That is in russian a house is usually a tenement

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: nts. The social grounding of metaphors is also pronounced in Musolff (2004), who proposes to employ the concept of the given scenario within the metaphorical framework to solve the problem of cross-linguistic differences between German and British media representation of the debates about Europe. He shows how, within the same conceptual metaphor, different sets of mappings are selected in different discourses, giving rise to contradictory axiological values of the overall representations. For example, in the COMMON EUROPEAN HOUSE metaphor introduced to European politics by Gorbachev, different source language cultures may lead to different implications. That is, in Russian, a house is usually a tenement block with many flats, which implies some independence within the flats, but also stresses a need for communal effort in servicing and managing the whole building. In the US and Britain a house is single-family small building set in a garden, fenced with walls. In this structure of the Source Domain the focus is on the separation from the others, not on co-operation. Charteris-Black (2004) places the study of metaphor firmly within a discourse analytic framework and proposes to call it Critical Metaphor Analysis. There are two valuable theoretical contributions in his work. The first is the suggestion that the reversal of metaphors, where X IS Y subliminally facilitates the use of Y IS X, is quite common. The author exemplifies it with FOOTBALL IS WAR and WAR IS FOOTBALL. The second issue concerns methodology and calls for enhancing qualitative data analysis with quantitative metaphor frequency counts made possible by the use of language corpora. This topic will be further elaborated on in Chapter Two Section 4. Zinken (2004) attempts to combine CMT with the Ethnolinguistic School of Lublin (ESL) developed by Bartmiński (see, for example 1999) and points out that within ESL, metaphor is just one among many important means of stereotyping, i.e. building a linguistic representation of the world. This representation has a clear social (interpersonal), as well as cognitive (intrapersonal) function, as within Bartmiński’s paradigm “stereotypes are viewed as chiefly cognitive phenomenon, with evaluative function of enforcing in- and out-groups” relations (Zinken 2004: 116). Zinken identifies the major difference between the two approaches. For 34 Chapter I instance, within CMT only representations stemming from direct sensorimotor experience are seen as literal, while others seem to be interpreted as metaphorical. ESL, on the other hand, makes a distinction between myth (conventional) and metaphor (performative), defined by Zinken (2004: 132) in the following words: The distinction between metaphors and myths serves the purpose to distinguish two types of an imaginative, narrative understanding of the world: a type in which the speaker – more or less unconsciously – (linguistically) behaves according to a particular picture of the world (=the mythical type), and a type in which a speaker (linguistically) acts upon this picture (=the metaphorical type) (Zinken 2002). Metaphoric acts can be habitualised...
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