25.4364, Review: Discourse Analysis; Semantics: Ritchie (2013)

[The LINGUIST List via LINGUIST]

LINGUIST List: Vol-25-4364. Mon Nov 03 2014. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 25.4364, Review: Discourse Analysis; Semantics: Ritchie (2013)

Moderators: Damir Cavar, Indiana U <damir at linguistlist.org>
            Malgorzata E. Cavar, Indiana U <gosia at linguistlist.org>

Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org
Anthony Aristar <aristar at linguistlist.org>
Helen Aristar-Dry <hdry at linguistlist.org>
Sara Couture, Indiana U <sara at linguistlist.org>

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Do you want to donate to LINGUIST without spending an extra penny? Bookmark
the Amazon link for your country below; then use it whenever you buy from
Amazon!

USA: http://www.amazon.com/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-20
Britain: http://www.amazon.co.uk/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-21
Germany: http://www.amazon.de/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistd-21
Japan: http://www.amazon.co.jp/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-22
Canada: http://www.amazon.ca/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistc-20
France: http://www.amazon.fr/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistf-21

For more information on the LINGUIST Amazon store please visit our
FAQ at http://linguistlist.org/amazon-faq.cfm.

Editor for this issue: Sara  Couture <sara at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 14:50:56
From: Donatella Resta [donatella.resta at unisalento.it]
Subject: Metaphor

E-mail this message to a friend:
http://linguistlist.org/issues/emailmessage/verification.cfm?iss=25-4364.html&submissionid=29754557&topicid=9&msgnumber=1
 
Discuss this message: 
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=29754557


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/24/24-2541.html

AUTHOR: L. David Ritchie
TITLE: Metaphor
SERIES TITLE: Key Topics in Semantics and Pragmatics
PUBLISHER: Cambridge University Press
YEAR: 2013

REVIEWER: Donatella Resta, Università del Salento

Review's Editor: Helen Aristar-Dry

SUMMARY

The book “Metaphor” by L. David Ritchie enters the tradition of metaphor
studies and provides an overview of available theoretical approaches about the
topic. The book can be read as an introductory textbook for those who are
approaching metaphor studies and would like to have an idea of the
state-of-the-art of the research on metaphor. Specifically, the book is
suitable to those who are interested in metaphor from a theoretical point of
view within the field of semantics, pragmatics, discourse analysis,
psychology, philosophy, language and literature. Main theories are
illustrated, and examples from actual oral and written discourse are provided.

The book is composed of eleven chapters including an Introduction and Closing
Reflections. In the appendix, there are a glossary, a bibliography and a
thematic index. At the end of every chapter, including the Introduction,
discussion questions and a list of suggested readings related to the chapter’s
topic are provided.

The Introduction opens with references to metaphors used in political
discourse (e.g., Obama’s discourse). In the second part of the Introduction
the author tries to answer the question “What is metaphor?” (p. 3) and
provides notes on terminology, the ways of identifying metaphors, and the
different varieties of metaphors. This paragraph touches upon different kinds
of metaphor as, for example, literary metaphor, metaphor in political
discourse, metaphor as defined in the dictionary. The main purpose is to give
a definition of metaphor that can embrace available accounts. Thus, references
are made to the basic definition of metaphor in the Oxford English Dictionary
up to more up-to-date definitions, such as those provided by cognitive
approaches to metaphor (e.g., Semino’s works). Another crucial point concerns
the identification of metaphors in texts and discourse and how to properly
classify available “varieties of metaphor” (p. 13). Finally, a quick reference
to instances of figurative language other than metaphors is provided
(metonyms, overstatements and understatements, idioms, non-linguistic
metaphors). 

Chapter 2 “Understanding metaphors: substitution and property attribution
theories” focuses on substitution, comparison, property attribution theories
and some recent elaborations of them (i.e., analogical models), and on the
Graded Salience Hypothesis (Giora 2003). All these theories focus on the
lexical meanings of the words that constitute the vehicle and the topic of a
metaphor. Substitution theories are based on the assumption that a metaphor
(e.g., Achilles is a lion) is created when a word (e.g., lion) is substituted
for another word (e.g., brave) that expresses some attributes of the topic
(Achilles in the previous example). Comparison theories assume that metaphors
are implicit comparisons and that the vehicle and the topic may have different
degrees of similarity (cf. Chiappe & Kennedy 2001). Attribution models focus
on the attributes of the vehicle that are transferred to the topic (cf.
Bortfeld & McGlone 2001). Analogical models, which considered metaphor as an
“analogy”, further elaborate the relation between the vehicle and the topic,
and claim that metaphors can be understood by directly linking concepts from
different domains of knowledge. One of the best known analogical models is the
structure mapping theory (cf. Gentner & Bowdle 2001). Finally, a section of
this chapter is dedicated to the Graded Salience Hypothesis (Giora 2003),
which argues that “salience” (i.e., familiarity, frequency, conventionality,
prototypicality, etc.) plays a fundamental role in the access to lexical
meanings and in the comprehension of metaphors. 

Chapter 3 “Categorization and Relevance” discusses inclusion theories based on
the idea that metaphors can be better understood as category inclusion
statements. For example, Glucksberg and colleagues (Glucksberg, Keysar, &
McGlone 1992) argue that saying “Achilles is a lion” implies reference to a
more abstract category (ENTITIES THAT ARE BRAVE) rather than to a more basic
category (FELINES THAT ARE BRAVE). Similarly, in the framework of Relevance
Theory Sperber and Wilson (2008) propose that metaphor is another kind of
category inclusion and the result of lexical narrowing and broadening
processes. Ritchie points out that both theories have difficulty with abstract
metaphors because to understand them an act of metaphor interpretation is
required before creating an ad hoc category (p. 66).

Chapter 4 is about Conceptual Metaphor Theory (Lakoff & Johnson 1980). This
approach is radically different from substitution, property attribution and
inclusion theories (described in the previous chapters) and it is still one of
most widely accepted approaches to metaphor comprehension. In his book,
Ritchie outlines the main features of Lakoff and Johnson’s theory –e.g., the
notion that metaphor does not connect only words but also underlying
concepts–and discusses some of the most common conceptual metaphors and
embodied metaphors. The author also talks about the “circularity” problem or
“metaphor in metaphor” problem (anticipated in Chapter 3) and the composite
metaphor question (i.e., compound metaphors derived by the connection of
simpler, more direct metaphors), concluding the chapter with some criticisms
to Conceptual Metaphor Theory.

Chapter 5 entitled “Perceptual Simulation” discusses a theory of language
processing that is closely linked to Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Perceptual
Simulation Theory states that language comprehension involves embodied
simulation, that is to say: while we talk about an action we imagine
performing the bodily actions (among others, Gibbs, Lima, & Francozo 2004).
After a detailed description of perceptual simulation with references to
specific theories (e.g., Barsalou’s Language and Situated Simulation), the
role of simulation in metaphor comprehension is thoroughly discussed and
supported by scientific evidence. Attention is also paid to the role of
context in the attempt to “pull the threads together” and provide a
comprehensive cognitive account of metaphor (p. 100).

Chapter 6 discusses two approaches close to Conceptual Metaphor Theory, namely
topic framing (Schön 1993) and conceptual integration, which is also called
conceptual blending (Fauconnier & Turner 2002). The first approach examines
how language in general and metaphor in particular can be used to “frame” a
topic and thus influence people. Metaphor framing is discussed through
evidence provided by Thibodeau and Boroditsky (2011) who demonstrated that the
metaphors used to describe crime have strong impact on how people think about
the question. The second approach, conceptual integration theory (Fauconnier &
Turner, 2002), is a direct extension of Lakoff and Johnson’s Conceptual
Metaphor Theory. It focuses on conceptual integration or conceptual blending,
that is to say the process of connecting small conceptual packets to long-term
mental schemas. 

Chapter 7 “Language play: metaphors, stories and humor” discusses instances of
metaphor used with playful intent, which is one of the uses of metaphor in
actual discourse (p. 121). The author reviews theories and research related to
language play and humor in order to show how they can contribute to
understanding metaphors that appear in actual discourse. The first part of the
chapter is dedicated to language play, which serves several functions. For
example, the author discusses “grooming” (Dunbar 1996), i.e. the ability to
use language in a way that contributes to the pleasure of others, and playful
metaphors, i.e. metaphors used as wordplay. In the second part, humor is
discussed as sublimated aggression and framed within a cognitive evolutionary
account (Hurley, Dennett, & Adams 2011). The social functions of both play and
humor are outlined, and a final proposal of “humor as metaphor” is provided. 

The last three chapters--Chapter 8 “Metaphor in conversation”, Chapter 9
“Metaphor in politics”, Chapter 10 “Metaphor in literature”--address the
relationship of metaphor to three forms of discourse: daily and scientific
conversation, political communication, and literary language. Metaphors are
shown to serve a number of conversational purposes as confirmed by Cameron
(2007)’s studies about several conversational settings (e.g. the
reconciliation talks between Jo Berry and Pat Magee), to support political
discourse in creating deliberate sarcasm or in highlighting differences in
political positions, and to convey specific effects in literary texts.

In the closing reflections, the author sums up “some of the work metaphors do”
and how they do it, i.e., he summarizes the theories discussed in previous
chapters and invites the readers to move to further theoretical and
experimental studies.

EVALUATION

The book “Metaphor” by Ritchie is a handy manual about the main theoretical
approaches to metaphor and offers several discussion prompts. Indeed, the
author provides information about both traditional and new theories of
metaphor, invites readers to reflect on the topics, and offers space for class
discussion. It is a well-organized and concise textbook particularly suitable
to those who are new to the field. It is recommended to undergraduate and
graduate students and to scholars who are approaching the field for two main
reasons. The first reason is that the most important theories of metaphor are
discussed in a detailed but straightforward way, the second reason is that at
the end of each chapter (and thus of each topic) the author provides some
recommended readings. The list of readings does not consist of a simple list
of titles, each reference is enriched by a brief description. In some cases,
examples of critiques are also provided (e.g., at the end of Chapter 4
“Conceptual Metaphor”) so that the reader can explore the topic from different
perspectives. 

The book could be used for classroom discussion thanks to its structure and to
the insightful questions proposed at the end of each chapter. The questions
could also be intended as research questions for further studies since they
often invite the reader to extend the topic. The presence of a three-page
glossary with concise, basic definitions of the crucial terms in metaphor
studies (e.g., cognitive effects, conceptual metaphor, dead metaphor, embodied
metaphor, thematic metaphor) definitely makes the book suitable for the
audience outlined above. For more expert readers, this book might be a valid,
up-dated, theoretical summary and a source of inspiration for further
investigations. The invitation of the author is interesting: “I hope the
reader’s appetite will have been whetted for more” (p. 208).

The last three chapters could be of importance to researchers interested in
corpus and discourse analysis since they grapple with metaphor in
conversation, political speech and literature, providing several interesting
examples from actual discourse. In these last chapters, metaphors are
generally analyzed and discussed in terms of Conceptual Metaphor Theory
(Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). For example, phrases from campaign speeches by Blair
and Obama are shown to be drawn on conceptual metaphors such as GOOD IS IN
FRONT and FAILURE IS BACK. 

It is interesting to notice that in Chapter 10, the author starts from very
often discussed metaphors--e.g., “Juliet is the sun” (Shakespeare), “The fog
comes on little cat feet” (Sandburg)-- and extends analysis to less known
metaphors, e.g., “But you stand there so nice, in your blizzard of ice,/oh
please let me come into the storm” (Cohen). Again, Ritchie proposes and
analysis of these metaphors in terms of Conceptual Metaphor Theory (for
example, Cohen’s metaphor activates the conceptual metaphor PASSION IS A
STORM) or in terms of Conceptual Integration Theory (for example, Sandburg’s
poem is discussed in terms of blended spaces). In my opinion, it would have
been interesting to discuss (or at least propose to discuss) the topics in
terms of broadening and narrowing processes (Wilson & Carston 2006) and the
elicitation of poetic effects (Pilkington 2000).

“Metaphor” by Ritchie is a stimulating book that gives an overview of current
theories on metaphor and gives interesting insights about a widely studied
topic. The book is agreeable to read and can be used both for study and
reference. The use of examples taken from actual texts and the specific
structure of the book make Ritchie’s work an appealing book in metaphor
studies.

REFERENCES

Bortfeld, Heather, & Matthew McGlone. 2001. The Continuum of Metaphor
Processing.
Metaphor and Symbol 16: 75-86.

Chiappe, Dan, & John Kennedy. 2001. Literal Bases for Metaphor and Simile.
Metaphor and Symbol 16(3): 249-76.

Dunbar, Robin. 1996. Grooming, Gossip and the Evolution of language.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Fauconnier, Gilles, & Mark Turner. 2002. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending
and the Mind's Hidden Complexities New York: Basic Books.

Gentner, Dedre, & Brian F Bowdle. 2001. Convention, Form, and Figurative
Language Processing. Processing 16: 223-47.

Gibbs, Raymond, Paula Lenz Costa Lima, & Edson Francozo. 2004. Metaphor Is
Grounded in Embodied Experience. Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1189-1210.

Glucksberg, Sam, Boaz Keysar, & Matthew S. McGlone. 1992. Metaphor
Understanding and Accessing Conceptual Schema: Reply to Gibbs (1992).
Psychological Review 99: 578-81.

Hurley, Matthew M, Daniel Clement Dennett, & Reginal B Adams. 2011. Book
Inside Jokes. Using Humor to Reverse-Engineer the Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.

Lakoff, George, & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press. 
Pilkington, Adrian. 2000. Poetic Effects: A Relevance Theory Perspective.
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 

 Schön, Donald A. 1993. Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting
in social policy. In Metaphor and Thought, ed. Andrew Ortony. Cambridge
University Press, 137-163.
Sperber, Dan, & Deirdre Wilson. 2008. A Deflationary Account of Metaphor. In
The Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, ed. Raymond W. Gibbs. Cambridge
University Press, 171-203.

Thibodeau, Paul H., & Lera Boroditsky. 2011. Metaphors We Think with: The Role
of Metaphor in Reasoning. PLoS ONE 6(2).

Wilson, Deirdre, & Robyn Carston. 2006. Metaphor, Relevance and the ‘Emergent
Property’ Issue. Mind & Language 21(3): 404-33.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Donatella Resta holds a PhD in Linguistics and collaborates with the
University of Salento (Lecce, Italy). Her research interests concern
neuropragmatics and, specifically, the neural correlates of literary metaphor.








----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-25-4364	
----------------------------------------------------------