Metaphor across time and conceptual space : the interplay of embodiment and cultural models

Mischler named head of Dept. of English, Foreign Languages, and Cultural Studies at NSU

---

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Metaphor across time and conceptual space : the interplay of embodiment and cultural models file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Metaphor across time and conceptual space : the interplay of embodiment and cultural models book. Happy reading Metaphor across time and conceptual space : the interplay of embodiment and cultural models Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Metaphor across time and conceptual space : the interplay of embodiment and cultural models at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Metaphor across time and conceptual space : the interplay of embodiment and cultural models Pocket Guide.

What Are You Looking For? Back To Search. Despatched within 12 working days. Other books that matched your search.

Language Structure and Environment Social, Cultural, His briefer descriptions of how metaphors are to be used can be found in Rhetoric and Poetics, while his extended analysis of how metaphor operates within the context of language as a whole can be inferred by reading On Interpretation together with Metaphysics.

In me thou seest the glowing of such fire, That on the ashes of his youth doth lie…. It is to be understood as a linguistic device, widely applied but remaining within the confines of rhetoric and poetry. Though it does play a central role in social persuasion, metaphor, restricted by the mechanics of similarity and substitution, does not carry with it any speculative or philosophical importance.

Metaphors may point out underlying similarities between objects and their descriptive categories, and may instruct through adding liveliness and elegance to speech, but they do not refer, in the strong sense, to a form of propositional knowledge. The metaphorical attribution occurs when certain select properties from the second entity are imposed on the first in order to characterize it in some distinctive way. Similarly, in poetry, metaphor serves not as a foundation for knowledge, but as a tool for mimesis or artistic imitation, representing the actions in epic tragedy or mythos in order to move and instruct the emotions of the audience for the purpose of catharsis.

Thus, the noun-name can work as a signifier of meaning in two domains, the literal and the non-literal.

Metaphor and Phenomenology

However, there remains an unresolved problem: the categorical nature of the boundary between literal and figurative domains will be a point of contention for many contemporary critiques of the theory coming from phenomenological philosophy. Furthermore, the denotative theory has served in support of the referential function of language, one which assumes a system of methodological connections between language, sense perceptions, mental states, and the external world.

The referential relation between language and its objects serves the correspondence theory of truth, in that the truth-bearing capacity of language corresponds to valid perception and cognition of the external world. The theory assumes that these sets of correspondences allow for the consistent and reliable relation of reference between words, images, and objects.

These states are actually likenesses isomorphisms of the external objects.

Thus, names for things refer to the things themselves, mental representations of those things, and to the class-based meanings. Here, Aristotle creates a metaphor based on physical movement in order to explain metaphor. Furthermore, the transference or substitution , borrowing as it does the alien name for the thing, does not disrupt the overall unity of meaning or logical order of correspondence within the denotative system; all such movement remains within the classifications of genus and species.

The metaphoric transfer of meaning will become a significant point of debate and speculation in later philosophical discussions. Although Aristotle himself does not explore the latent philosophical questions in his own theory, subsequent philosophers of language have over the years recast these issues, exploring the challenges to meaning, reference, and correspondence that present themselves in the substitution theory.

By virtue of the epiphoric movement, species and genus attributes of disparate objects fall into relations of kinship, opposition, or deviation among the various ontological categories. These relations allow for the metaphoric novelty which will subsequently fuel the development of alternative theories, those which view as fundamental to our cognitive or conceptual processes. At this point the analysis of metaphor opens up the philosophical space for further debate and interpretation. In any theory of metaphor, there are significant philosophical implications for the transfer of meaning from one object-domain or context of associations to another.

The metaphor, unlike its sister-trope the analogy, creates a new form of predication, suggesting that one category or class of objects with certain characteristics can be projected onto another separate class of entities; this projection may require a blurring of the ontological and epistemological distinctions between the kinds of objects that can be said to exist, either in the mind or in the external world. What are the perceptual and ontological connections between fire and human existence?

Another problem comes to the forefront when we try to account for how metaphors enable us to think in new ways. The metaphor, understood as a new name, is conceived as a function of individual terms, rather than sentences or wider forms of discourse narratives, texts. As Continental phenomenology develops in the late 19 th and 20 th centuries, we are presented with radically alternative theories which obscure strict boundaries between the literal and the figurative, disrupting the connections between perception, language, and thought.

Namely, the phenomenological, interactionist, and cognitive treatments of metaphor defend the view that metaphorical language and symbol serve as indirect routes to novel ways of knowing and describing human experience. In their own ways, these theories will call into question the validity and usefulness of correspondence and reference, especially in theoretical disciplines such as philosophy, theology, literature, and science. Although this article largely focuses on explicating phenomenological theories of metaphor, it should be noted that in all three theories mentioned above, metaphor is displaced from its formerly secondary position in substitution theory to occupying the front and center of our cognitive capabilities.

Understood as the product of intentional structures in the mind, metaphor now becomes conceptual, rather than merely ornamental, acting as a conduit through which we take apart and re-assemble the concepts we use to describe the varieties and nuances of experience. They all share in the assumption that metaphors suggest, posit, or disclose similarities between objects and domains of experience where there seem to be none , without explicitly recognizing that a comparison is being made between two sometimes very different kinds of things or events.

In doing so, he deconstructs our conventional reliance on the idea that meaningful language must reflect a system of logical correspondences.

But Nietzsche boldly suggests that we are, from the outset, already in metaphor and he works from this starting point. The concepts and judgments we use to describe reality do not flatly reflect pre-existing similarities or causal relationships between themselves and our physical intuitions about reality, they are themselves metaphorical constructions; that is, they are creative forms of differentiation emerging out of a deeper undifferentiated primordiality of being.

Even in his early work, The Birth of Tragedy , Nietzsche rejects the long-held assumption that truth is an ordering of concepts expressed through rigid linguistic categories, putting forth the alternative view which gives primacy to symbol as the purest, most elemental form of representation.

In the Dionysian dithyramb man is incited to the greatest exaltation of all his symbolic faculties; something never before experienced struggles for utterance—the annihilation of the veil of maya , … oneness as the soul of the race and of nature itself. The essence of nature is now to be expressed symbolically; we need a new world of symbols. Here, following Schopenhauer, he reverses Aristotelian transference of concept-categories from the literal to the figurative, and makes the figurative the original mode for representation of experience.

They emerge through construction indirectly based in vague images or names for things, willed into being out of the unnamed flowing elements of biological existence. Even Thales the pre-Socratic, we are reminded, in his attempt to give identity to the underlying unity of all things, falls back on a conceptualization of it as water without realizing he is using a metaphor.

Table of contents

Once we construct and begin to apply our concepts, their metaphorical origins are forgotten or concealed from ordinary awareness. The layering of metaphors, the archeological ancestors of concepts, is specifically linked to our immediate experiential capacity to transcend the proper and the individual levels of experience and linguistic signs.

We cannot, argues Nietzsche, construct metaphors without breaking out of the confines of singularity, thus we must reject the artificiality of designating separate names for separate things. To assume that an individual name would completely and transparently describe its referent in perception is to also assume that language and external experience mirror one another in some perfect way. It is rather the case that language transfers meaning from place to place. Thus the meaningful expression of the real is seen and experienced most directly in the endlessly creative activity of art and music, rather than philosophy.

Taken together, these philosophers call into question the position that truth entails a relationship of correspondence between dual aspects of reality, one internal to our minds and the other external.

Language Log » On Interdisciplinary Collaboration and "Latent Personas"

We consider Heidegger, Ricoeur, and Derrida as the primary examples. For Heidegger, metaphoric language signals a totality or field of significance in which being discloses or reveals itself. These structures point beyond themselves in symbols and texts, serving as mediums which reveal new worlds of meaning and existential possibilities.

French philosopher Jacques Derrida, on the other hand, reiterates the Nietzschean position; metaphor does not subvert metaphysics, but rather is itself the hidden source of all conceptual structures.

Product details

He means to address here the former distinction made by Kant between the phenomenal appearances of the real to consciousness and the noumenal reality of the things-in-themselves. If those objects are knowable, it is because they are immediate in conscious experience.

Here, the act of description is a method for avoiding a metaphysical trap: that of imposing these essences or object meanings onto the contents of mental experience. Noesis , for Husserl, achieves its aim by including within itself giving an account of the role that context or horizon plays in delineating possible objects for experience.

This will have important implications for later phenomenological theories of metaphor, in that metaphors may be said intend new figurative contexts in which being appears to us in new ways.

Metaphor across Time and Conceptual Space

In Ideen 30 , Husserl explains how such a horizon or domain of experience presents a set of criteria for us to apply. We choose and identify an object as a single member of a class of objects, and so these regions of subjective experience, also called regions of phenomena, circumscribe certain totalities or generic unities to which concrete items belong.

Drawing upon the work of Brentano and Meinong, Husserl develops a set of necessary structural relations between the knower ego , the objects of experience, and the horizon within which those objects are given. The relation is characterized in an axiomatic manner as intentionality , where the subjective consciousness and its objects are correlates brought together in a psychological act.

Subjectivity contributes to and makes possible cognition; specifically, it must be the case that perception and cognition are always about something given in the stream of consciousness, they are only possible because consciousness intends or refers to these immanent objects. Communicable linguistic expressions, such as names and sentences, exist only in so far as they exhibit intentional meanings for speakers. Written or spoken expressions only carry references to objects because they have meanings for speakers and knowers. If we examine all of our mental perceptions, we find it impossible to think without intending an object of some sort.

Both Continental and Anglo-American thinkers agree that metaphor holds the key to understanding these processes, as it re-organizes our senses of perception, temporality, and relation of subject to object, referring to these as subjects of existential concern and possibility. Heidegger, building upon the phenomenological thematic, asserts that philosophical analysis should keep to careful description of the human encounter with the world, revealing the modes in which being is existentially or relationally given.

• A History of Latin America
• Long-Term Performance of Epoxy-Coated Reinforcing Steel in Heavy Salt- Contaminated Concrete
• 3D Game Textures. Create Professional Game Art Using Photoshop
• Signs
• Indian Nocturne