1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Published under the auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association
  4. Volume 19, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 19, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1877-9751
  • E-ISSN: 1877-976X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The molecular structure of a complex metaphor comprises two or more atomic metaphorical parts, known as primary metaphors. In the same way, several molecular structures of metaphors may combine and form a mixture, known as mixed metaphors. In this study, different types of metaphoric integrations are reviewed and illustrated in figures to facilitate understanding the phenomena. Above all, we introduce double-ground metaphoric chain, a new form of metaphoric integration that has not been identified in the previous literature. Also, a distinction is made between single-ground and double-ground metaphoric chains. In the former, which has already been introduced, two basic metaphors are chained with the same form and have the same ground, while the latter includes two chained metaphors, one main metaphor plus a supportive one, with different grounds. In this analysis, we benefited from Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) to analyse double-ground metaphoric chains. This study suggests that each metaphoric integration leads to a multifaceted conceptualization, in which each facet is related to one of the constituent micro-metaphors.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00085.nav
2021-10-11
2023-12-09

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00085.nav
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abdul-Raof, H.
    (2006) Arabic rhetoric: A pragmatic analysis. London and New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203965399
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203965399 [Google Scholar]
  2. Abrams, M. H., & Harpham, G.
    (2014) A glossary of literary terms. Nelson Education.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Ahmed, M. J., & Ahmed, S.
    (1994) The Koran, complete dictionary and literal translation. Vancouver: M, J & S Ahmed.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Arberry, A. J.
    (1955) The koran interpreted. New York: Macmillan Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Barcelona, A.
    (2003) Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110894677
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110894677 [Google Scholar]
  6. Croft, W., & Cruse, A.
    (2004) Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511803864
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864 [Google Scholar]
  7. Evans, V.
    (2007) A glossary of Cognitive Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Evans, V., & Green, M.
    (2006) Cognitive Linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M.
    (1998) Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 22(2), 133–187. 10.1207/s15516709cog2202_1
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2202_1 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2002) The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. (2003) Conceptual blending, form and meaning. Recherches En Communication, 19, 57–86. 10.14428/rec.v19i19.48413
     https://doi.org/10.14428/rec.v19i19.48413 [Google Scholar]
  12. Geeraerts, D.
    (2002) The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in composite expressions. InR. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 435–465). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219197.435
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.435 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2010) Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199738632.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199738632.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gibbs, R. W.
    (2016) Mixing metaphor. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/milcc.6
     https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.6 [Google Scholar]
  15. Goossens, L.
    (1990) Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(3), 323–342. 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.323
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.323 [Google Scholar]
  16. (2003) Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action [revised version]. InR. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 349–378). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Grady, J.
    (1997a) Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Linguistics University of California at Berkeley.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. (1997b) theories are buildings revisited. Cognitive Linguistics, 8, 267–290. 10.1515/cogl.1997.8.4.267
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1997.8.4.267 [Google Scholar]
  19. (2005) Primary metaphors as inputs to conceptual integration. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1595–1614. 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.03.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.03.012 [Google Scholar]
  20. Grady, J., Oakley, T., & Coulson, S.
    (1999) Blending and metaphor. InR. W. Gibbs & G. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 101–124. 10.1075/cilt.175.07gra
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.175.07gra [Google Scholar]
  21. Grady, J., Taub, S., & Morgan, P.
    (1996) Primitive and compound metaphors. InA. Goldberg (Ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse, and language (pp. 177–187). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Irving, T. B.
    (1985) The Quran. Vermont: Amana Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Kimmel, M.
    (2010) Why we mix metaphors (and mix them well): Discourse coherence, conceptual metaphor, and beyond. Journal of pragmatics, 42(1), 97–115. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.017
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.017 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kövecses, Z.
    (2002) Metaphor: A practical introduction. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. (2005) Metaphor in culture: Universality and variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511614408
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614408 [Google Scholar]
  26. (2016) A view of “mixed metaphor” within a conceptual metaphor theory framework. InR. W. Gibbs (Ed.), Mixing metaphor (pp. 3–15). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/milcc.6.01kov
     https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.6.01kov [Google Scholar]
  27. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
    (1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. (1999) Philosophy in the flesh. New York: Basic Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Lakoff, G., & Turner, M.
    (1989) More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226470986.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226470986.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  30. Makarem Shirazi, N.
    (2007) Bargozide-ye Tafsir-e Nemuneh [Selection of Tafsir-e-Nemuneh] (vol.4). Tehran: Dar al-Kotob al-Eslamya. (Original in Persian)
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Meisami, J. S. & Starkey, P.
    (Eds.) (1998) Encyclopedia of Arabic literature. (vol.2). London and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Miró-Sastre, I.
    (2018) Combining metaphors: From metaphoric amalgams to binary systems. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 38(1), 81–104. 10.1080/07268602.2018.1393860
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2018.1393860 [Google Scholar]
  33. Monotheist Group
    Monotheist Group (2008) The Message – A translation of the Glorious Qur’an. US: Brainbow Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Müller, C.
    (2016) Why mixed metaphors make sense. InR. W. Gibbs (Ed.), Mixing metaphor (pp. 31–56). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/milcc.6.03mul
     https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.6.03mul [Google Scholar]
  35. Naciscione, A.
    (2016) Extended metaphor in the web of discourse. InR. W. Gibbs (Ed.), Mixing metaphor (pp. 241–266). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/milcc.6.12nac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.6.12nac [Google Scholar]
  36. Noy, A.
    (2018) The legacy of ʿAbd al-Qāhir al-Jurjānī in the Arabic East before al-Qazwīnī’s Talkhīṣ al-Miftāḥ. Journal of Abbasid Studies, 5(1–2), 11–57. 10.1163/22142371‑12340036
     https://doi.org/10.1163/22142371-12340036 [Google Scholar]
  37. Pickthall, M.
    (1930) The meaning of the glorious Koran: An explanatory translation. Quran Archive.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Qaraei, A.
    (2003) The Qur’an with an English paraphrase. Qom: The center for translation of Holy Qur’an.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Qaribullah, H., & Darwish, A.
    (2001) The meaning of the Glorious Koran. Online:https://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qaribullah/.(01.09.2021).
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Radden, G.
    (2000) How metonymic are metaphors?InA. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads (pp. 93–108). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Reddy, M. J.
    (1979) The Conduit Metaphor. InA. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284–324). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J.
    (2008) Cross-linguistic analysis, second language teaching and cognitive semantics: The case of Spanish diminutives and reflexive constructions. InS. de Knop & T. de Rycker (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar: A volume in honour of René Dirven (pp. 121–153). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. (2017) Metaphor and other cognitive operations in interaction: From basicity to complexity. InB. Hampe (Ed.), Metaphor: Embodied cognition, and discourse (pp. 138–159). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108182324.009
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182324.009 [Google Scholar]
  44. (2020) Ten lectures on cognitive modeling. Between grammar and language-based inferencing. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004439221
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004439221 [Google Scholar]
  45. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Galera-Masegosa, A.
    (2011) Going beyond metaphtonymy: Metaphoric and metonymic complexes in phrasal verb interpretation. Language Value, 3(1), 1–29. 10.6035/LanguageV.2011.3.2
     https://doi.org/10.6035/LanguageV.2011.3.2 [Google Scholar]
  46. (2012) Metaphoric and metonymic complexes in phrasal verb interpretation: Metaphoric chains. InB. E. Rebollar (Ed.), Studies in linguistics and cognition (pp. 157–185). Bern & Switzerland: Peter Lang Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. (2014) Cognitive modeling: A linguistic perspective. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.45
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.45 [Google Scholar]
  48. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Mairal, R.
    (2011) Constraints on syntactic alternation: lexical-constructional subsumption in the lexical constructional model. InP. Guerrero-Medina (Ed.), Morphosyntactic alternations in English. Functional and cognitive perspectives (pp. 62–82). London & Oakville: Equinox.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Pérez, L.
    (2011) The contemporary theory of metaphor: Myths, developments and challenges. Metaphor and Symbol, 26, 161–185. 10.1080/10926488.2011.583189
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2011.583189 [Google Scholar]
  50. Saffarzadeh, T.
    (2001) Translation of the Holy Quran. Tehran: Cultural Institute Jahan Rayaneh Kawthar.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Sakkaki, S. A.
    (1987) Miftah al-’ulūm [The key to the sciences], Naʼīm Zarzūr (Ed.). Beirut: Dāru-l-kitāb-ul-ʼilmīyyah. (Original in Arabic).
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Sarwar, S. M.
    (1981) The Holy Quran: Arabic text and English translation. Elmhurst: Islamic Seminary.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Shakir, M. H.
    (1999) The Qur’an translation. Elmhurst, NY: Tahrike Tarsile Qur’an.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Shamisā, S.
    (2014) Bayān [Eloquence]. Tehran: Mitra Publication. (Original in Persian).
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Steen, G.
    (Ed.) (2010) A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU (vol.14). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.14
     https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 [Google Scholar]
  56. Tabatabaie, M. H.
    (1995) Translation of Tafsir Al-Mizan. Trans: Seyed Mohammad Bagher Musavi Hamedani. Qom: Islamic Publications Office of Teachers’ Community, Vol.17. (Original in Persian)
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Taftāzānī, S.
    (2007) Sharh-ul-Mukhtasar [Description of Al-Mukhtasar]. Qom: Esmāīlīān publications. (Original in Arabic).
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Turner, M., & Fauconnier, G.
    (1995) Conceptual integration and formal expression. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10(3), 183–204. 10.1207/s15327868ms1003_3
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1003_3 [Google Scholar]
  59. Yu, N.
    (2008) Metaphor from body and culture. InR. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 247–261). New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.016
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.016 [Google Scholar]
  60. Yusuf Ali, A.
    (1934) The Qur’an. Text, translation and commentary. New York.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00085.nav
Loading
Metaphoric chains
Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Published under the auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association 19, 273 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00085.nav
/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00085.nav
/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00085.nav
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): double-ground metaphoric chain (DGMC); macro-metaphor; metaphoric integration; micro-metaphor; multifaceted conceptualization

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error