Metaphor and Conceptual Metaphor Theory

EMOTIONS ARE FLUIDS

EMOTIONS ARE FLUIDS IN A CONTAINER (THE BODY)

Rationale behind the expression “I flipped my lid”. When the fluid in the container is too much

or too agitated, the container overflows. If there is a lid on the container, the pressure in the

container causes the lid to pop open.

Anger is an emotion.When there is too much anger in the body the emotion is represented as

boiling, rising and causing the top (the head) to pop open. That is where the expression “I

flipped my lid” (meaning “I was extremely angry”) comes from.

I flipped my lid.

I blew my top

I blew my stack

I hit the ceiling.

CONCEPTUAL METAPHORS

-A set of conceptual metaphors organizes a whole system of concepts with respect to one

another

CM: LOVE IS MADNESS FIGURATIVE EXPRESSION: I’m crazy about her.

CM: LOVE IS WAR FIGURATIVE EXPRESSION: He fled from her advances.

CM: LOVE IS A PHYSICAL FORCE FIGURATIVE EXPRESSION: I could feel the electricity

between us..

A concept is structured by the metaphor PARTIALLY and it can be EXTENDED in SOME ways but

not in others.

MORE IS UP LESS IS DOWN

The figurative expression: He attacked every weak point in my argument

is motivated by The CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR (CM): AN ARGUMENT IS A BATTLE

LOVE IS FIRE

He was on fire with emotion

They were ablaze with emotion

Seeing her every day kindled his passion for her

He was burning with desire

She fanned the flames of his desire

She was consumed by passion

He was all burned out

Time extinguishes passion

Happy is up; sad is down.

Conscious is up; unconscious is down.

Health and life are up; sickness and death are down.

ECONOMY IS WAR inflation is my biggest enemy

Idiomatic expression

-a polylexical (partially fixed) unit whose meaning cannot be derived from its component parts

I flipped my lid

TIME IS MOTION

In cognitive linguistics, conceptual metaphor, or cognitive metaphor, refers to the

understanding of one idea, or conceptual domain, in terms of another, for example,

understanding quantity in terms of directionality (e.g. "prices are rising"). A conceptual domain

can be any coherent organization of human experience. The regularity with which different

languages employ the same metaphors, which often appear to be perceptually based, has led

to the hypothesis that the mapping between conceptual domains corresponds to neural

mappings in the brain.

One of the commonly used conceptual metaphors is "argument is war". This metaphor shapes

our language in the way we view argument as war or as a battle to be won. It is not

uncommon to hear someone say "He won that argument" or "I attacked every weak point in

his argument". The very way argument is thought of is shaped by this metaphor of arguments

being war and battles that must be won. Argument can be seen in many other ways other than

a battle, but we use this concept to shape the way we think of argument and the way we go

about arguing.

Conceptual metaphors are used very often to understand theories and models. A conceptual

metaphor uses one idea and links it to another to better understand something. For example,

the conceptual metaphor of viewing communication as a conduit is one large theory explained

with a metaphor. So not only is our everyday communication shaped by the language of

conceptual metaphors, but so is the very way we understand scholarly theories. These

metaphors are prevalent in communication and we do not just use them in language; we

actually perceive and act in accordance with the metaphors.

There are two main roles for the conceptual domains posited in conceptual metaphors:

Source domain: the conceptual domain from which we draw metaphorical expressions (e.g.,

love is a journey).

Target domain: the conceptual domain that we try to understand (e.g., love is a journey).

A mapping is the systematic set of correspondences that exist between constituent elements of

the source and the target domain. Many elements of target concepts come from source

domains and are not preexisting. To know a conceptual metaphor is to know the set of

mappings that applies to a given source-target pairing. The same idea of mapping between

source and target is used to describe analogical reasoning and inferences.

A primary tenet of this theory is that metaphors are matter of thought and not merely of

language: hence, the term conceptual metaphor. The metaphor may seem to consist of words

or other linguistic expressions that come from the terminology of the more concrete conceptual

domain, but conceptual metaphors underlie a system of related metaphorical expressions that

appear on the linguistic surface. Similarly, the mappings of a conceptual metaphor are

themselves motivated by image schemas which are pre-linguistic schemas concerning space,

time, moving, controlling, and other core elements of embodied human experience.

Conceptual metaphors typically employ a more abstract concept as target and a more concrete

or physical concept as their source. For instance, metaphors such as 'the days [the more

abstract or target concept] ahead' or 'giving my time' rely on more concrete concepts, thus

expressing time as a path into physical space, or as a substance that can be handled and

offered as a gift. Different conceptual metaphors tend to be invoked when the speaker is trying

to make a case for a certain point of view or course of action. For instance, one might

associate "the days ahead" with leadership, whereas the phrase "giving my time" carries

stronger connotations of bargaining. Selection of such metaphors tends to be directed by a

subconscious or implicit habit in the mind of the person employing them.

The principle of unidirectionality states that the metaphorical process typically goes from the

more concrete to the more abstract, and not the other way around. Accordingly, abstract

concepts are understood in terms of prototype concrete processes. The term "concrete," in this

theory, has been further specified by Lakoff and Johnson as more closely related to the

developmental, physical neural, and interactive body (embodied philosophy, embodied realism,

experientialism).

Although Lakoff (1987) and Johnson (1987) developed the basic idea here in different ways

(see also Lakoff and Johnson 1999, Johnson 2007), the general flavor of the view they share

can be conveyed by considering a well-known example they discuss: that of love as a kind of

journey. Those in a romantic relationship are often said to head off together, travel the same

path, take wrong turns, retrace their steps, check their bearings, and pack their bags. For

Lakoff and Johnson, this non-literal language is not merely peripheral expression useful for

adding bells and whistles to the bustle of communication, but reflects something deep about

how love is conceptualized. Importantly, the central organizing metaphor—love is a journey—

involves a mapping from one domain (journeys) to another (love), where the source domain is

informed by our bodily physicality and the embodied experience that we have as creatures who

move through the world to achieve purposes and goals.

cross-cultural

As previously mentioned, one type of cross-cultural variation occurs when languages

differ with respect to the particular source that is conventionally mapped onto a common

target domain. In other words, a given conceptual metaphor may be common in one culture

but uncommon in another. Not all conceptual metaphors seem susceptible to this type of

variation, though. Following Grady(1997, 1999), we suggest dividing the set of conceptual

metaphors that have so far been identified by cognitive semanticists into two broad categories:

primary and complex metaphors. Many primary metaphors map image-schemas onto abstract

experience (e.g., Lakoff, 1990). Examples of image-schemas are UP-DOWN, IN-OUT, and

so on. These “bare” image-schemas are used to lend structure to abstract domains through

general conceptual metaphors like the following: “MORE IS UP; LESS IS DOWN” (e.g., “An IQ

of over 150,” “An income below the average”), and “THE BODY IS A CONTAINER FOR THE

EMOTIONS” (e.g., “She was filled with hatred,” “Don’t keep all that anger inside you”). These

metaphors are motivated by correlations in the domain of general physical experience. For

example, if you add objects to a pile, the pile will grow (hence MORE IS UP”). Because this

kind of general physical experience is universal, we would expect to find similar image-

schema-based conceptual metaphors in communities around the world. Other primary

metaphors, whose experiential grounding also seems universal, include cases like “STRONG

DESIRE IS HUNGER”(e.g., “We are hungry for a victory;” Grady, 1999, p. 85).

The second category of metaphors, however, is more likely to be susceptible to culture-specific

influences. These are more complex conceptual metaphors that combine (or compound)

different primary metaphors. For example, “THEORIES ARE BUILDINGS” (e.g., “Without a

solid foundation, your theory will soon collapse”) combines the primary metaphors

“ORGANIZATION IS PHYSICAL STRUCTURE” and “PERSISTING IS REMAINING ERECT”

(Grady, 1997).

Complex metaphors result in “richer” imagery. For example, although “LIFE IS A JOURNEY”

(e.g., “We’ll have to get round many obstacles to get married,” “The quest for love and

happiness”) is clearly based on the MOTION image schema, it can be “enriched” by specifying

the kind of vehicles involved, such as trains (e.g., “It’s about time you got back onto the right

track”), ships (e.g., “She’s been drifting without a real purpose in life”), cars (e.g. “He’s in the

fast lane to success”), and so on. “ABSTRACT COMPETITION IS RACING” (e.g., “Running for

president,” “Staying ahead of our economic competitors”) also belongs here, because the

metaphor imposes a richer scenario on the “bare” MOTION schema. Other examples of

complex metaphors are those that map our knowledge of man-made things onto abstract

domains: “THE MIND IS A COMPUTER”(e.g., “This amnesic patient processes input, but

cannot retrieve the data afterwards”), COMPETITION IS WARFARE” (e.g., “To

conquer market share”), and so on.

Unlike the general physical experience that underlies primary metaphors, complex experiential

domains are more likely to be culture-dependent and thus to vary from place to place. As a

result, such a particular domain may not be (equally) available for metaphorical mapping in all

cultures. It follows that cross-cultural variation is more likely to occur when metaphors of the

second category (i.e., complex metaphors) are involved. For example, one would not expect

an isolated community in the