This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: ections 3 and 4 it is considered one of a number of social institutions, a socio-cultural pattern of
interaction between different human communities. This dispassionate
definition is often elaborated on to account for the new developments in
war technology and strategy and to facilitate the classification of different
guises of war. Even then the prototypical war is characterised as a military conflict between two nation-states conducted by the national armies
by means of weapons. An ideal example of war would be the one described by the Geneva Convention, as the legitimate way of conducting
military conflict. The real conflicts, diverging from the Convention, 110 Chapter III would constitute less prototypical examples. If we were to construct a radial category for war, we could probably consider this type of war as the
central model, with guerrilla war, tribal war, humanitarian intervention,
and city violence as non-central extensions.
If we focus on the central model as the model for metaphorical mappings from the source domain of WAR, then the constituent elements of the
domain would be the two opponents, the conflict obtaining between them,
the two opposing armies and their weapons. The activities performed by the
troops and the art of war in general would constitute the potential for metaphorical entailments. This model can be considered a specification of the generic force-dynamic event structure with the Agonist and Antagonist and the
forces operating between them (Talmy 2000, see Chapter One, Section 5).
The folk model of war would probably be most akin to the image of
war as represented in literature (Section 5, this chapter) or in the reports of
war correspondents (Section 6, this chapter) rather than to the construction
proposed by philosophers and sociologists. It would thus less likely include
the definition of war as one of many social institutions. It would probably
be based on the Glory of War Myth or one of the pervading metaphors,
such as WAR IS A GAME or WAR IS A NATURAL FORCE. It would also rest on
the FORCE image schema as its experiential basis. When it comes to the cultural grounding, the narrative construction of identity in the opposition to
the other could also play an important role in the model.
The expert definitions of war point to one more important factor,
i.e. the complex set of relations between politics, diplomacy, war, the
economy and other spheres of social life.
Overall, this chapter has provided an important conceptual background for Chapters Four and Five. Chapter Four uses Conceptual Metaphor
Theory in a contrastive analysis of war reports in two languages: Polish and
English. The analysis is intended to show the similarities and differences between the political discourses conducted in the media and devoted to war.
Chapter Five investigates the use of a number of lexical items identified in
Chapter Four as typically occurring in war reports. It concentrates on the
English language only. The source for analysis is the...
View Full Document