34.2480, Review: Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-34-2480. Mon Aug 14 2023. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 34.2480, Review: Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory

Moderators: Malgorzata E. Cavar, Francis Tyers (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Justin Fuller
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Steven Franks, Everett Green, Daniel Swanson, Maria Lucero Guillen Puon, Zackary Leech, Lynzie Coburn, Natasha Singh, Erin Steitz
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Maria Lucero Guillen Puon <luceroguillen at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: 11-Jul-2023
From: Maria Tsitoura [marietsling at gmail.com]
Subject: Cognitive Science, Neurolinguistics: Kövecses (2022)


Book announced at https://linguistlist.org/issues/33.3700

AUTHOR: Zoltán Kövecses
TITLE: Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory
PUBLISHER: Cambridge University Press
YEAR: 2022

REVIEWER: Maria Tsitoura

SUMMARY

Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), as proposed by Lakoff and Johnson
(1980) in their seminal work Metaphors We Live By, has been greatly
influential within the Cognitive Linguistics framework and beyond.
Notwithstanding its popularity, Conceptual Metaphor Theory (henceforth
CMT) has received a lot of criticism regarding some of its major
propositions. In his monograph under discussion, Extended Conceptual
Metaphor Theory, Zoltán Kӧvecses has developed and proposed an updated
version of CMT, by shedding light on many aspects of the standard CMT
which have been criticized over the years.
In Chapter 1, the author provides a comprehensive account of what is
regarded as the standard view of Conceptual Metaphor Theory. More
specifically, he introduces the key tenets of Conceptual Metaphor
Theory (as proposed by Lakoff and Johnson 1980, and elaborated by
other scholars in the field), and also addresses some of the major
controversial issues raised against the standard view of CMT. Within
Conceptual Metaphor Theory, a conceptual metaphor is defined as “a
systematic set of mappings between two domains of experience” (p.2).
In conceptual metaphors, we construe or conceive an abstract domain
(the target) through a more concrete, physical or tangible domain (the
source). The pairing between a source and a target may be motivated by
similarity between the two domains (either real, or perceived), by
correlation in experience, or even by image schemas (container schema,
verticality etc.). However, these mappings are constrained by various
factors such as the principle of unidirectionality (Kӧvecses 2010).
Another constraint of metaphorical mappings is that only certain
elements can be carried over from the source to the target. This can
be explained in terms of the invariance hypothesis (Lakoff 1990).
Metaphors are not only linguistic, but they are also conceptual in
nature. An important implication of this idea is that using different
source domains to conceptualize the same target reflects different
views of how this target is perceived, thus creating very different
realities. This process of reality construction has applications to
many areas such as advertising. The chapter ends with a brief overview
of the key criticisms raised against CMT, which are addressed in the
subsequent chapters.
Chapter 2 deals with issues regarding the existence of literal
language. In the present chapter, two of the major claims of CMT,
namely that language which denotes concrete concepts is literal, and
it is used for the conceptualization of abstract concepts, as well as
the unidirectionality of metaphorical mappings, seem to be challenged.
It is not stated that literal language does not exist at all. Rather,
the chapter attempts to explore the actual extent of literal meaning
based on three pieces of substantial evidence. First of all, it is
claimed that abstract concepts (i.e ANGER, TIME) can only be
conceptualized metaphorically (i.e ANGER IS FIRE, TIME IS MOTION), and
thus the linguistic expressions used for their linguistic
manifestation can only be metaphorical. A great number of expressions
which are regarded as literal, or the ones which are deeply entrenched
metaphors, known as dead metaphors, also have a figurative basis. In
addition to being metaphorically comprehended, certain concepts
etymologically derive from figurative processes. Therefore, the main
idea underlying the present chapter is that both concrete and abstract
concepts consist of an ontological part (embodied content ontology)
and a cognitive part (figurative construal), but in different amounts.
In the case of literal meaning for concrete concepts, it is the
ontological part that is profiled, whereas in abstract concepts, it is
the cognitive part that predominates. In conceptual metaphors, the
former serve as source domains, while the latter function as target
domains.
Chapter 3 explores issues regarding the emergence of primary
metaphors. The question that arises is whether primary metaphors
emerge directly or through a metonymic process. In this chapter, the
author suggests that correlation-based metaphors derive from
“frame-like conceptual structures” (p.46) through metonymic processes,
and more specifically through the application of the cognitive
processes of generalization (schematization) and specialization
(elaboration). A frame element is generalized to a concept that lies
outside the initial frame in a different part of the conceptual
system, and becomes either the source or the target concept of a
conceptual metaphor. Elaborations can also emerge when either a source
or a target is generalized. For example, in ANGER IS HEAT metaphor,
HEAT as the source of ANGER can be elaborated as fire, boiling water,
or volcano.
In Chapter 4, the author proposes the multilevel view of conceptual
metaphor, according to which each conceptual metaphor exists not only
on a single level (e.g that of domain, or frame), but simultaneously
exists on four hierarchical levels of schematicity: the levels of
image schema, domain, frame and mental space. The lower levels
elaborate the higher, more schematic ones. Image schemas, domains and
frames belong to long-term memory, while mental spaces function online
in the working memory, allowing the activation of higher level
conceptual structures. The chapter concludes with the implications of
the multilevel view of conceptual metaphors on various aspects of
metaphorical language, including the distinctions between deep and
superficial metaphors, and deliberate and nondeliberate metaphors, as
well as on metaphorical idioms and visual metaphors.
Another major criticism that was raised against the standard view of
CMT concerned its inability to account for metaphor use in real
discourse (Deignan 2005, Semino 2008). Within the Extended Conceptual
Metaphor Theory that he proposes, Kӧvecses views metaphor not only as
a cognitive phenomenon, but also as contextual. The main argument that
he puts forward in Chapter 5 is that context also plays a major role
in metaphorical conceptualization, and therefore in the linguistic
realizations of metaphors in discourse. He suggests that
speakers/conceptualizers unconsciously choose the metaphors they use
on the basis of context. In particular, they draw their metaphors from
situational, discourse, conceptual-cognitive and bodily context. This
contextual view of metaphor provides evidence for the variation of
metaphors across or even within cultures, and across individuals. The
main implication of this approach to metaphor is that conceptual
metaphors and their linguistic realizations do not exclusively derive
from human bodily experience, but also from contextual factors.
Conceptual Metaphor Theory has been criticized for its inefficiency in
accounting for meaning of metaphorical language in naturally occurring
discourse (Cameron 2003, Deignan 2005). The standard CMT is based on
conceptual structures, namely image schemas, domains, and frames,
which are decontextualized. In order to account for the meaning of
metaphors in real discourse, in Chapter 6, the author employs the
multilevel view of metaphor (outlined in Chapter 4). Within this
framework, metaphor exists on all four levels of schematicity
including mental spaces which license online metaphorical activity,
thus accounting for both metaphorical production and comprehension in
discourse. It is therefore, assumed that conceptual metaphor is both
an online and an offline phenomenon. When employing metaphors,
speakers are based on offline conceptual structures (image schemas,
domains, frames) found in the long-term memory, while at the same time
they are engaged in online processes that take place at the mental
space level in working memory. Taking this into account, Kӧvecses
illustrates this dual nature of metaphors using two online
metaphorical processes, namely mixing metaphors and conceptual
integration. Although both of them take place online at the mental
space level, the offline conceptual structures are activated to
account for their meaning.
The last two chapters (Chapters 7 and 8) summarize the key features of
Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Extended Conceptual Metaphor
Theory draws primarily on the multilevel nature and the contextual
component of conceptual metaphors. With respect to the multilevel
nature of metaphor, it is suggested that conceptual metaphors consist
of various components, including various types of metaphorical meaning
(meaningfulness at the image schema level, decontextualized meaning at
the levels of domain and frame, contextualized meaning at the mental
space level). At the same time, the Extended Conceptual Metaphor
Theory takes into consideration the contextual factors which prime
metaphors in real discourse, thus suggesting that metaphors are used
in the context of the speaker’s available experiences at the time of
metaphor use. Finally, the author proposes a metaphor processing model
which attempts to account for the process that is going on in the
speaker’s mind when he/she produces a metaphorical expression in
actual discourse. In the final chapter, the author provides an
evaluation of the key components of the extended version of CMT that
he proposed and elaborated throughout the book. In this chapter, he
also draws comparisons between the Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory
and the Dynamic Systems view which was developed by Gibbs (2013). As a
final note, Kӧvecses proposes an interactional shift in the study of
metaphor, which will facilitate and enrich the work of researchers in
every field of metaphor study.

EVALUATION
The book presents an updated version of Conceptual Metaphor Theory,
and provides new insights into the field of metaphor study. Viewing
metaphor as a complex cognitive phenomenon, Kӧvecses addresses and
also provides responses to some of the major criticisms that were
raised against the standard view of CMT. More specifically, the author
extends Conceptual Metaphor Theory, by introducing three main
innovative ideas. First of all, it is argued that both concrete and
abstract concepts include an ontological part (embodied content
ontology) and a cognitive part (figurative construal), yet in
different amounts. The other two innovations introduced in the book
are reflected in the introduction of the multilevel and the contextual
view of metaphor. The main proposition of the multilevel view is that
each metaphor exists on four hierarchical levels of schematicity.
Kӧvecses innovatively introduces an additional schematic level, that
of mental space. The importance of the multilevel nature of metaphor,
as well as of the addition of a fourth, less schematic level lies in
the fact that mental spaces serve as an invaluable tool for the
elucidation and interpretation of metaphorical meaning in discourse.
Over the years, Conceptual Metaphor Theory was criticized for lacking
a component that could explain the actual usages of metaphors in
natural discourse. A key feature of the Extended Conceptual Metaphor
Theory, which differentiates it from the standard CMT is that this new
perspective brings forward the role of context in metaphorical
conceptualization, and in the linguistic realizations of conceptual
metaphors in actual use. It is suggests that a variety of contextual
factors interact and contribute to the priming of particular metaphors
in real discourse. This contextual view can account for the variation
in metaphor use across speakers. In addition, within the Extended
Conceptual Metaphor Theory, metaphor is perceived as both an online
and an offline phenomenon. Bringing together the assumptions of both
the multilevel and the contextual view, it is claimed that metaphor
comprehension and production are online processes which are based on
offline conceptual structures found in the long-term memory.
The book under discussion is aimed at metaphor researchers, since it
provides them with a detailed and solid theoretical background for
their own research work. The book is exceptionally well-written and
clearly structured, and therefore it may also constitute a valuable
resource for postgraduate students and young researchers. Each chapter
abounds in illustrative examples which help readers to fully
comprehend the theoretical framework, so that they can apply it to
their own research studies. However, it should be stressed that all
the examples used throughout the book derive from the English
language. Therefore, it is considered necessary to make use of
crosslinguistic data, in order to be able to see how the Extended
Conceptual Metaphor Theory works with other languages as well.
The major contribution of Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory is that
it brings together the cognitive, linguistic and
contextual-communicative dimensions of metaphor. Extended Conceptual
Metaphor Theory puts emphasis on the interface between cognition and
context in metaphor processing, comprehension and production. It is
through this interface between cognitive and contextual factors that
speakers/conceptualizers can account for metaphorical meaning in
actual use. These enriching insights will constitute an indispensable
tool for researchers and scholars working on various areas of metaphor
study, including Cognitive Linguistics, psycholinguistics,
neurolinguistics, cognitive science, psychology and even literary
studies, and language teaching.
Overall, the book makes a major contribution to the field of cognitive
linguistics, in general, and to the field of metaphor study in
particular, proposing a unified, coherent and comprehensive
theoretical account of metaphor which opens new, exciting and
promising avenues to metaphor research in use.

REFERENCES
Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in Educational Discourse. London:
Continuum.
Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Gibbs, R. (2013). Metaphoric cognition as social activity: Dissolving
the divide between metaphor in thought and communication. Metaphor and
the Social World, 3, 54-76.
Kövecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

Lakoff, G. (1990). The invariance hypothesis: Is abstract reason based
on image schemas? Cognitive Linguistics, 1, 39-74.

Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.

Semino, E.  (2008). Metaphor and Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Maria Tsitoura holds a BA in English Language and Literature, a BA in
Education and an MA in Linguistics from Aristotle University
(Thessaloniki, Greece). Currently, she works as an English Language
teacher in secondary education in Greece. She also teaches foreign
languages (English and French) for specific purposes at various
university departments in Greece. Her main academic interests lie in
the field of Cognitive Linguistics, and in particular, in figurative
language, as well as in the applications of Cognitive Linguistics in
language teaching and learning.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please consider donating to the Linguist List https://give.myiu.org/iu-bloomington/I320011968.html


LINGUIST List is supported by the following publishers:

American Dialect Society/Duke University Press http://dukeupress.edu

Bloomsbury Publishing (formerly The Continuum International Publishing Group) http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/

Brill http://www.brill.com

Cambridge Scholars Publishing http://www.cambridgescholars.com/

Cambridge University Press http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics

Cascadilla Press http://www.cascadilla.com/

De Gruyter Mouton https://cloud.newsletter.degruyter.com/mouton

Dictionary Society of North America http://dictionarysociety.com/

Edinburgh University Press www.edinburghuniversitypress.com

Elsevier Ltd http://www.elsevier.com/linguistics

Equinox Publishing Ltd http://www.equinoxpub.com/

European Language Resources Association (ELRA) http://www.elra.info

Georgetown University Press http://www.press.georgetown.edu

John Benjamins http://www.benjamins.com/

Lincom GmbH https://lincom-shop.eu/

Linguistic Association of Finland http://www.ling.helsinki.fi/sky/

MIT Press http://mitpress.mit.edu/

Multilingual Matters http://www.multilingual-matters.com/

Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG http://www.narr.de/

Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics / Landelijke (LOT) http://www.lotpublications.nl/

Oxford University Press http://www.oup.com/us

SIL International Publications http://www.sil.org/resources/publications

Springer Nature http://www.springer.com

Wiley http://www.wiley.com


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-34-2480
----------------------------------------------------------