interpreting the corresponding simile, and the truth of the metaphor is thus reduced

to that of the simile

The problem with this view is that similarity is a symmetric relation, whereas, in reality, metaphor is often asymmetric For example saying “Surgeons are butchers” means describing surgeons’ work metaphorically as butchers’ one, but does not mean that “Surgeons are like butchers”

To sum up, the main problems with all of these views are that they fail to explain the creation of similarity that metaphor is capable of, that many metaphorical

expressions, such as “to defend a position”, are so conventional that they cannot be regarded as anomalous language use, and that metaphor is described as a decorative element without cognitive importance and metaphor is not necessary, it is just nice

In other words, metaphor, according to traditional approach, is considered a mere matter of language

1.2.2 Cognitive approach to metaphor

While the traditional approach places metaphor as secondary to, or derived from, literal meaning; cognitive linguistics aims to show that metaphors should not be considered as a mere matter of language; it is actually a matter of thought

According to this approach, metaphors do not express existing similarities; they create them by metaphorical mapping from a source domain to a target domain

1.2.2.1 What is a conceptual metaphor?

For Lakoff and Johnson (1980) metaphor is not a matter of language but of thought processes Therefore, they are not interested in metaphor as linguistic expressions but as concepts behind the expressions They do not even attempt to provide an adequate definition for metaphor but describe the use of it as “understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another” (p 5) They use the term

“conceptual metaphor” when discussing metaphors which are part of our ordinary conceptual system therefore reflected in our every language

Though Lakoff and Johnson do not answer what a conceptual metaphor is, they describe its use, its structure and its mechanics and its entailments The following

parts will look at the structure and the mechanism and entailments of a conceptual metaphor in order to arrive at a brief description of the type of the metaphor

discussed in this study

1.2.2.2 Metaphorical mapping

Metaphor is not just the notion of similarity or comparison between the literal and figurative meanings in an expression The transference of metaphor in meaning is realized by constructing mapping between two domains (Lakoff and Johnson: 1980)

The cognitive process that relates literal meanings to extended meanings is known

as mapping A mapping is the systematic set of correspondences that exist between

constituent elements of the source and the target domain The source domain is

predominantly associated with some tangible physical experiences and therefore it

is more concrete than the target domain (Esenova: 2000) As a result, to know a conceptual metaphor is to know the set of mappings that applies to a given source-target pairing

We can see that the set of concept in which words and expressions are borrowed is called “Source Domain”, while the concept which is the borrowers is called “Target

Domain” as shown in the metaphor “Anger is a Plant”

Source Domain Target Domain

[PLANT] [ANGER]

Seed: And the small seed of anger against him knotted itself

inside her into a hard little core of resentment

Germinations: And this, I think, is where much of the anger germinates

Root: Anger is rooted in our survival instincts and has a legitimate

and vital function in human behavior

Bloom: The feeling of rejection had quickly blossomed into anger

(Esenova: 2009)

As we can see in the above examples, the target domain “anger” is understood through the source domain “plant” “Plant” is described as having “seed”,

“germinations”, “root”, and “bloom”

1.2.2.3 The structure of a conceptual metaphor

The way metaphor transfers meaning from one area to another is described as a source domain being mapped onto a target domain Metaphor is a relation between conceptual domains, so that the way we talk about the source domain can be applied the target domain, based on systematic correspondences between the two That it is systematic means that multiple aspects of the source domain (appearances,

functions, and relations) may be mapped onto the target domain

Since a conceptual metaphor is about two domains of thought and not just using one word instead of another, the structure of a conceptual metaphor is complex

According to Kövecses (2002) in conceptual metaphor, “conceptual domain” is a critical concept in cognitive theories of metaphor We rely on our knowledge and experience on one concept in order to understand another concept Therefore, “a conceptual metaphor consists of two conceptual domains, in which one domain is understood in terms of another,” (Kövecses: 2002, p 4) We have special names for

these two conceptual domains They are called source domain and target domain

respectively Lakoff &Johnson (1980), Kövecses (2002) The conceptual domain from which we draw metaphorical expressions to understand another conceptual

domain is called the source domain, while the conceptual domain that is understood

this way is the target domain For example, in the conceptual metaphor “Argument

is War”, we try to understand the target domain argument through the source

domain war

1.2.2.4 Types of conceptual metaphors

According to cognitivists there are four main types of conceptual metaphors

1.2.2.4.1 Structural metaphors

The structural metaphor concept is perhaps Lakoff and Johnshon’s (1980) foremost metaphor classification They defined it as “cases where one concept is

metaphorically structured in terms of another” (p 14) Metaphorical structure is

characterized by two spatial structures called two conceptual domains: source

domain and target domain The concept in the target domain is understood through

the concept in the source domain The relationship between the source domain and target domain is mapping, which means that the concept in the target domain is mapped from the concept in the source domain Take an example of the metaphor

“Argument is War” As shown in the definition of structural metaphor, the

concept of argument is metaphorically structured in terms of the concept of war That is to say, when people argue, they act as if they are conducting a war by

attacking, defending, and counterattacking This is present during and after

arguments and, furthermore, participants usually claim that they did attack, defend, and counterattack –but only metaphorically (Lakoff & Johnson: 1980) This is evidence of a structural metaphor, in that it structures people’s ways of thinking, acting, speaking, and understanding By looking into the structural relationship of the concept of argument and the concept of war, one can understand that “the

concept is metaphorically structured, the activity is metaphorically structured, and, consequently, the language is metaphorically structured” (Lakoff & Johnson: 1980,

p 5)

1.2.2.4.2 Orientational metaphors

Another kind of metaphorical concept is called an orientational metaphor, which organizes a whole system of concepts with respect to one another These typically deal with spatial orientation, such as up-down, in-out, front-back, on-off, deep-shallow, and central peripheral Orientational metaphors give a concept a spatial orientation, such as happy is up The fact that the concept happy is oriented as up

gives rise to expressions such as “You’re in high spirits”; “That boosted my spirits”;

“I fell into a depression” or “I’m feeling down” (Lakoff and Johnson: 1980, p 15)

These metaphorical orientations are not arbitrary; they have a basis in our physical and cultural experience In particular, drooping posture is typically related to

sadness and depression, whereas erect posture relates to a positive emotional state

The fact that humans and most other mammals sleep lying down and stand up when they awaken gives rise to the metaphor conscious is up; unconscious is down: “He

rises early in the morning”; “He’s under hypnosis” (Lakoff and Johnson: 1980, p

15)

Similarly, the physical basis for the metaphor health and life are up; sickness and death are down is that serious illness forces us to lie down physically and when one

dies, he or she is physically down This gives rise to “He’s at the peak of health”;

“He came down with the flu”; “His health is declining”; “He dropped dead” (Lakoff

and Johnson: 1980, p 15)

Having control or force is up; being subject to control or force is down occurs because physical size typically correlates with physical strength, and the victor in a

fight is typically on top: “I have control over her”; “I am on top of the situation”;

“He’s in a superior position”; “He’s at the height of his power”; “He’s in the upper echelon”; “She’s in the high command”; “He is under my control” (Lakoff and

Johnson: 1980, p 15)

1.2.2.4.3 Ontological metaphors

Ontological metaphorical expressions occur when people try to impose substances and entities with discrete boundaries on abstract concepts such as events, activities, emotion, and so on (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980) According to Lakoff and Johnson (1980: 25), understanding our experiences in terms of objects and substances allows

us to pick out parts of our experience and treat them as discrete entities or

substances of a uniform kind Once we can identify our experiences as entities or substances, we can refer to them, categorize them, group them, and quantify them – and, by this means, reason about them

Ontological metaphors tend to fulfill human purposes such as referring, quantifying, identifying aspects, identifying causes, setting goals and motivating actions (Lakoff

& Johnson, 1980) Examples are as follows:

Referring

My fear of insects is driving my wife crazy

We are working toward peace

(Lakoff and Johnson: 1980, p 26)

Quantifying

It will take a lot of patience to finish this book

There is so much hatred in the world

(Lakoff and Johnson: 1980, p 26)

Identifying aspects

The ugly side of this personality comes out under pressure

The brutality of war dehumanizes us all

(Lakoff and Johnson: 1980, p 27)

Identifying causes

The pressure of his responsibilities caused his breakdown

He did it out of anger

(Lakoff and Johnson: 1980, p 27)

Setting goals and motivating actions

He went to New York to seek fame and fortune

I’m changing my way of life so that I can find true happiness

(Lakoff and Johnson: 1980, p 27)

1.2.2.4.4 Conduit metaphor

Another type of conceptual metaphor which is found in (at least the everyday

English) language is conduit metaphor This type of conceptual metaphor was originally described by Michael J Reddy in 1979 This conceptual metaphor states that ideas are manipulatable things that can be packed into words and language, and then transferred (given or sent) to someone, who can subsequently unpack the words to uncover the ideas inside

Lakoff and Johnson identify a large number of examples of this metaphor For examples:

“It’s hard to get that idea across to him.”

“I gave you that idea.”

“It’s difficult to put my ideas into words”

(Lakoff and Johnson: 1980, p 11) When considering our everyday ways of talking about ideas and how we

communicate them to each other, it is difficult (if not impossible) to discuss them without using this reference to a conduit for information exchange

1.2.2.5 Metaphorical entailment

Firstly we shall go to explain what entailment is Entailment is a term derived from formal logic, meaning logical consequence Richards et al (1992: 125) define entailment as “a relationship between two or more sentences If knowing that one sentence is true gives us certain knowledge of the truth of the second sentence, then the first sentence entails the second”

As mentioned above, a conceptual metaphor refers to understanding one idea

(conceptual domain) in terms of another This understanding is based on set of mappings of the source domain onto the target domain We usually have richer knowledge about source domain When this rich knowledge about elements is mapped onto target domains, we have cases of metaphorical entailment Therefore a metaphorical entailment can be defined as the imparting of a characteristic of the source domain (the metaphorical image) to the target domain (the concept receiving metaphorical treatment) by logical means Consider the following examples:

We will proceed in a step-by-step fashion

We have covered a lot of ground

(Lakoff and Johnson: 1980, p 90)

These two metaphorical expressions are related to the conceptual metaphor “An

Argument is A Journey” In this metaphor, the “participants” in the argument

correspond to “travelers”, the argument itself corresponds to a “journey” and the

“progress” of the argument corresponds to the “route” taken However, in the

source domain “journey”, travelers can get lost, they can stray from the path, they can fail to reach their destination, and so on The association between source and

target gives rise to the entailment that these events can also occur in the target domain “argument”

1.2.2.6 The role of conceptual metaphors in description of emotions

Le Dinh Tu (2010) states that “The emotions are invisible, that is, we have no way

to describe or express them properly in our own way” as the result, “we have toborrow the words available in the language to express our emotions.” It is a well known fact that we mostly use metaphors to express our emotions such as love, sadness, anger According to Kovecses (2000) “the most prominent feature of emotional language is highly figurative; that is, it is dominated by metaphorical and metonymic expressions.” Metaphor might allow people to express emotions which are difficult or impossible to express if they are restricted to literal uses of language (Ortony and Fainsilber: 1987) In other words, metaphor is a powerful device for communicating emotion from two distinct perspectives

Emotions are abstract concepts The relation of an emotion to other concepts tends

to make the emotion more concrete, as Corlenia M Verspoor (1993) points out in his research that “Metaphors are extremely pervasive in language They provide a powerful manner of making abstract concepts explicit For these reasons, they are frequently utilized to describe emotional state.” And practically, the use of

metaphorical expressions helps us express our emotions better Take the two

following sentences: “Tom’s sneer made his partner very angry” and “Tom’s sneer made his partner blood boil” It is clear that in the later the emotion of anger is described more concrete and we can see the level of anger

1.2.3 Summary

To sum up, we can say that metaphor is not only a matter of language; it is a matter

of thought It is not used only in poetics but also pervasive in everyday

conversations And metaphors play a central role in expression of emotional state And this is one of the bases for this study though it only deals with one conceptual

emotional metaphor “Anger is Heat”

CHAPTER 2

A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE METAPHOR “ANGER IS HEAT”

IN ENGLISH AND THE POSSIBLE EQUIVALENT

EXPRESSIONS IN VIETNAMESE

In this chapter we will discuss the most general metaphor for anger: “Anger is

Heat” This metaphor is used with a highly frequency both in English and in

Vietnamese; however, the speakers do not see that they use metaphorical

expressions What is the cognitive basis of this metaphor? What are differences in source domain of this metaphor in the two languages? And why are there

differences? These questions will be discussed in this chapter

2.1 The cognitive basis of the metaphor „Anger is Heat” in English and the equivalent in Vietnamese

2.1.1 The cognitive basis of the metaphor “Anger is Heat” in English

In English, according to Lakoff and Kovecses (1983) anger metaphors are based on the theory of the physiological effects of anger They argue that the physiological effects of anger are increased body heat, increased internal pressure (blood pressure, muscular pressure), agitation, and interference with accurate perception As anger increases its physiological effects increase There is a limit beyond which

physiological effects of anger impair normal functioning Moreover, the theory is largely used to tell when someone is angry, on the basis of their appearance This can be done by making use of a general metonymic principle THE

PHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF AN EMOTION STAND FOR THE EMOTION With this principle, a system of metonymies for anger is yielded:

- When I found out, I almost burst a blood vessel

- He almost had a hemorrhage

(Lakoff and Kovecses: 1983) REDNESS IN FACE AND NECK AREA:

- She was scarlet with rage

- He got red with anger

(Lakoff and Kovecses: 1983) AGITATION

- She was shaking with anger

- I was hoping mad

(Lakoff and Kovecses: 1983)

INTERFERENCE WITH ACCURATE PERCEPTION

- She was blind with rage

(Lakoff and Kovecses: 1983)

It has been argued also that the theory of physiological effects, especially the part that emphasizes HEAT, forms the basis of the most general metaphor for anger

“Anger is Heat” This metaphor has other two versions, one where the heat is

applied to fluids, and the other where the heat is applied to solids When it is

applied to fluids we get: Anger is the Heat of a Hot Fluid in a Container The

specific motivation for this consists of HEAT, INTERNAL PRESSURE and

AGITATION parts of the folk theory When “Anger is Heat” is applied to solids,

we get the version “Anger is Fire”, which is motivated by the HEAT and

REDNESS aspects of the folk theory of physiological effects

2.1.2 The cognitive basis of the equivalent metaphor “Anger is Heat” in Vietnamese

In Vietnamese, we have available words widely accepted by the community and based on that we can know the specific content of the concept of "anger"

Vietnamese observes the same metonymic principle with English, and similar

metonymic expressions are found in everyday use:

BODY HEAT

Một người đàn ông nóng tính, “một chính trị gia”, hay một người cha thiểu

…, tất cả những người đó đều là Sean Penn, ảnh đế của Oscar lần thứ 81 (http://www.thethaovanhoa.vn/135N200922416119893T0/sean-penn-chinh-tri-gia-cua-hollywood.htm)

INTERNAL PRESSURE

Tức đến vỡ mật mất thôi, Khánh Bình quay phắt lại, anh chụp hai vai Mười

Bốn bóp mạnh: “Tôi báo cho cô biết, đừng chọc cho tôi nổi điên, không có lợi cho cô đâu.”

(http://www.hoahoctro.com/4rum/showthread.php?t=294299)

REDNESS IN FACE AND NECK AREA

- Bà Chúa đỏ mặt tía tai, tức lắm nhưng chẳng dám nói gì

(http://namkna.blogspot.com/2011/05/ba-chua-mac-lom-truyen-trang-quynh.html)

AGITATION

An Nhiên cảm thấy giận run người, đó là lần đầu tiên cầm bản thảo trong

(http://4phuong.net/ebook/22129502/nuoc-mua-co-vi-man.html)

INTERFERENCE WITH ACCURATE PERCEPTION

Khi hôn nhân không còn hạnh phúc, đôi khi người phụ nữ trở thành nạn nhân

của nhũng ông chồng bị cơn giận làm mờ mắt…

(http://thegioigiadinh.com.vn/doi-song/toa-an/2304/to-am-mong-manh.html)

The central metaphor “Anger is Heat” in Vietnamese also has two versions like in English: the version “Anger is the Heat of a Hot Fluid in a Container” and the version “Anger is Fire”

In summary, the basis for the central metaphor “Anger is Heat” is similar between

the two languages This is expected because it is based on bodily experience that

should be universal among all human beings And this central metaphor in both languages has two same versions

2.2 The metaphor “Anger is Heat” in English and the equivalent in

Vietnamese

As pointed above, the central metaphor “Anger is Heat” in both English and

Vietnamese has two versions: “Anger is the Heat of a Hot Fluid in a Container” and “Anger is Fire” Therefore, we will study these two sub-versions in English

and the Vietnamese equivalents to point outs similarities and differences between them

2.2.1 The version “Anger is the Heat of a Hot Fluid in a Container” in English and the Vietnamese equivalent

In this metaphor, the target domain “anger” is understood through the source

domain “the heat of a fluid in a container” The mechanisms of this metaphor in English and in Vietnamese are the same and based on a set of correspondences between the source domain “the heat of a fluid in a container” and the target domain

“anger” These correspondences are in two types: ontological and epistemic

The ontological correspondences are the correspondences between the entities in the source domain and the corresponding entities in the target domain These

correspondences are, in other words, the mapping of the source domain onto the target domain and can be defined as follows:

The container The body

The heat of a fluid The anger

The heat scale The anger scale, with and end points

zero and limit Container heat Body heat

Pressure in container Internal pressure in the body

Agitation of fluid and container Physical agitation

The limit of the container’s capacity to the limit on the anger scale

withstand pressure caused by heat

Explosion Loss of control

Danger of explosion Danger of loss of control

Based on these ontological corresponding the meaning of the metaphor or the

epistemic correspondences becomes clearer Epistemic correspondences are

correspondences between knowledge about the source domain and corresponding knowledge about the target domain We can define epistemic correspondences of the metaphor as follows:

The effect of intense fluid heat is

container heat, steam, and agitation

The effect of intense anger is body heat, internal pressure, and agitation

When the fluid is heated past a certain

limit, pressure increases to the point at

which the container explodes

When anger increases past a certain limit, pressure increases to the point at which the person loses control

An explosion is damaging to the

container and dangerous to bystanders

A loss of control is damaging to angry person and to other people

The fluid can be prevented from

explosion by removing the fire

Removing the cause of anger can prevent it form being vented

It is sometimes possible control the

release of heated fluid for either

destructive or constructive purposes; this

has the effect of lowering the level of

heat and pressure

It is sometimes possible control the release of anger for either destructive or constructive purposes; this has the effect

of lowering the level of anger and internal pressure

These correspondences between source domain and target domain constitute

elaborations of conceptual metaphors Here, based on these correspondences, the

central metaphor “Anger is the Heat of a Hot Fluid in a Container” has a rich

system of metaphorical entailments expressing different levels of increase of anger The following parts will investigate the system of metaphorical entailments of the

central metaphor “Anger is the Heat of a Hot Fluid in a Container” in English