Other formats:
BibTeX
LaTeX
RIS
@inbook{1342144,
author = {Mácha, Jakub},
address = {Frankfurt am Main},
booktitle = {From Philosophy of Fiction to Cognitive Poetics},
doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-06564-0},
editor = {Stalmaszczyk, Piotr},
keywords = {conceptual metaphor; cognitive science; literal-metaphorical distinction; novel metaphor; dead metaphor; blending theory; diachronic linguistics; George Lakoff; Max Black; Relevance Theory},
howpublished = {tištěná verze "print"},
language = {eng},
location = {Frankfurt am Main},
isbn = {978-3-631-66945-7},
pages = {93-115},
publisher = {Peter Lang},
title = {Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Classical Theory: Affinities Rather than Divergences},
url = {https://is.muni.cz/repo/1342144/Macha__Conceptual_Metaphor_Theory_and_Classical_Theory._Affinities_Rather_than_Divergences.pdf},
year = {2016}
}
TY - CHAP
ID - 1342144
AU - Mácha, Jakub
PY - 2016
TI - Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Classical Theory: Affinities Rather than Divergences
VL - Studies in Philosophy of Language and Linguistics
PB - Peter Lang
CY - Frankfurt am Main
SN - 9783631669457
KW - conceptual metaphor
KW - cognitive science
KW - literal-metaphorical distinction
KW - novel metaphor
KW - dead metaphor
KW - blending theory
KW - diachronic linguistics
KW - George Lakoff
KW - Max Black
KW - Relevance Theory
UR - https://is.muni.cz/repo/1342144/Macha__Conceptual_Metaphor_Theory_and_Classical_Theory._Affinities_Rather_than_Divergences.pdf
L2 - https://is.muni.cz/repo/1342144/Macha__Conceptual_Metaphor_Theory_and_Classical_Theory._Affinities_Rather_than_Divergences.pdf
N2 - Conceptual Metaphor Theory makes some strong claims against so-called Classical Theory which spans the accounts of metaphors from Aristotle to Davidson. Most of these theories, because of their traditional literal-metaphorical distinction, fail to take into account the phenomenon of conceptual metaphor. I argue that the underlying mechanism for explaining metaphor bears some striking resemblances among all of these theories. A mapping between two structures is always expressed. Conceptual Metaphor Theory insists, however, that the literal-metaphorical distinction of Classical Theories is empirically wrong. I claim that this criticism is based rather on terminological decisions than on empirical issues. Conceptual Metaphor Theory focusses primarily on conventional metaphors and struggles to extend its mechanism to novel metaphors, whereas Classical Theories focus on novel metaphors and struggle to extend their mechanisms to conventional metaphors. Since all of these theories study metaphors from the synchronic point of view, they are unable to take into account any semantic change. A diachronic perspective is what we need here, one which would allow us to explain the role of metaphor in semantic change and the development of language in general.
ER -
MÁCHA, Jakub. Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Classical Theory: Affinities Rather than Divergences. In Stalmaszczyk, Piotr. \textit{From Philosophy of Fiction to Cognitive Poetics}. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2016, p.~93-115. Studies in Philosophy of Language and Linguistics. ISBN~978-3-631-66945-7. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-06564-0.
|
