![]() ![]() ![]() Another way in which differences in metaphorical conceptualization can be culturally revealing lies in the ‘scope of the source’, that is, the overall set of target domains to which a particular source concept can apply metaphorically. Because conceptual metaphors provide the speakers of a language with their automatic and unconscious ways of thinking about things and tend to characterize those dimensions of a concept that are most culturally salient, differences in the ‘range of the target’ can therefore underpin – and provide good ‘emic’ evidence of – differences in worldview. There can be differences in the range of conceptual metaphors that societies (including historical ones) make use of in conceptualizing a particular target domain. The structuring of concepts via multiple metaphors is one way in which culture enters into metaphorical conceptualization (cf. ![]() Highly abstract concepts in fact tend to be conceptualized in terms of whole networks of metaphors. In this view, metaphorical linguistic expressions reflect ‘conceptual metaphors’, that is, systematic mappings of conceptual content that deliver a society’s ways of making sense of – and hence speaking about – certain (mostly abstract) concepts in terms of other (mostly concrete, body-based) concepts. Cognitive linguistics takes metaphor to be a pervasive and essential feature not only of language, but also of thought. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |