Metafory konceptualne: fenomeny umysłu czy konstrukty kognitywistyczne? Cz. I

Autor

  • Aleksander Kiklewicz Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski, Olsztyn

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12797/LV.14.2019.28.01

Słowa kluczowe:

psychologia języka, psycholingwistyka, semantyka, lingwistyka kognitywna, metafora konceptualna

Abstrakt

Conceptual Metaphors: Phenomena of the Mind or Cognitive Constructs? Part I

The author considers the psychological reality of models in contemporary cognitive linguistics. The initial hypothesis is that the programmatic assumption of cognitive linguistics, i.e. the fact that linguistic activity is programmed in the mind by ambivalent, monomodular conceptual categories or gestalts, is not realized in research practice: in reality we are dealing with different versions of constructivism, i.e. speculative generation of theoretical models that cannot be used to explain linguistic facts. This general assumption is verified with reference to the theory of conceptual metaphors by G. Lakoff and M. Johnson (1980). The author presents six arguments that metaphoric models economy is a substance or emotion is a hot fluid in a container do not reflect the real linguistic or mental activities of the subjects. The author refers to numerous scientific sources as well as empirical material of Slavonic languages.

Pobrania

Brak dostęþnych danych do wyświetlenia.

Bibliografia

Apresân V.Û., Apresân Û.D., 1993, Metafora v semantičeskom predstavlenii èmocij, „Voprosy âzykoznaniâ” 3, s. 27–35.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Bateson G., 1979, Mind and Nature. A Necessary Unity, New York.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Bogusławski A., Wawrzyńczyk J., 1993, Polszczyzna, jaką znamy. Nowa sonda słownikowa, Warszawa.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Cameron L., 2003, Metaphor in Educational Discourse, London.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Croft W., 2002, The Role of Domains in the Interpretation of Metaphors and Metonymies, [w:] R. Dirven, R. Pörings (red.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, New York, s. 161–206.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Dobrovol’skij D., 1997, Idiome im mentalen Lexikon. Ziele und Methoden der kognitivbasierten Phraseologieforschung, Trier.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Fabiszak M., 2007, A Conceptual Metaphor Approach to War Discourse and its Implications, Poznań.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Flusberg S.J., Matlock T., Thibodeau P.H., 2018, War Metaphors in Public Discourse, „Metaphor & Symbol” 33, nr 1, s. 1–18, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2018.1407992.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Gibbs R.W., 1995, Idiomaticity and Human Cognition, [w:] M. Everaert i in. (red.), Idioms. Structural and Psychological Perspectives, Hillsdale, s. 97–117.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Gibbs R.W., 2009, Why Do Some People Dislike Conceptual Metaphor Theory, „Cognitive Semiotics” 5, nr 1–2, s. 13–36, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem.2013.5.12.14.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Gibbs R.W., Matlock T., 2001, Psycholinguistic Perspectives on Polysemy, [w:] H. Cuyckens, B. Zawada (red.), Psycholinguistic Perspectives on Polysemy, Amsterdam – Philadelphia, s. 213–240.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Jäkel O., 2003, Metafory w abstrakcyjnych domenach dyskursu. Kognitywno-lingwistyczna analiza metaforycznych modeli aktywności umysłowej, gospodarki i nauki, tłum. M. Banaś, B. Drąg, Kraków.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Kardela H., 2011, Ile jest strukturalizmu w kognitywizmie lub czy istnieją rewolucje naukowe w językoznawstwie?, „Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego” LXVII, s. 51–70.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Kardela H., 2014, The Non-modular Nature of Cognitive Grammar, „SKASE. Journal of Theoretical Linguistics” 11, nr 1, s. 2–31.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Keysar B., Shen Y., Glucksberg S., Horton W.S., 2000, Conventional Language: How Metaphorical Is It?, „Journal of Memory and Language” 43, nr 4, s. 576–593, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2711.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Kibrik A.E., 1999, Tri ahillesovy pâty funkcionalizma, [w:] E.V. Rahilina, Â.G. Testelec (red.), Tipologiâ i teoriâ âzyka. Ot opisaniâ k obʺâsneniû, Moskva, s. 36–49.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Kiklewicz A., 2007, Metafory pojęciowe jako baza nominacji idiomatycznej (na przykładzie polskich konstrukcji werbo-nominalnych), „Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego” LXIII, s. 197–216.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Kiklewicz A., 2012, Znaczenie w języku – znaczenie w umyśle. Krytyczna analiza współczesnych teorii semantyki lingwistycznej, Olsztyn.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Kiklewicz A., 2013, Konceptual’nye metafory, leksičeskie parametry i prototipičeskie èffekty, [w:] A. Kamalova (red.), Slovo kak fenomen kul’tury, Olsztyn, s. 115–150.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Kohl K., 2007, Metapher, Stuttgart – Weimar.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Kövecses Z., 2003, Metaphor and Emotion. Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling, Cambridge.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Lakoff G., 1977, Linguistic Gestalts, [w:] W.A. Beach, S.E. Fox, S. Philosoph (red.), Papers from the Thirteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, s. 236–287.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Lakoff G., 1990, The Invariance Hypothesis: Is Abstract Reason Based on Image-schemas?, „Cognitive Linguistics” 1, nr 1, s. 39–74, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Lakoff G., Johnson M., 1980, Metaphors We Live By, Chicago.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Leezenberg M., 2001, Contexts of Metaphor, Amsterdam.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Leŝeva L.M., 2014, Leksičeskaâ polisemiâ v kognitivnom aspekte, Moskva.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

McGlone M.S., 1996, Conceptual Metaphors and Figurative Language Interpretation: Food for Thought?, „Journal of Memory and Language” 35, nr 4, s. 544–565, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.0029.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

McGlone M.S., 2007, What is the Explanatory Value of a Conceptual Metaphor?, „Language & Communication” 27, nr 2, s. 109–126, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1016j.langcom.2006.02.016.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Miller G.A., 1979, Images and Models, Similes and Metaphors, [w:] A. Ortony (red.), Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge, s. 202–248.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Musolff A., 2004, Metaphor and Political Discourse. Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe, Basingstoke.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Musolff A., 2006, Metaphor Scenarios in Public Discourse, „Metaphor and Symbol” 21, nr 1, s. 23–38, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Pawelec A., 2005, Znaczenie ucieleśnione. Propozycje kręgu Lakoffa, Kraków.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Pawelec A., 2006a, Metafora pojęciowa a tradycja, Kraków.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Pawelec A., 2006b, The Death of Metaphor, „Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis” 123, s. 117–121.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Piirainen E., 1998, „Bildspendbereich” – Metapher – metaphorisches Modell. Zu einem Beschreibungsansatz der Phraseologie des westmünsterländischen Dialektes, [w:] W. Eismann (red.), Europhras ’95. Europäische Phraseologie im Vergleich. Gemeinsames Erbe und kulturelle Vielfalt, Bochums, s. 679–692.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Rakova M., 2002, The Philosophy of Embodied Realism: A High Price to Pay?, „Cognitive Linguistics” 13, nr 3, s. 215–244, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2002.015.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Rice S., 1996, Prepositional Prototypes, [w:] M. Pütz, R. Dirven (red.), The Construal of Space in Language and Thought, Berlin, s. 135–165.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Ritchie D., 2003, „Argument is War” – Or is it a Game of Chess? Multiple Meanings in the Analysis of Implicit Metaphors, „Metaphor and Symbol” 18, nr 2, s. 125–146, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1802_4.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Ross D., 1993, Metaphor, Meaning, and Cognition, New York.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Sandra D., Rice S., 1995, Network Analyses of Prepositional Meaning: Mirroring whose Mind – the Linguist’s or the Language User’s?, „Cognitive Linguistics” 6, nr 1, s. 89–130, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1995.6.1.89.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Szwedek A., 2011, The Ultimate Source Domain, „Review of Cognitive Linguistics” 9, nr 2, s. 341–366, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.9.2.01szw.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Tabakowska E., 2001a, Językoznawstwo kognitywne a poetyka przekładu, tłum. A. Pokojska, Kraków.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Tabakowska E. (red.), 2001b, Kognitywne podstawy języka i językoznawstwa, Kraków.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Talmy L., 1977, Rubber-sheet Cognition in Language, [w:] W.A. Beach, S.E. Fox, S. Philosoph (red.), Papers from the Thirteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, s. 612–628.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Taylor J.R., 2007, Gramatyka kognitywna, tłum. M. Buchta, Ł. Wiraszka, red. nauk. E. Tabakowska, Kraków.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Winters M., 2015, On the Origins of the Cognitive Grammar, [w:] J. Daems, E. Zenner, K. Heylen, D. Speelman, H. Cuyckens (red.), Change of Paradigms – New Paradoxes. Recontextualizing Language and Linguistics, Berlin – Boston, s. 150–167.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Ziem A., 2008, Frames und sprachliches Wissen. Kognitive Aspekte der semantischen Kompetenz, Berlin – New York.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Zinken J., 2003, Ideological Imagination: Intertextual and Correlational Metaphors in Political Discourse, „Discourse and Society” 14, nr 4, s. 507–523, [on-line:] https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0957926503014004005.
##plugins.generic.googleScholarLinks.settings.viewInGS##

Pobrania

Opublikowane

2019-11-29

Jak cytować

Kiklewicz, A. (2019) „Metafory konceptualne: fenomeny umysłu czy konstrukty kognitywistyczne? Cz. I”, LingVaria, 14(28), s. 13–27. doi: 10.12797/LV.14.2019.28.01.

Numer

Dział

Zagadnienia ogólne