Abstract
Cognitive semiotics is a new field for the study of meaning in trans-disciplines, such as semiotics, cognitive linguistics, and corpus linguistics. This paper aims at studying how cognitive semiotics is employed to construe conceptual metaphors in discourse. We conducted a corpus-based study, with Lakoff and Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) and Fauconnier and Turner’s Blending Theory (BT), to illustrate our cognitive-semiotic model for metaphors in Dragon Seed, written by Nobel Prize winner Pearl S. Buck. The major finding is that metaphors are mental constructions involving many spaces and mappings in the cognitive-semiotic network. These integration networks are related to encoders’ cognitive, cultural, and social contexts. Additionally, cognitive semiotics can be employed to construe conceptual metaphors in discourse vividly and comprehensively and thus is helpful to reveal the ideology and the theme of the discourse.
About the authors
Xia Zhao (b. 1967) is a professor in the English Department at Jiangsu University of Science and Technology and an academic visitor at Cardiff University, UK. Her research interests include semiotics, functional linguistics, cognitive linguistics, and corpus linguistics. Publications include “A corpus-based study of metaphor in Pavilion of Women” (2019), “Research on language constructivism based on evolutionary theory of meaning” (2015), and “The implications of Wittgenstein’s philosophy of language to Halliday’s theory of meaning” (2014).
Rong Shen (b. 1989) is a postgraduate student at Jiangsu University of Science and Technology. Her research interests include cognitive linguistics and corpus linguistics.
Xincheng Zhao (b. 1994) is a scholar, whose research interests include applied linguistics and corpus linguistics. His publications include “The door to higher education should be open to the visually impaired population” (2013),“Transmedia storytelling of Chinese TV reality shows – A case study of ‘Where’s Daddy’ and ‘Chinese Good Voice’” (2014) and “A Corpus-based Study of Metaphor in Pavilion of Women” (2019, 3rd author).
Funding
We are grateful for the financial support from the Ministry of Education of China (grant no. 17YJA740072).
References
Aristotle. 2005. Rhetoric, Book III, Chapter 4. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research. Press.Search in Google Scholar
Black, Max. 1962. Models and metaphor. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.10.7591/9781501741326Search in Google Scholar
Black, Max. 1993. More about metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and thought, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139173865.004Search in Google Scholar
Buck, Pearl Sydenstricker. 1941. Dragon Seed. New York: The John Day Company.Search in Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2004. Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan Book Company.10.1057/9780230000612Search in Google Scholar
Casasanto, Daniel. 2009. When is a linguistic metaphor a conceptual metaphor? In Vyvyan Evans & Stéphanie Pourcel. (eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics (Human Cognitive Processing) 127–145. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.24.11casSearch in Google Scholar
Daddesio, Thomas C. 1995. On minds and symbols: The relevance of cognitive science for semiotics. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110903003Search in Google Scholar
Dennett, Daniel C. 1991. Consciousness explained. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.Search in Google Scholar
Durst-Andersen, Per. 2011. Linguistic supertypes: A cognitive-semiotic theory of human. communication. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110253153Search in Google Scholar
Eco, Umberto. 2000. Kant and the platypus: Essays on language and cognition. New York: Harcourt.Search in Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner. 1998. Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science 22(2). 133–187.10.1207/s15516709cog2202_1Search in Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner 2002. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles. 1994. Mental spaces. New York: Cambridge University Press (Originally published 1985 Cambridge: MIT Press).10.1017/CBO9780511624582Search in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Jr. Raymond W. 2014. Conceptual metaphor in thought and social action. In Mark J. Landau, Michael D. Robinson & B. P. Meier (eds.), The power of metaphor: Examining its influence on social life, 17–40. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.10.1037/14278-002Search in Google Scholar
Goatly, Andrew. 1997. The language of metaphors. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203210000Search in Google Scholar
Grady, Joseph, Todd Oakley & Seana Coulson. 1999. Blending and metaphor. In Metaphor in cognitive linguistics: Selected papers from the 5th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, 101–124. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.175.07graSearch in Google Scholar
Guo, Yingjian & Suling Hao. 2005. Dragon Seed—a true representation of China’s Anti-Japanese war. Journal of Jiangsu University (Social Science Edition) 3. 54–63.Search in Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. 1978. Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London, United Kingdom: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar
Hutchins, Edwin. 2005. Material anchors for conceptual blends. Journal of Pragmatics 37(10). 1555–1577.10.1016/j.pragma.2004.06.008Search in Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltan. 2003. Language, figurative thought, and cross-cultural comparison. Metaphor and Symbol 18(4). 311–320.10.1207/S15327868MS1804_6Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Rafael E. Núñez. 2000. Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar
Pascual, Esther. 2007. Imaginary trialogues: Conceptual blending and fictive interaction in criminal courts. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law 11(1). 169–172.10.1558/ijsll.v11i1.169Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1932. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. 8 Vols. Edited by Charles Hartshorne & Paul Weiss. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Search in Google Scholar
Quintilianus, Marcus Fabius. 1976. Institutio Oratoria. [The institutio oratoria of Quintilian]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Riccardo Fusaroli & Kristian Tylén. 2012. Carving language as social coordination. Interaction Studies 13(1). 103–124.10.1075/is.13.1.07fusSearch in Google Scholar
Richards, Ivor Armstrong. 1936. The philosophy of rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sykes, John Bradbury (ed.). 1982. The concise Oxford dictionary of current English, 7th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sonesson, Göran. 1989. Pictorial concepts Lund: Lund University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sonesson, Göran. 2007. From the meaning of embodiment to the embodiment of meaning: A study in phenomenological semiotics. In Tom Ziemke, Jordan Zlatev & Roslyn Frank (eds.), Body, language and mind. Vol. 1: Embodiment. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Sonesson, Göran. 2011. The mind in the picture and the picture in the mind: A phenomenological approach to cognitive semiotics. In Lexia. Rivista di semiotica 07/08. 167–182.Search in Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 1995 [1986]. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford, UK & Cam-bridge, USA: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Stampoulidis, Georgios, Mariana Bolognesi & Jordan Zlatev. 2019. A cognitive semiotics exploration of metaphors in Greek street art. Cognitive Semiotics 12(1).10.1515/cogsem-2019-2008Search in Google Scholar
Wei, Zaijiang. 2016. Context in cognitive linguistics: Definition and functions. Journal of Foreign Languages 4. 39–46.Search in Google Scholar
Yang, Huizhong. 2002. An introduction to corpus linguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.Search in Google Scholar
Yu, Hongbing. 2019.On semiotic modeling. Suzhou: Soochow University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Zhao, Xia, Yaoyao Han & Xincheng Zhao. 2019. A corpus-based study of metaphor in Pavilion of Women. Chinese Semiotic Studies 15(1). 95–117.10.1515/css-2019-0006Search in Google Scholar
Zhao, Xia. 2008. Restriction of cognitive context on metaphor construal. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching 9. 22–25.Search in Google Scholar
Zhao, Xia. 2015. Research on language constructability on the basis of the evolutionary theory of meaning. Suzhou: Soochow University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Zlatev, Jordan. 2012. An emerging field for the transdisciplinary study of meaning. The Public Journal of Semiotics (1). 2–24.10.37693/pjos.2012.4.8837Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
