Metaphor in the light of conceptual metaphor theory: a literature review
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/2218-2926-2017-15-06
2017-01-01
Abstract:This paper reviews some of the central insights on metaphor that come from the domain of cognitive linguistics and originate, for the most part, from the conceptual metaphor theory in its standard version. The review focuses upon the nature, origin, function, components, systematicity and types of metaphor, and upon metaphorical meaning; lays a special emphasis upon the mapping mechanism of metaphor; contrasts metaphor to metonymy and addresses the interaction and overlap of these. A large portion of this paper is a review on the issue of metaphorical creativity. Metaphorical creativity is, to the best of my knowledge, a little-studied topic in cognitive linguistics. There are some claims concerning metaphorical creativity in the review that might appear rigid, decisive and conclusive, but they are definitely not intended as such. Research on metaphorical creativity is still being launched, and numerous aspects of creative metaphorical concepts remain undisclosed so far. This, on the one hand, is reflected in the at times cursory nature of my review and, on the other, indicates a need for further investigations. In my review, I cite literature with a fundamental standing in the cognitive linguistic field mainly. The literature selection for this paper is ultimately shaped by my affiliation with the cognitive linguistic community and by my ambition to eventually formulate a conceptualization of metaphor and of creative metaphor that would lend these to computation. I introspect and comment on some of the assumptions and claims that the literature puts forward. In the review are Modern English metaphorical expressions that come from the cited literature, or are prompted by my own research and introspection; these data help support or, though scarcely, challenge the assumptions and claims. In prospect, this paper will grow into a larger-scale research on the issue of metaphorical creativity. The review might have implications for cognitive linguistic theorizing and research, and be of particular purpose for Ukrainian cognitive linguists aiming their research at the international, in particular European, scholarly community.