The relation between language, culture and thought
The connection between language, culture, and thought is evident, as language is inherently a human construct influenced by the cultural environment in which individuals are raised This environment shapes their thoughts and behaviors according to social norms and conditions Wierzbicka (1997) highlights the link between societal life and language lexicon, demonstrating that the vocabulary of a language reflects the cultural context of its speakers through her analysis of English, Russian, Polish, German, and Japanese Similarly, Sapir argues that language significantly shapes our perception of reality, suggesting that our experiences are largely guided by the linguistic habits of our community (Sapir, quoted in Whorf, 1956).
The language we use profoundly influences our habits and thought processes, as Wierzbicka (1997) highlights the intricate relationship between language, culture, and cognition Language not only embodies culture-specific meanings but also reflects the unique ways of living and thinking within a society Consequently, the way we use language shapes our thoughts and behaviors, illustrating how different languages can lead to distinct ways of thinking and acting, ultimately revealing the cultural differences that exist among people.
Language serves as a key expression of thought, both verbally and nonverbally, and is influenced by cultural values that can be both visible and hidden Each community possesses its unique culture, which may share universal traits while maintaining distinct differences that shape societal structures and language use Significant disparities between languages in conveying similar concepts suggest varying worldviews among their speakers This relationship between language, thought, and culture, as discussed by Sapir (1949) and Whorf (1956), aligns with Lakoff and Johnson's (2003) exploration of metaphors, emphasizing that our understanding is deeply intertwined with the metaphors we live by.
Language is essential in shaping our lives, regulating our activities, and maintaining social order Metaphors serve as a crucial linguistic technique that reflects deeper societal realities, cultural values, and community thought Understanding metaphors allows us to trace their roots back to the way of life within a society.
The exploration of metaphors across different languages reveals the intricate connections between language, thought, and culture, highlighting the underlying cultural values embedded within each language This study is essential for understanding how metaphors shape our perception and reflection of cultural nuances.
Poetry and poetic language
Researchers categorize literary language into poetic, dramatic, and narrative forms Poetry uniquely intertwines sound and meaning, with both elements playing a crucial role in its interpretation (Lân, 2011; Jakobson, 1981) Jakobson (1981) emphasized that poetry strives to create an equation between phonological sequences and semantic units Each culture's poetry varies due to factors like geography and religion, as Lân (2001) notes that poetry is an intrinsic form of language He identifies poetry as a combination of meaning, emotion, structure, and prosody According to Hán, Sử, and Phi (2004), poetry conveys mood and strong feelings through concise language, often manifesting the author's thoughts and viewpoints Hòa (2006) categorizes poetry into five types: publicistic, lyricism, free verse, prose poetry, and narrative verse, with lyric poetry focusing on personal emotions through imagery and rhythm Hùng (quoted in Lân, 2011) agrees that poetry reflects life and emotions through expressive language Historically, narrative, lyrical, and dramatic works were often expressed in poetic form, leading to a longstanding association between poetry and literary creation Nam (1984, quoted in Lân, 2011) defines poetry as a literary mode reflecting life through rich feelings and rhythm Ân (2004) traces the origins of poetry as the earliest form of verbal art, foundational to various literary genres, including epic, tragedy, and comedy.
Every poem is a creation The poem is full of imagination For Heidegger (1971: 197)
The essence of a poem lies in the poet's expression of their inner thoughts, which is conveyed through language This language serves as a multifaceted means of communication, reflecting the author's ideas and emotions Essentially, a poem articulates the poet's perspective while showcasing the complexity and depth of language as a powerful tool for expression.
To emphasize the uniqueness of poetic language, Hanauer (2003: 69) stated that poetry is
Poetry serves as a unique discourse that encapsulates individualized experiences and linguistic expressions, allowing readers to engage deeply with personal narratives Its distinctiveness fosters multicultural understanding and strengthens community connections While poetry evokes powerful emotions, it also complicates the concept of literacy, as effectively reading poetry often demands expertise in language According to scholars, poetry is a literary form that conveys the writer's experiences, thoughts, and feelings through a self-referential use of language, ultimately providing both the reader and writer with new insights into these shared human experiences.
Pace (2009) highlights that poets "cut up" existing texts to create new works, drawing from a vast array of images rather than inventing entirely new concepts Poetry retains its distinctive shape and form, becoming increasingly unpredictable and complex, which can challenge comprehension Despite the allure of modern inventions, poetry persists in contemporary society by offering "access to first-hand experience in the world" (Hanauer, 2003) While language is ubiquitous, its nuanced meanings can be difficult to navigate, necessitating careful exploration Poetry serves as a "mnemonic medium," preserving knowledge and fostering community dialogue, as evidenced by classical works like the Iliad and Odyssey, which intertwine persuasive and melodic elements This ornamental quality of poetry has been recognized since ancient times, notably by scholars like Aristotle.
Poetic language uniquely activates potential meanings that ordinary language cannot convey While the words and structures used in poetry are familiar, their innovative combinations create original expressions that reflect the author's true intentions Paraphrasing these creations often diminishes their value and depth Poetry typically offers layered meanings, allowing for diverse interpretations and insights, making it a rich medium for exploration and understanding.
From what is reviewed above, the language of poetry shares and is itself distinct from general language in the following aspects:
Language or poetic language is expression
Poetic language, however, is the unique creation of an individual, therefore, it is not usually transparent
Poetry has gone beyond the primary purpose of transferring knowledge to a special means of conveying the author’s ideas to his surroundings
Poetry still keeps its memorable shape and form which is one of the structural features making it merge from common language
Poetry captivates second language learners, offering a unique avenue for exploring emotions, feelings, and thoughts, yet it also presents several challenges Understanding poetry is essential for research in language learning In the following section, we will delve into one specific genre of poetry: the lyric.
Lyric as a genre of poetry
The exploration of poetry highlights the advantages of focusing on language within specific genres for both language learners and educators Echoing Wang (2009), we recognize that genre analysis can significantly inform document design and teaching methods While some scholars equate genre with discourse type (Simpson, 2003; Carter, 1997), others differentiate between genre and text type (Fairclough, 2003; Swales, 1990; Wang, 2009; Wodak, 2009; Guerin, 2005; Van Dijk, 2008) The former perspective categorizes genres as text types, such as novels and newspaper articles, which can be easily identified by proficient English speakers, suggesting that genres operate at a higher level of discourse organization than registers (Biber & Finegan, 1991; quoted in Simpson, 2003).
Carter (1997) observed that genre is a particular type of text It can be seen that this approach is a
The understanding of genre can be approached in two distinct ways: a "static" perspective and a "dynamic" perspective The dynamic view, as articulated by Swales (1990), considers genre as a specific type of communicative event aimed at fulfilling particular purposes within a discourse community Wang (2009: 237) further emphasizes that a genre is a goal-oriented social process with a structured framework Fairclough (2003: 65) defines genre as the discourse-related aspect of social interactions during events, highlighting six key aspects, including how social practices constrain social actions and interactions He notes that transformations in social practices, particularly in the context of new capitalism, lead to changes in the forms of action and interaction, ultimately resulting in shifts in genres This socially oriented nature of genres implies that some are more adaptable to these changes.
The evolution of genre reflects a shift in the combination of various genres, leading to a diverse array of interconnected texts While some genres may be localized in their scope, others can possess universal qualities It is important to recognize that a specific genre does not completely define a text or interaction; rather, it often encompasses a blend of multiple genres.
Fairclough emphasizes that defining genre solely as text type is overly simplistic; instead, it should be viewed through multiple contextual facets Guerin (2005) compares genre to a schema, suggesting it relies on our prior knowledge and experience, acting as a "pre-setting device" that enhances our understanding of various forms, whether they be jokes, business discussions, or literary works He specifically notes that lyric poetry, characterized by emotion and subjectivity, is a distinct genre Additionally, Stockwell (2002) highlights that genre classification can occur at various levels, influenced by social, historical, functional, authorial, political, stylistic, and individual factors.
Lyric poetry is widely recognized as a primary and universal genre in the realm of poetry, as noted by Blasing (2007), who describes it as a foundational genre across various languages This genre serves as a socially coded expression of emotions and is considered the most rhetorical among poetic forms Đức (1985) emphasizes the significance of lyric poetry, highlighting its unique ability to convey deep feelings and experiences.
Lyric poetry is a literary genre that emphasizes the poet's inner feelings and emotions, which play a crucial role in creating vivid imagery According to Abrams & Harpham (2009), lyric poetry encompasses a wide range of expressions, primarily characterized by its emotional orientation and subjectivity Typically written in the first person, the "I" in lyrics does not always represent the poet but serves as a linguistic tool to convey mood and feelings As noted by Guerin et al (2005), the presence of a speaker in lyric poetry establishes context and circumstances, allowing for a personal reaction to experiences, emotions, ideas, or sensations This unique perspective enhances the depth and relatability of the poem, drawing readers into the speaker's emotional landscape.
In 2002, poetry was categorized into various modes, with lyric identified as a distinct genre alongside others like comedy, tragedy, gothic, and surrealism Blasing (2007) emphasizes that the essence of lyric poetry lies in its ability to refer, express, and communicate through a voice that addresses "nobody in particular," rather than focusing on storytelling or dramatic action Thus, lyric poetry is defined by its unique characteristics that set it apart from other genres.
This study views lyrics as a form of poetry that expresses an individual's emotions and reactions to various situations, often constrained by social norms As a distinct genre, lyrics embody unique characteristics that highlight personal feelings and societal influences.
- In terms of purpose, it is a form of communicating author’s ideas (in this case, the feeling, the emotion etc.) of and to the context
- In terms of form, it contains an “I” the agent of such feeling who expresses himself explicitly or implicitly through language of the poem.
Cognitive linguistics
An overview of Cognitive Linguistics
Cognitive Linguistics (CL) has established itself over the past 30 years as a vital framework for understanding language, cognitive systems, and meaning construction It emphasizes that language study intertwines with cognitive and cultural domains, exploring how language is activated through various models and frames CL highlights the intricate connections within the language network and the processes of mapping and elaboration that contribute to meaning Rather than merely representing meaning, language actively constructs it within specific contexts shaped by cultural models and cognitive resources This modern linguistic approach investigates the interplay between human language, the mind, and socio-physical experiences (Evan et al., 2007: 2).
It is of common understanding that CL is not a single theory but a cluster of theories, with the central focus on language and thought (Nesset (2008), Evans (2007), Evans and Green
(2006), Geeraerts & Cuyckens (2007)), for Nesset (2008: 9) it contains “a family of broadly compatible theoretical approaches” as long as they share the common view that language is an
Cognitive linguistics emphasizes the intricate relationship between language and thought, highlighting the significance of meaning, conceptual processes, and embodied experience in understanding language and the mind (Evans, 2007) This field, described as an umbrella discipline, often uses distinct terminology for similar phenomena (Evans & Green, 2006) A key distinction of cognitive linguistics is its assertion that language reflects fundamental properties of the human mind (Evans & Green, 2006) The analysis of linguistic categories' conceptual and experiential foundations is central to this approach, which views natural language as a mental phenomenon (Geeraerts & Cuyckens, 2007) Cognitive linguistics can be divided into two main areas: cognitive semantics, which focuses on linguistic semantics, and cognitive grammar, which models the language system with an emphasis on meaning Despite their differences, cognitive semantics and cognitive grammar share a common goal of exploring the relationship between experience and the semantic structures encoded in language, thereby contributing to the broader study of meaning and its sources within cognitive linguistics.
The study of meaning and grammar from cognitive linguistics
Cognitive Linguistics (CL) is grounded in two key commitments: the generalization commitment, which seeks to identify overarching principles applicable to all language use, and the cognitive commitment, which aims to characterize these principles based on insights from the mind and brain provided by other disciplines This interdisciplinary approach positions CL within the realm of cognitive science, defined as a scientific discipline focused on the study of the mind.
Cognitive Linguistics (CL) expands the understanding of conceptual phenomena identified by cognitive scientists, particularly through frameworks like Conceptual Metaphor, Mental Space, and Conceptual Blending Theory By emphasizing the connection between language and human imagination, CL posits that language reflects the systematic cognitive processes of the mind It aligns with functionalism by examining language in terms of its functions while also recognizing language as a representation of cognition Additionally, CL shares aspects with Generative Linguistics regarding the mental nature of language but distinguishes itself by focusing on the human mind and rejecting the autonomy of language Rather than adhering to the "objectivism" of language, CL embraces "experientialism," which blends elements of both objectivism and subjectivity.
Some of the basic principles of CL will serve to show the importance given to context:
- Language is not an autonomous entity, but rather is related to other human cognitive aspects
Cognitive approaches to grammar The study of the symbolic linguistic units that comprise language
Cognitive semantics The study of the relationship between experience, embodied cognition and language
Cognitive linguistics The study of language in a way that is compatible with what is known about the human mind, treating language as reflecting and revealing the mind
- The main object of CL, therefore, is language use, language can be considered from many different perspectives (syntax, semantics, pragmatics and cognition)
- Meaning should be considered both from semantics and pragmatic point of view
As mentioned above, CL shares with functionalism the concern with language function, however, CL does not make the sharp distinction between syntax and the lexicon Instead, it
Syntax and the lexicon represent a continuum of construction, spanning from specific elements like "cat" and "kick the bucket" to broader patterns such as "noun" and "transitive construction" (Broccias, 2006: 81) This perspective is supported by other researchers, including Lakoff and Johnson.
(1980), Rosch (1975) also rejected the dominant idea at the time that syntax is separate from other aspects of language, and that language is separate from cognition
Insights taken from CL can be useful for second language teaching and learning, based on the following dimensions:
Language plays a crucial role in cognition and should not be viewed as a standalone entity In the context of second language acquisition, it is essential to teach language in conjunction with cognitive processes, emphasizing the fundamental conceptual mappings that underlie understanding.
In Cognitive Linguistics (CL), language is understood as a complex, non-dichotomous system of symbolic units, highlighting the importance of teaching and learning that integrates various aspects of language This approach emphasizes that acquiring a language involves not only linguistic skills but also the understanding of "standard behavior" and social norms associated with it.
CL rejects the traditional dictionary definition of words, emphasizing that each word or pattern serves as a cue connecting to other language elements within a broader system Consequently, second language teaching and learning should not treat linguistic expressions as isolated entities but rather understand them in relation to the entire language network Isolating specific language elements is not a productive approach.
Metaphor and metonymy are crucial elements in the semantics of natural languages and influence cognitive patterns, as highlighted by researchers like Gibb (2007) and Lakoff and Johnson (2003) They argue that metaphor transcends mere literary use; it is a fundamental aspect of everyday language that shapes our understanding through conceptual mappings Therefore, language instruction should incorporate these principles of cognitive semantics to enhance comprehension and usage The next section will explore the foundational aspects of cognitive semantics in more detail.
Cognitive semantics
Cognitive semantics explores the relationship between conceptualization and meaning construction, emphasizing the role of language in investigating cognitive phenomena Scholars focus on cognitive experiences and the conceptual systems that represent knowledge, as outlined by Evans and Green (2006) and Evans (2007) Rather than being a singular theory, semantics encompasses various guiding principles, including Blending Theory, Conceptual Metaphor Theory, Frame Semantics, and Mental Spaces Theory.
Cognitive semantics scholars, such as Evans (2007), Langacker (2008), and Gibbs (2008), define meaning as the conceptualization underlying linguistic expressions, viewing language as a manifestation of thought intertwined with social practices Langacker (2008) emphasizes that linguistic meanings are grounded in social interaction, negotiated by interlocutors based on their mutual understanding He highlights the importance of empirical data in uncovering conceptual structures in language Gibbs (2008) advocates for a flexible approach to cognitive semantics, noting that our knowledge is dynamic and shaped by various perceptual interactions and bodily actions, exemplified by the concept of "image schema." He illustrates this with the image of containment, mapping emotions like anger as fluid within a container, showcasing the embodied nature of our conceptualizations Evans (2007) further clarifies that embodied cognition arises from the interaction between human bodies and their environments, reinforcing the connection between language and our physical experiences.
Language is a reflection of our embodied experiences, as noted by Croft (1993) and echoed by Charteris-Black (2004), emphasizing that linguistic semantics is rooted in common human experiences Langacker (2008) further clarifies that meaning arises from thought and is intricately linked to conceptualization, encompassing both new and established ideas This connection highlights how human experiences shape our understanding of meaning.
Understanding meaning requires considering sensory, motor, and emotional experiences, as well as the dynamic aspects of context, including physical, linguistic, social, and cultural factors These elements not only shape our interpretations but also evolve over time, reflecting the changing nature of conception and understanding.
Cognitive semantics theory is the parental one of conceptual metaphor theory Leezenberg (2001: 144) denoted that in cognitive semantics, the transference of domain creates metaphor
The emergence of distinct cognitive domains facilitates metaphorical transfers, emphasizing the importance of conceptualizing metaphors This approach serves as a foundation for translating linguistic metaphors into conceptual metaphors, enhancing our understanding of metaphors through underlying patterns of thought.
14) also carried out his study under this umbrella approach and he claimed that image schema is the central tenet in conceptualizing metaphor, and he acknowledges the embodied trend in it that
“image schemas are the source of metaphorical mappings for abstract domains.” This is coincident with Gibb’s idea above of cognitive semantics in general
Cognitive semantics, similar to cognitive linguistics (CL), lacks a definitive boundary, making it difficult to consolidate all its perspectives into a single study Various approaches can be identified within the cognitive semantic framework According to Evans (2007) and Evans and Green (2006), the guiding principles of cognitive semantics emphasize the interconnectedness of language and thought, highlighting the importance of understanding meaning through cognitive processes.
2 Semantic structure is conceptual structure
3 Meaning and representation are encyclopaedic
The concept of embodied cognition suggests that our physical characteristics shape our perception of the world, influencing how we form concepts based on our interactions with our environment A clear example of this is the perception of beauty, which varies across cultures; for instance, while certain regions may celebrate complexions with spots as beautiful, others may not view them in the same light.
The semantic structure, viewed as a conceptual structure, highlights that the meanings associated with words and linguistic elements can align with conceptual frameworks; however, it is essential to recognize that these two components are distinct and do not overlap.
The third perspective posits that semantic structure is encyclopaedic in nature, suggesting that lexical words do not correspond to rigid categories of meaning as defined in dictionaries Instead, they serve as "points of access" (Evan and Green, 2006: 160) to a vast expanse of knowledge associated with specific concepts or conceptual domains.
For example: John is a Shylock
In our understanding of literature, a statement about Shylock is not contradictory; rather, it is acceptable and easily understood when we associate him with traits like meanness and selfishness However, this encyclopedic interpretation does not negate the conventional meanings associated with the character.
It is the conventional meaning which makes the differences between the above two sentences
The fourth principle of cognitive semantics highlights that meaning construction is a dynamic process influenced by the interaction of language units and background knowledge, rather than being solely derived from language itself This process, known as Blending Theory, relies on encyclopaedic knowledge and inferencing strategies that relate to various aspects of conceptual structure and organization Fauconnier (1994, 1997) underscores the importance of mappings, which serve as local connections between different mental spaces, facilitating the formation of conceptual "packages" of information during real-time construction.
E.g If John were here we would discuss the matter
John is currently not present, which prevents us from discussing the matter at hand This situation illustrates how we connect different mental spaces, namely "here" and "there," leading to a new understanding referred to as encyclopaedic meaning Meaning construction involves conceptualization, focusing on the relationship between conceptual structures and sensory experiences For instance, a prisoner experiences confinement within the structural boundaries of a prison, which restricts their freedom and rights until release This concept is closely tied to the notion of "image schema," particularly in relation to containment.
Cognitive semantics explores the relationship between language and the mind, emphasizing that conceptualization, rather than mere concepts, is its core focus This approach highlights how concepts are motivated and evolve over time, influenced by the dynamic interactions between humans and their environment These changes stem from personal experiences and the encyclopedic knowledge individuals acquire through their social existence.
This article reviews key issues in cognitive semantics, focusing specifically on metaphor It highlights essential concepts such as mappings, conceptualization, and domains, providing a comprehensive understanding of the foundational elements in cognitive linguistics.
Metaphor
Metaphor: substitution view, comparison view, interaction view and pragmatic approach
A pragmatic approach to metaphor reveals its significance beyond mere embellishment in language Historically, metaphors have been recognized as essential tools for effective communication, with their roots tracing back to Aristotle, who defined metaphor as the transference of names across categories—be it from genus to species, species to genus, or through analogy This understanding underscores the role of metaphor in enhancing clarity and engagement in writing.
Leech (1969) highlights that metaphor is a crucial figure of speech in poetry and idioms, introducing the concepts of Tenor and Vehicle based on Grounding He argues that metaphor is fundamental to poetic creation, often regarded as a distinct phenomenon independent of other forms of transferred meaning.
Literary researchers often highlight the unconventional use of pre-existing words, which can be substituted with less accurate terms Metaphor is viewed as a unique expression of the individual; Bergman and Epstein (1992) describe it as "the dance of the mind." This powerful poetic trope involves transforming one idea into another, showcasing a fundamental skill essential for poetic creativity.
This article examines metaphor through various perspectives, focusing on the insights of Black (1993) regarding the substitution theory of metaphor Black critiques the traditional comparison view, which posits that a metaphor simply replaces a literal term He argues that this substitution view encompasses comparison, where one term is applied to another in a way that transcends its literal meaning, highlighting the mechanism of meaning transference inherent in metaphorical language.
The comparison theory, rooted in Aristotle's "Poetics," views metaphor as an implicit comparison, exemplified by the structure A is B, which can be interpreted as A is like B in specific respects (Tehdal, 2009) However, this theory has its limitations, as it suggests that metaphors cannot generate new similarities, only describing those that already exist (Katz et al., 1998) Additionally, metaphors under this theory are seen as explicit or implicit comparisons that are literally false, such as "my car is a lemon" or "Juliet is the sun." Littlemore and Low (2006) noted that advocates of the comparison theory maintain this perspective on metaphors.
“metaphor comprehension and simile comprehension are similar.” As such, the reader or listeners need to identify common features that two parts of the expressions bear
In the comparison view, stating that x is y indicates that x and y share certain similarities that serve as a foundation for understanding the concept being discussed These similarities ease the comprehension of the intended entity As Miller (1993: 367) noted, when an author claims that x is y, we should envision a scenario where this is true, which is easier if x and y are alike in some aspects Miller emphasized that comparison underpins metaphors, asserting that analogy serves as the basis for comparison He illustrated this by showing that the statement "The toes are the fingers of the foot" can be viewed as a metaphor, highlighting the shared properties of toes and fingers Similarly, Vietnamese scholars align with this global perspective, defining metaphor through the lens of comparison and emphasizing the importance of similarity, while also recognizing the value metaphors bring to language use, as noted by Hòa (2006).
Metaphor is a figure of speech that creates an implicit comparison between two things, allowing one to be referred to by the name of another This technique enhances the reader's imagination by highlighting similarities in meaning According to Lạc (2003: 52), a metaphor serves as a second name for the first, based on the likeness or similarity between the named entity (A) and the naming entity (B).
The concept of metaphor involves understanding the relationship between the referent and the relatum, where the reader is expected to recognize the relatum while the metaphor reveals a similarity between the two Unlike similes, which make explicit comparisons, metaphors operate as hidden comparisons, enriching the meaning of language through implicit connections between entities.
Critics of the comparison theory of metaphor argue that it is flawed to assert that metaphors simply compare two similar things (Searle, 1993) They contend that metaphorical statements cannot be equated with literal statements of similarity, as their truth conditions often differ This criticism highlights that asserting a metaphorical statement like "S is P" implies the literal statement "S is like P" does not adequately address the complexities of metaphorical expression; it merely shifts the issue The comparison theory ultimately falters by relying on literal similarities that frequently do not exist in many contexts.
The Interaction view, as proposed by Black (1993), emphasizes the similarities between two subjects while rejecting the notion that they share identical characteristics In this perspective, the primary and secondary subjects engage in a dynamic interaction, where the former highlights specific properties of the latter This interaction creates a complex relationship that aligns with the primary subject, subsequently presenting "parallel challenges" for the secondary subject For instance, the metaphor "Society is a sea" illustrates that the focus is not solely on the sea as a physical entity but rather on the intricate system of relationships it represents.
The concept of "implicative complex" highlights the role of the word "sea" in sentence interpretation, suggesting that comprehension is crucial but lacks definitive criteria for property definition, leading to unavoidable ambiguity Searle (1997) critiques this semantic view, arguing that it incorrectly assumes metaphorical meanings arise from literal contexts, while Katz et al (1998) further emphasize that the interaction between primary and subsidiary subjects in metaphors does not necessarily influence each other, as extensive psychological studies show these elements play distinct roles in metaphor comprehension.
Metaphor studies are often categorized into "semantic" and "pragmatic" theories, with the substitution theory classified as "semantic" and the newer approaches as "pragmatic." This distinction aligns with the works of notable scholars such as Austin (1963), Searle (1993), and Grice (1975) According to this theory, metaphors represent a deviant use of language within specific contexts, leading to a defective sentence meaning in those situations, as noted by Glucksberg and Keysar.
In understanding speaker meanings, the first step is to derive literal meanings, as noted by (1993: 403) This process involves determining whether the sentence's meaning is plausible within its context; if it is not, the hearer must interpret the intended message Grice (1975) supports the idea that conversational exchanges typically adhere to cooperative principles, with metaphorical language often violating these maxims, particularly the quality maxim However, critics like Glucksberg and Keysar (1993) argue that not all sentences that lack literal accuracy are metaphors and that many metaphors can be easily understood when considered within their textual contexts.
Despite the criticism, pragmatic view still has its values in understanding metaphors as it is feasible in dealing with this language use in many circumstances
The cognitive approach to metaphor introduces a hierarchical perspective, viewing metaphors not just as linguistic deviations or implicit comparisons, but as fundamental to our conceptualization of the world They arise from our knowledge, experiences, and interactions, leading to embodied reflections Furthermore, metaphors are interconnected within the framework of human encyclopedic knowledge and are expressed through language This approach will be further explored in our study.
Metaphor in cognitive linguistics
1.5.2.1 The concept of metaphor in cognitive linguistics
Cognitive linguists like Lakoff and Johnson (2003) assert that metaphor is integral to language and cognition, encompassing linguistic, sociocultural, neural, and bodily dimensions Scholars such as Gibb (1998, 2007), Kovecses (2002), and Charteris Black (2002, 2004) emphasize that in cognitive linguistics (CL), metaphor is understood as the process of comprehending one conceptual domain through another This perspective distinguishes CL from traditional approaches, highlighting metaphor's significance in language studies As a central theme in cognitive semantics, metaphor is recognized as a fundamental aspect of understanding language.
In CL, it is a cornerstone issue among others such as Mental Space, Blending Theories, etc
The cognitive approach to metaphor differs from traditional views by positing that metaphors are rooted in conceptual frameworks, known as conceptual metaphors, which connect various metaphors into a cohesive system This perspective emphasizes that metaphor is not limited to literary language but is a fundamental aspect of human cognition, permeating everyday language and aiding in the comprehension of novel metaphorical expressions distinct from conventional ones It highlights the interaction between different cognitive domains through a mapping mechanism Lakoff and Johnson define metaphor as a way of understanding one concept in terms of another, underscoring that metaphor exists not just in words but in human thought Ân summarizes this approach as understanding one conceptual domain through another, while Cơ notes that metaphor serves as a cognitive mechanism that facilitates our grasp of abstract concepts, often relying on non-metaphorical expressions for understanding.
Metaphor involves using a word, term, or concept to represent another, often revealing an underlying "irrelevance" at first glance This suggests that metaphors arise from a conceptual foundation known as conceptual metaphor, indicating that they are interconnected rather than isolated Collectively, these metaphors create what is referred to as a "conceptual metaphor." As a result, metaphors have become a central focus in various fields of study.
The exploration of metaphor across different languages can enhance the recognition of Cognitive Linguistics (CL) within cognitive sciences By examining the distinctions in metaphors between languages, learners can gain insights into the conceptual frameworks that underpin each language system This understanding ultimately equips students to better comprehend metaphors in their target language.
Our study establishes that metaphors involve understanding one concept through the lens of another, highlighting the fundamental shift of meaning from one domain to another as the basis of linguistic metaphors In the subsequent sections, we will explore the key issues surrounding metaphors.
1.5.2.2 Fundamental issues in metaphor studies
This article explores the hierarchical classification of linguistic and conceptual metaphors, highlighting their essential components It emphasizes the importance of considering accompaniments such as domain, mapping, and conceptualization when analyzing metaphors.
Linguistic metaphor refers to expressions that convey metaphorical meanings through analogies of objects or concepts While many linguistic metaphors may appear distinct on the surface, they are often interconnected within a system of underlying conceptual metaphors As Kovecses (2010) notes, "it is the metaphorical linguistic expressions that reveal the existence of the conceptual metaphors." Additionally, Littlemore and Low (2006) describe linguistic metaphors as words or expressions that are spoken or written, providing examples to clarify their usage.
“The phrase level playing field is a linguistic metaphor, because it consists of three words concerning sport, in an utterance concerning a different topic, commerce In this expression, the
The Japanese car market can be understood through the metaphor of a "level playing field," which highlights the importance of fairness in competition, similar to how games require a flat terrain to ensure equity Lakoff and Johnson (2003) argue that linguistic metaphors are integral to human language, while Picken (2007) emphasizes their linguistic dimension, noting that certain expressions may appear incoherent in specific contexts Leezenberg (2001) and Kimmel (2008) further explore the role of context in understanding linguistic metaphors, with Leezenberg identifying "semantic tension" as a result of shifting words or phrases from their expected context to an unexpected one Kimmel aligns this concept with Leech's theories, reinforcing the significance of context in metaphorical language.
In 1969, it was noted that metaphors generate "semantic tension with their cotext or context" (Kimmel, 2008: 193) In summary, our study identifies key characteristics of linguistic metaphors.
- It bears a tension with the context and cotext it appears
- It is created based on the association between entities
- It is the manifestation of the underlying conceptual metaphor
We are now looking at how the latter, conceptual metaphor, is defined
The idea of conceptual metaphor is indebted to seminar article by Lakoff and Johnson
In their 1980 work, Lakoff and Johnson argue that metaphor is fundamentally a cognitive phenomenon, distinguishing between linguistic metaphor and its deeper conceptual roots Their insights reveal that metaphors are interconnected within a system, introducing concepts not previously addressed in earlier theories They emphasize that bodily experiences serve as the foundation for metaphorical thinking, later supported by research showing that metaphors, such as those related to anger, stem from physiological responses They note that various concepts, including time, events, causation, and morality, are structured by intricate systems of conceptual metaphor, highlighting that the concept of causation alone may encompass nearly two dozen distinct metaphors.
It entails that a lot of elaborating research should be carried out to reveal the conceptual metaphors underlying language
To understand the concept of metaphor, it is essential to explore its definitions Scholars like Charteris-Black (2004) highlight the linguistic structure that forms the basis of metaphor as a figure of speech, which helps to alleviate the semantic tension among various metaphors by demonstrating their interconnections In contrast, researchers such as Littlemore and Low provide additional insights into this concept.
Kovecses (2010), Tendahl (2009), and Littlemore and Low (2006) argue that conceptual metaphors are not merely linguistic expressions but rather phenomena of thought that reveal relationships Tendahl (2009) emphasizes that the conceptual metaphor approach posits metaphor as a fundamental aspect of thought rather than language Lakoff and Johnson (2003) describe conceptual metaphors as integral to human cognition, illustrating them as connections between two conceptual domains, where one domain (the target) is understood through another (the source) Despite differing definitions, these scholars converge on the notion that conceptual metaphors are distinct from linguistic metaphors, enriching our understanding of the concept.
Metaphors in language, such as "LOVE IS A JOURNEY" and "LIFE IS A JOURNEY," as identified by Lakoff and Johnson (2003), illustrate the connection between experiential correlations and linguistic expressions These metaphors are rooted in two types of experiential correlations: co-occurrence and similarity The relationship between linguistic metaphors and their conceptual foundations highlights how our understanding of complex ideas is shaped by metaphorical language Examples of linguistic metaphors that embody the conceptualization of love as a journey further illustrate this intricate relationship.
Look how far we’ve come
We’re at the crossroads
We’ll just have to go our separate ways
We can’t turn back now
I don’t think this relationship is going anywhere
It can be seen that conceptual metaphor is understood from its grounding, its structure and meaning as follows:
It is the hidden statement or thought underlying one or several linguistic metaphors
It is structured through two domains, the target domain (what is being described) and the source domain (what is borrowed to describe)
It expresses human thought and is manifested through the form A IS B For this matter, the relationship between conceptual and linguistic metaphor is necessarily elaborated
Linguistic metaphor and conceptual metaphor are closely interconnected, with linguistic metaphor serving as the expression of conceptual metaphor, which underlies our understanding of the former Lakoff and Johnson (2003) describe conceptual metaphor as an inherent aspect of human thought, while linguistic metaphor is seen as a fundamental component of human language They emphasize that exploring the nature and role of conceptual metaphor in thought and language is fundamentally an empirical inquiry Similarly, Littlemore and Low acknowledge the relationship between these two types of metaphor in their interpretation.
The relationship between linguistic and conceptual metaphors is complex and not easily defined When encountering a linguistic metaphor in speech or writing, it is helpful to identify the underlying conceptual metaphor to enhance comprehension and establish connections within the discourse.
Concluding Remarks
In our exploration of Cognitive Linguistics (CL) and metaphor theories, we highlight the integral role of metaphors in language and human thought, emphasizing their prevalence in communication A key focus within CL is cognitive semantics, which underpins metaphor theory Our review examines metaphor from various perspectives, particularly within the CL framework, defining essential components and offering clear insights into metaphor studies We discuss important concepts such as hierarchical linguistic and conceptual metaphors, as well as the processes of conceptualization and mapping, which will be utilized in subsequent analyses.
This research focuses on the exploration of metaphors in modern English and Vietnamese lyric poetry, aiming to uncover the cultural values embedded within conceptual metaphors It examines the presence of conceptual metaphors in both languages by analyzing linguistic metaphors, while also investigating the similarities and differences in their conceptual representations The study employs various methods and techniques for data collection, description, interpretation, and comparison of metaphors, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the underlying factors that influence these conceptualizations.
Approach to the study
The major approaches that are used in the study are deductive and inductive To be more specific, they are applied as follows:
The deductive approach provides a theoretical foundation for the study, drawing on the synthesized literature of key scholars whose concepts are essential to our research We acknowledge the contributions of Lakoff and Johnson (2003) for their foundational ideas on conceptualization and metaphorical concepts, as well as Lakoff (2006) and Thắng (2008, 2012) for their insights into domain mapping Additionally, we recognize the work of Kovecses (2005), Charteris-Black (2004, 2005), Stefanowitsch (2006), Steen (2010), The Pragglejaz Group (2007), and Semino, which further enriches our understanding of these themes.
(1996), Cơ (2007) for the identification and analysis of metaphors; Hòa (2006a), (2006b), Lạc
In their works, Lạc and Hòa (2003), Ân (2002), Lân (2004), and Đức and Hán (2011) provide comprehensive definitions and classifications of metaphors, alongside a clear discussion of the cognitive approach to understanding them This foundational knowledge serves as a theoretical basis for our dissertation, from which we develop a study framework grounded in the cognitive perspective on metaphors.
The inductive approach is crucial for this research as it enables the collection of essential data, allowing for thorough description, analysis, interpretation, and synthesis This methodology facilitates a comprehensive evaluation of linguistic and conceptual metaphors, along with the underlying values associated with them By utilizing this approach, we can effectively quantify metaphors and assess their proportions within the context of conceptual metaphors.