Class Notes (834,721)
Canada (508,692)
Anthropology (1,672)
ANT253H1 (64)
Lecture

Chapter 7 notes.odt

8 Pages
155 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Anthropology
Course
ANT253H1
Professor
Marcel Danesi
Semester
Fall

Description
Chapter 7 Metaphor – a linguistic feature that describes the relationship between language and thought – they are commonly seen in everyday language e.g being cool/lukewarm about something – this shows we perceive feelings the same way we describe physical conditions Roger Brown – Apsycholinguist who explained this feelings and physical conditions correlation – His quote explained that when we sense something first, we tend to extend that sense to describe other experiences. Cognitive linguistics – approach to the study of language as a system of concepts grounded in metaphor – Both cognitive linguistics and linguistic anthropology share the same goals – Boar, Sapir, whorf are refered to as linguistic anthropologist – But they can also be seen as cognitive linguist today since they saw metaphor as a means of adding a meaning to the system – Cognitive linguistics is really the modern version of the linguistic anthropology Linguistic versus Conceptual Metaphors – Aristotle coined the term Metaphor (meta = beyond; Pherein = to carry) – explained how abstract concepts(e.g. Life) can be thought of in concrete ways – Life is a stage – theatre is used as a metaphor for life- gives life a concrete meaning – That is why people say my life is a comedy or a farce Combination of two semantically unrelated referents – The professor is a snake consits of 2 unrelated referents – Primary referent = Professor known as the topic of the metaphor – Secondary referent= Snake known as the vehicle of the metaphor (a referent used to understand the personality of the professor) – The combination of the sentence= the ground where the meaning is derived not from the sum of the two referents but rather as the meaning transferred from the vehicle to the topic – we can imaginge the professor turning into a snake now – It is not the denotative meaning of snake that is transferred; it's the connatations – cultural specific charecteristics seen in snakes = slyness, danger, etc. – This complex of connotiations produces the ground Blending of lexical fields (human personality with animals) – allows us to understand abstractions – St. Thomas Aquinas (in his Summa Theologica) claimed that in Holy Scriptures, the writers compared spiritual truth to material things because that was the only way humans could understand it; “metaphor was a tool of cognition, not a feature of rhetorical flourish” – Giambattisa Vico in support of St. Thomas Aquinas said that metaphor was evidence of how knowledge comes from senses – he described out ability to create metaphors as poetic logic – likeAristotle, he saw me saw metaphors as a way to explain abstract concepts such as life – He further claimed that metaphors are spercifically used to describe the unfamilar concepts with those familiar and at hand. – Two parts of the metaphor suggest each other phenomenologically - by saying life is a stage, we are also saying stages are life; they imply each other – This view was largely ignored G.W.F Hegel and John Sruart – continued arguing metaphor is nothing more than a decorative accessory to language Immanual Kant – in his Critique of Pure Reason explained that figurative language is the proff of how mind tries to understand unfamiliar things Friedrich Nietzsche – saw Metaphor as humanity's greatest flaw – It gives the unconscious power to persuade people into believing things on its own terms – Human thought can be divident into 2 domains 1. The domain of Perception- consists of impressions and sensations 2.. The domain of conception- the ideas that mind make from perception – This linkage of impressions in conception is imprinted in the structure of metaphor – it distorts the true perception of things – Metaphor can hence be seen as a source of superstition – neietsche described metaphor as a linguistic self-fulfilling prophecy Gustav Theodor Fechner and Wilhelm Wundt – encouraged interest in metaphor as a trace of human cognition instead of just a figure of speech – Were the first to conduct experiments on people processed figurative language Karl Buhler – gathered data on how people paraphrased and recalled proverbs – For example he found that it was easier to recall a proverb if it was linked to second proverb – he thus concluded that metaphorical-associative thinking was an effective memory retrival tool Gestalt psychologists – Like Vico and Nietzche saw metaphor as how we form abstractions from sensory perceptions Richards – a literary thoerist not a psychologist – in his book The philosophy of Rhetoric claimed that metaphors are not stylistic devised used as a replacement for literally meaning – instead they produce a new meaning completely that could never be achieved by literal paraphrase – (***can be used in the essay?) – e.g. the semantic interaction between life and stage – the two catagories overlap significantly Poems – metaphors can be seen as a “sense producing” power – allowing us to glean sense from the images in the poem Fables – extended metaphorical tale where animals/trees/natural objects are used as vehicles to understand human personality Max Black – expanded Richards' theory – In John is a Gorilla, both John and Gorilla fit as a subcatagory of animals – This kind of linkage can also be implied to science where a scientific theory is simply a metaphorical inference – Charles Pierce – refered to this as an abduction or informed hunch Howard Pollio – conducted a study called Psychology and the Poetics of Growth: Figurative language in psychology, psychotherapy and education – showed that metaphors are found in the everyday speech and spiked a huge interest in research on metaphors – confirmed that metaphors are not merely a sylistic accessory Collection of Studies – Metaphor and Thought – by Andrew Ortony – Cognition and Figurative Language – by Richard P. Honeck and Robert R. Hoffman – Metaphors we live by- a famous book by George Lakeoff and Mark Johnson – These studies set the groundwork for Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) CMT – mainly emphasized that metaphors are seen in common language not just poetic or rhetorical – Metaphors can be more instinctive than literal interpretations in some situations – e.g. The murder is an animal – you would not not think about an actual animal unless specifically told – another critical finding by CMT- nonsense or anomolous strings Noam Chomsky – used such strings to show that we process syntax seperately from a language – these strings sound like real sentences because they are put together correctly – Colourless green ideas sleep furiously – His study found that we tend to extract metaphorical meaning for these well formed strings Winner – claimed that if we were strictily limited to literal language, our communication would be highly limited if not stopped all together CMT- continuation – another critical finding - metaphors are high in mental imagery- conclusion by Bilow – it was also found that visually impaired people seem to have the same kind of imagery with metaphors – Kennedy found that blind people can make appropriate line drawings of metaphorial concepts – shows that metaphor is the product of intersensory knowing Lakeoff and Johnson – made CMT attractive to a larger audience – The agree withAristotle that there are two types of concepts: concrete andAbstract – They further emphasized that abstract concepts are not independent of concrete concepts, instead they are simply metaphorical extensions of them – They renamed the abstract concept = conceptual metaphor – Deriving the abstract metaphorical idea that People are animals from The Professor is a snake is an example of a conceptual metaphor – People = the generic topic also called the target domain – Animals = the generic vehicle also called the source domain – Linguistic metaphor- is the actual specfic example of conceptual methapor (e.g. The Professor is a snake) Franz Kafka – wrote a scary short story Metamorphosis where a person wakes up and finds himself changed into a monster – similarly metaphors allow picturing human personality in animal terms – Metaphors produce Whorfian effects (as described in the previous chapter?) Examples of conceptual and linguistic metaphors used in everyday conversations – Happiness is up/ sadness is down (Conceptual metaphor) – I am feeling up (linguistic metaphor) – Knowledge is light; ignorance is darkness (conceptual metaphor) – That's an obscure theory (linguistic metaphor) We do not detect these metaphors because of their repeated usage Lakeoff and Johnson again – traced the source of conceptual metaphors to unconscious image schemas – These images convert concrete concepts (perceived animal behaviour) to vehicles necessary to better understand abstractions (e.g. human personality) Root metaphors – conceptual metaphors based ons sensation and perception – e.g. some common root metaphors for mind/thinking processes – vision – flash of insight – a bright mind – touching and grasping – apprehend – from latin -to hold of – intelligence – from latin- to pick – discern- from latin to seperate – Similar root metaphors in other unrelated languages – Hebrew- liptos = to grasp means to understand – Japanese- yoin = reverbrating sound means human feelings – Not all words for minds are necessarily root metaphors (e.g. contemplate- from Latin means temple; most ones are considered sense based root metaphors Edie – explained how the origin of metaphor is lost due to repeated usage Lakeoff and Johnson- one last time – explains in their book how cultural groupthink is built on conceptual metaphors – this is done by “higher order” metaphorical thinking – as target domains associate with more and more source domains – they form idealized cognitive models (ICMs) – E.g. Ideas/theories = target domain; – Sight (I don't see the point of your idea) – Geometry (Those ideas are parallel) – Plants ( That is a budding new theory) – Food ( I cannot digest those ideas) – ICM = the sum of source domains for a specific target domain – These source domains can overlap and be used within the same sentence – Language = a network of source domains Which ICMs are more or less productive in a culture? – Can be answered by simply counting the number of source domains – Ideas = estimated 89
More Less

Related notes for ANT253H1

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit