Conclusion this book is a study in cognitive

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: clear 50 abstract 9 sport 4 sexual 3 psychological 1 natural forces 1 disease 115 abstract entities 18 unarmed groups of people 14 sport 9 sexual 3 psychological 3 disease 2 natural forces 2 unclear 58 abstract 7 sexual 2 about armed criminal groups Words from the lexical field of war and their metaphoric potential 227 The analysis of the examples from the BNC shows that the most frequent sense is the military one. Therefore, both the verb and the noun surrender can be considered as indicative of the X IS WAR metaphor. 6. Summary of the results and conclusion An analysis of various literal and metaphorical senses of the words identified as common in the war reports and thus considered as constituting the lexical field of war has shown that the military sense has not always been the most frequent literal sense of the word. For example, in the case of the verb attack and the noun fight the ‘physical violence’ sense dominated. On the other hand, a related noun fighting has been mostly used in its military sense. It is therefore relatively safe to claim that while the noun fight seems to be more indicative of the X IS A HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT metaphor, the noun fighting is more likely to be a manifestation of the X IS WAR metaphor. As for the verb defend, what seemed to be a metaphorical sense of ‘speaking’ turned out to be most common. The question arises at this point whether, in accord with the embodiment claim, ‘speaking’ is not more basic, concrete, bodily based than ‘defending’ in the military sense? Can this basicness be overruled on the basis of etymology? And how far in word history would we need to go?11 Whatever the answer to this question may be, sheer frequency may suggest that even if in some cases the use of the verb defend, in its ‘speaking’ sense, may activate the conceptual metaphor ARGUMENT IS WAR, in many cases the metaphor will remain dormant. When it comes to synonyms and morphologically related words, they seem to select different meaning foci as if to utilize their formal differentiation. That was the case with the verbs bomb and bombard, where bomb was predominantly used in its military sense, while bombard in the metaphorical sense. This tendency is also reflected, though to a lesser extent, in the use of their nominal derivatives. Bombing in the analysed sample was used only in the military sense, while bombardment had a small number of metaphorical uses. The case of the nouns fight and fighting has been presented above. 11 According to the OED it is a borrowing from Old French into Middle English with the first sense ‘ward off, protect’. The ‘speaking’ sense is listed as number 5, but it also appeared already in Middle English. 228 Chapter V The noun conflict has predominantly general sense uses. The military sense can be considered as a narrowing of the general sense. There seems to be no ground for interpreting it as a metaphorical extension of the military sense. It is therefore not a manifestation of the X IS WAR metaphor. From among the investigated words, four groups can be distinguished. The first one consists of the words with a strong (understood as most frequent) military sense or the military sense as the only literal sense and with a strong metaphorical potential. They are bombard (V), fighting (N), invade (V), invasion (N),...
View Full Document

This essay was uploaded on 02/24/2014 for the course LING 1100 taught by Professor Friedman during the Fall '09 term at Cornell University (Engineering School).

Ask a homework question - tutors are online