Cognitive Analysis of Conceptual Metaphors in Brush Talks from Dream Brook: A Study based on Conceptual Blending Theory

Yi Wang

doi:10.54097/9qv93y39

Authors

Yi Wang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/9qv93y39

Keywords:

Conceptual Blending Theory, Conceptual Metaphor, Brush Talks from Dream Brook, Meaning Construction

Abstract

Conceptual Blending Theory provides a scheme to explain the dynamic characteristics and operational picture of meaning construction of natural language. This paper employs Lakoff & Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Gilles Fauconnier & Mark Turner’s Conceptual Blending Theory as a foundation. It combines the Metaphor Identification Procedure developed by Pragglejaz Group to systematically identify and classify conceptual metaphors in the humanities section of Brush Talks from Dream Brook (420 entries). The research found that structural metaphors are relatively less common, followed by orientational metaphors, with ontological metaphors being the most frequent. Further analysis of the most representative subcategories of these three major classes of metaphors is conducted through exemplification. By dissecting the projection, alignment, and integration of concepts across four mental spaces, the research attempts to elucidate the meaning construction and conceptual integration of these conceptual metaphors.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Fauconnier, G. & M. Turner. Rethinking metaphor[A]. In Ray Gibbs, ed. Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.005

[2] Fauconnier, G. & M. Turner. Conceptual projection and middle spaces[R]. Cognitive Science Report 9401, UCSD. 1994.

[3] Fauconnier, G. Mappings in Thought and Language[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174220

[4] Group, Pragglejaz. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse[J].Metaphor and Symbol, 2007, 22(1):1-39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752

[5] Hou Min. Craft aesthetics in Mengxi Bianan[J]. Decoration,2005(11):47-48.

[6] Li Mei. Textual Analysis of “Twenty-eight Tunes of Yan Music” in Mengxi Bianan[J]. Chinese musicology,2016, (01):83-95.

[7] Li Mei. Textual analysis of “twenty-eight tones of yan music” in Mengxi Bianchuan[J]. Chinese musicology,2016,(02):44-56.

[8] Lakoff, G. & Johnson. Metaphors We Live By[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.

[9] Pan Tianhua. Study on the attributes of the entries of Mengxi Bianan[J]. Journal of Zhenjiang Higher Education,2008, 21(04):1-6.

[10] Sha Jundong. Trial analysis of Shen Kuo’s painting theory of “Mengxi Bianan”[J]. North Series,1999(01):88-90.

[11] Steen, G. J. , et al. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14

[12] Wang Xingguang,LUO Sijing. Research on Mengxi Bianan since the twentieth century[J]. Dynamics of Chinese History Research,2011(02):20-26.

[13] Wang Chang. Study on mineralogical historical materials in Mengxi Bianan[J]. Journal of Kaifeng University,2004(04):14-16.

[14] Wu Chenxi. A preliminary study on the methodology of language research in Mengxi Bianan[J]. Language Research, 2002(02):42-44.

[15] Wang Hong. Study on the Translation Strategy of the Translated Version of Mengxi Bianan[J]. Shanghai Translation, 2010,(01):18-22.

[16] Zheng Zuxiang. Interpretation of the “law number” in the mind of an ancient scientist--A brief review of Huang Datong’s “Ancient Chinese culture and the theory of law in ‘Mengxi Bianan’[J]. Journal of Xinghai Conservatory of Music,2010 (03):152-155.