Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Authors
  • Keywords
  • Date
  • Type

Search results

Number of results: 3
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

By conducting an examination of the mapping process in metaphor comprehension, this article suggests that a set of superficially different metaphors can be considered to be isomorphic to an underlying generic metaphor. In other words, a set of seemingly different metaphors with different domains can be categorized under a single generic metaphor. The generic metaphor is in the general form of X is in some kind of semantic relationship with Y. When this generic metaphor is realized in specific-level forms, a number of metaphors are produced which are isomorphic to each other, although their domains could be completely different in appearance. In other words, there is a deep homogeneity among a set of concretely different metaphors. A generic metaphor can be seen as a semantic frame for all specific metaphors that are isomorphic to it. Since base and target domains of a given metaphor can be very different in terms of concrete features, the mapping of the base into the target must be mediated by the domain of its underlying generic metaphor.
Go to article

Bibliography

Aziz-Zadeh, L., & Damasio, A. (2008). Embodied semantics for actions: Findings from functional brain imaging. Journal of Physiology, 102(1-3), 35–39.
Barsalou, L. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645.
Binder, J. R., & Desai, R. H. (2011). The neurobiology of semantic memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(11), 527–536.
Fauconnier, G. (1997). Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (1998). Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 22(2), 133-–187.
Fischer, M.H., & Zwaan, R.A. (2008). Embodied language: a review of the role of the motor system in language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(6), 825–850. doi: 10.1080/17470210701623605.
Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., & Law, K. (1994). MAC/FAC: A model of similarity-based retrieval. Cognitive Science, 19(2), 141–205.
Galinsky, A. D., & Glucksberg, S. (2001). Inhibition of the literal: Metaphors and idioms as judgmental primes. Social Cognition, 18(1), 35–54.
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7(2), 155–170.
Gernsbacher, M. A., Keysar, B., & Robertson, R. R. (1995). The role of suppression in metaphor interpretation. Paper presented at 36th annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Los Angeles.
Gibbs, R., Gould, J., & Andric, M. (2006). Imagining metaphorical actions: Embodied simulations make the impossible plausible. Imagination, Cognition, & Personality, 25(3), 221–238.
Gibbs, R. (2006). Embodiment and Cognitive Science. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs, R. W., & Colston, H, L. (2012). Interpreting Figurative Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Giora, R. (1997). Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(3), 183–206.
Glucksberg, S., Newsome, M. R., & Goldvarg, Y. (2001). Inhibition of the literal: Filtering metaphor-irrelevant information during metaphor comprehension. Metaphor & Symbol, 16(3-4), 277–293.
Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., &, Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41(2), 301–307. doi: 10.1016/S0896-6273(03)00838-9.
Jamrozik, A., McQuire, M., Cardillo, E., & Chatterjee, A. (2016). Metaphor: Bridging embodiment to abstraction, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(4), 1080–1089.
Khatin-Zadeh, O., & Khoshsima, H. (2021). Homo-schematic metaphors: A study of metaphor comprehension in three different priming conditions. Journal of Psycholinguist Research, 50(4), 923–948. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-020-09754-z
Khatin-Zadeh, O., Khoshsima, H., Yarahmadzehi, N., & Marmolejo- Ramos, F. (2019). The Impact of metaphorical prime on metaphor comprehension processes. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 39(3), 375–388.
Khatin Zadeh, O., Vahdat, S. (2015). Abstract and concrete representa-tions in structure-mapping and class-inclusion. Journal of Cognitive Linguistic Studies, 2(2), 349-360.
King, B. (1989). The Conceptual structure of emotional experience in Chinese. Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.
Klatzky, R. Pellegrino, J. McCloskey, B., & Doherty, S. (1989). Can you squeeze a tomato? The role of motor representations in semant-ic sensibility judgments. Journal of Memory and Language, 28(1), 56–77.
Kövecses, Z. (1986). Metaphors of Anger, Pride, and Love: A Lexical Approach to the Study of Concepts. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Kövecses, Z. (1987). The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English. In D. Holland and N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 195–221). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. & Tumer, M. (1989). More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we Live by. London: University of Chicago Press.
Matsuki, K. (1995). Metaphors of anger in Japanese. In J. R. Taylor and R. MacLaury (Eds.), Language and the cognitive construal of the world (pp. 137–151). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Micholajczuk, A. (1998). The metonymic and metaphoric conceptualization of anger in Polish. In A. Athanasiadou and E. Tabakowska (Eds.), Speaking of emotions: Conceptualization and expression (pp. 153–191). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nie, Y., & Chen, R. (2008). WATER metaphors and metonymies in Chinese: A semantic network. Pragmatics & Cognition, 16(3), 492–516.
Sweetser, E. (1990). From Etymology to Pragmatics: The Mind-as-body Metaphor in Semantic Structure and Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, J., & Mbense, T. (1998). Red dogs and rotten mealies: How Zulus talk about anger. In A. Athanasiadou and E. Tabakowska (Eds.), Speaking of emotions: Conceptualization and expression (pp. 191– 226). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Turner, M. (1987). Death is the Mother of Beauty: Mind, Metaphor, Criticism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Turner, M. (1991). Reading Minds: The Study of English in the Age of Cognitive Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Watson, C.E., Cardillo, E.R., Ianni, G.R., & Chatterjee, A. (2013). Action concepts in the brain: an activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25, 1191–1205. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00401.
Wilson, N., & Gibbs, R. (2007). Real and imagined body movement primes metaphor comprehension. Cognitive Science, 31(4), 721–731.
Wolff, P., & Gentner, D. (2011). Structure-mapping in metaphor comprehension, Cognitive Science, 35 (8), 1456–1488.
Yu, N. (1998). The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: A Perspective from Chinese. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Omid Khatin-Zadeh
1
Hassan Banaruee
2
Babak Yazdani-Fazlabadi
3

  1. School of Foreign Languages, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China
  2. University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
  3. University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The domain of motion events is widely used to metaphorically describe abstract concepts, particularly emotional states. Why motion events are effective for describing abstract concepts is the question that this article intends to answer. In the literature of the field, several reasons have been suggested to be behind the suitability of motion events for describing these concepts, such as high concreteness of motion events, their high imageability, and the ability of comprehender to simultaneously imagine components of motion events. This article suggests that motion events are particularly effective for metaphorical description of those domains which have the feature of dynamic change over a period of time. This is particularly the case with emotional states. Since changes in emotions take place throughout a period of time, they could best be described by motion events which have the same feature. In other words, the continuous change in emotions is understood in terms of continuous change in the location of a moving object in the 3D space. Based on the arguments of embodied theories of cognition, it would be no surprise to see the involvement of similar areas of the brain in understanding emotions and motions.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Omid Khatin-Zadeh
Zahra Eskandari
Sedigheh Vahdat
Hassan Banaruee
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This article looks at the semantic space of abstract and concrete concepts from the perspective of distributed models of conceptual representations. It focuses on abstract metaphorical classes and the mechanisms through which these concepts are processed. When the metaphor X is a Y is understood, X is included in the abstract metaphorical class of Y. This metaphorical class is abstract because the most of semantic features of Y are filtered out through a suppressiveoriented mode of processing. It is suggested that abstract metaphorical classes of living things are usually defined by a single or a very small set of semantic features. Therefore, such metaphorical classes are highly abstract. On the other hand, abstract metaphorical classes of nonliving things are defined by a relatively larger cluster of semantic features. Therefore, abstract metaphorical classes of nonliving things have a relatively higher degree of concreteness compared to those of living things. In other words, abstract metaphorical classes of living things and nonliving things are rather different in terms of nature and the structure of semantic space.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Omid Khatin-Zadeh
Zahra Eskandari
Hassan Banaruee
Fernando Marmolejo-Ramos

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more