1887
Volume 22, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1877-9751
  • E-ISSN: 1877-976X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Religious identity is often viewed as a relatively stable construct, reflecting an individual’s personal worldview. However, individuals living within modern multi-cultural societies often must engage in extensive reflection to orient themselves to faith traditions in ways that are coherent and personally relevant. Although some work has examined the connection between narratives of religious experience, identity and cognition (cf. Richardson, 2012; Richardson & Nagashima, 2018; Richardson & Mueller, 2019), the relationship between thinking and speaking about this identity is still a developing area of enquiry, with important consequences for how religious faith and practice are understood. This article presents a detailed analysis of an interview with a UK-based Jewish woman based on the mental spaces (Fauconnier, 1994) and conceptual blending (Fauconnier & Turner, 2002) frameworks. The analysis shows how mental spaces and the relationship between elements within those spaces emerge over the course of a discourse event so as to constitute a personal account of religious identity. The concluding section furthermore discusses how within- and across-space contrast links are utilized, along with general processes of compression and decompression, to develop a blend that dynamically expresses the interviewee’s religious identity as an integrated and coherent position lying between competing attractor states.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00159.mue
2023-07-11
2025-04-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bowlby, J.
    (1969) Attachment and loss (vol. 1: Attachment). NY: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cameron, L.
    (2008) Metaphor shifting in the dynamics of talk. InM. S. Zanotto, L. Cameron & M. C. Cavalcanti (Eds.), Confronting metaphor in use: An applied linguistic approach (pp.45–62). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.173.04cam
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.173.04cam [Google Scholar]
  3. (2012) Metaphor and reconciliation: The discourse dynamics of empathy in post-conflict conversations. NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203837771
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203837771 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2015) Embracing connectedness and change: A complex dynamic systems perspective for applied linguistic research. AILA Review, 28(1), 28–48. 10.1075/aila.28.02cam
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.28.02cam [Google Scholar]
  5. Chatman, S.
    (1990) Coming to terms: The rhetoric of narrative in fiction and film. Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Conway, M. A.
    (2005) Memory and the self. Journal of Memory and Language, 53(4), 594–628. 10.1016/j.jml.2005.08.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.08.005 [Google Scholar]
  7. Conway, M. A., & Jobson, L.
    (2012) On the nature of autobiographical memory. InD. Bernsten & D. C. Rubin (Eds.), Understanding autobiographical memory: Theories and approaches (pp.54–69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139021937.006
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139021937.006 [Google Scholar]
  8. Dancygier, B.
    (2004) Identity and perspective: The Jekyll-and-Hyde effect in narrative discourse. InM. Achard & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Language, culture, and mind (pp.363–376). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (2005) Blending and narrative viewpoint: Jonathan Raban’s travels through mental spaces. Language and Literature, 14(2), 99–127. 10.1177/0963947005051281
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947005051281 [Google Scholar]
  10. Fauconnier, G.
    (1994) Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511624582
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511624582 [Google Scholar]
  11. (1997) Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139174220
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174220 [Google Scholar]
  12. Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M.
    (2002) The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. NY: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fillmore, C. J., & Baker, C. F.
    (2010) A frames approach to semantic analysis. InB. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis (pp.313–339). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hougaard, G. R.
    (2008) “Mental spaces” and “blending” in discourse and interaction: A response. InT. Oakley & A. Hougaard (Eds.), Mental spaces in discourse and interaction (pp.247–250). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hutchins, E.
    (2005) Material anchors for conceptual blends. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(10), 1555–1577. 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.06.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.06.008 [Google Scholar]
  16. Lakoff, G.
    (1987) Cognitive models and prototype theory. InU. Neisser (Ed.), Concepts and conceptual development (pp.63–100). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. (1996) Sorry, I’m not myself today: The metaphor system for conceptualizing the self. InG. Fauconnier & E. E. Sweetser (Eds.), Spaces, worlds, and grammar (pp.91–123). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L.
    (2008) Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. MacIntyre, A.
    (2007) After virtue: A study in moral theory (3rd ed.). Notre Dam & Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Richardson, P.
    (2012) A closer walk: A study of the interaction between metaphors related to movement and proximity and presuppositions about the reality of belief in Christian and Muslim testimonials. Metaphor and the Social World, 2(2), 233–261. 10.1075/msw.2.2.05ric
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.2.2.05ric [Google Scholar]
  21. Richardson, P., & Mueller, C. M.
    (2019) Moving yet being still: Exploring source domain reversal and force in explanations of enlightenment. Language and Cognition, 11(2), 310–339. 10.1017/langcog.2019.19
    https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2019.19 [Google Scholar]
  22. Richardson, P., Mueller, C. M., & Pihlaja, S.
    (2021) Cognitive linguistics and religious language: An introduction. NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003041139
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003041139 [Google Scholar]
  23. Richardson, P., & Nagashima, M.
    (2018) Perceptions of danger and co-occurring metaphors in Buddhist dhamma talks and Christian sermons. InCognitive Linguistic Studies (Vol.5, Issue1, pp.133–154). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cogls.00016.ric
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00016.ric [Google Scholar]
  24. Schechtman, M.
    (1996) The constitution of selves. Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Semino, E., Deignan, A., & Littlemore, J.
    (2013) Metaphor, genre, and recontextualization. Metaphor and Symbol, 28(1), 41–59. 10.1080/10926488.2013.742842
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2013.742842 [Google Scholar]
  26. Strawson, G.
    (2004) Against narrativity. Ratio, 17(4), 428–452. 10.1111/j.1467‑9329.2004.00264.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9329.2004.00264.x [Google Scholar]
  27. Turner, M.
    (2014) The origin of ideas: Blending, creativity, and the human spark. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Wang, Q., & Conway, M. A.
    (2004) The stories we keep: Autobiographical memory in American and Chinese middle-aged adults. Journal of Personality, 72(5), 911–938. 10.1111/j.0022‑3506.2004.00285.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00285.x [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00159.mue
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00159.mue
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): blending; cognition; discourse analysis; identity; mental spaces; religion
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