隐喻书评 metaphor we live by

Review of Metaphors We Live By

By

George Lakoff

Mark Johnson

“Metaphors We Live By”was written by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson in Chicago in 1980 published by University of Chicago Press. Lakoff and Johnson’s “Metaphors We Live By”(1980) is an important contribution to the study of metaphor.

“Metaphors We Live By” is a discussion of how our worldview, both at a macro and micro level, is dependent upon metaphors. In the first chapter, “Concepts We Live By,” Lakoff and Johnson use the phrase “argumen t is war” to explain the essence of metaphor as “understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another.” In the chapters that follow, they examine various conceptual metaphors: highlighting and hiding, orientational metaphors, ontological metaphors, personification, and metonymy.

The book demonstrates that, although metaphors may appear random, in reality they “form coherent systems in terms of which we conceptualize our experience.” Chapter 9 addresses apparent contradictions within metaphorical systems. The English (western) way of organizing time is used as an example:

First, the future in front and the past behind:

In the weeks ahead of us (future)

That’s all behind us now (past)

Second, the future behind and the past in front:

In the following weeks (future)

In the preceding weeks (past)

Third, mixed contradictory metaphors:

We’re looking ahead to the following weeks.

These contradictions, however, can be explained as cohesive through the underlying metaphor of “time.” Moving objects generally have a front–back orientation. In English, time is structured in a “time-is-a-moving-object” metaphor where the front-back orientation is relative to the point of view of the audience. Therefore, there is no contradiction in the use of time statements. In fact, they are consistent with the internalized metaphor of time.

“Metaphors We Live By”(1980) contains an extensive afterword which discusses various misunderstandings of metaphor, as well as contemporary trends in metaphor study (primary metaphor and the neutral theory, metaphor and dynamic enactment, and the Neutral Theory of Language project). Although the content of the book can be tough sledding at times, concepts and examples are presented in a very readable style, which helps the reader see how metaphors are used in daily life.

Over the past two decades, the studies on metaphor have undergone a radical shift. Among them, the conceptual metaphor theory proposed by Lakoff and Johnson has brought a turning point in the study of metaphor.

In cognitive linguistics, conceptual metaphor, or cognitive metaphor, refers to the understanding of one idea, or conceptual domain, in terms of another, for example, understanding quantity in terms of directionality (e.g. "prices are rising"). A conceptual domain can be any coherent organization of human experience. The regularity with which different languages employ the same metaphors, which often appear to be perceptually based, has led to the hypothesis that the mapping between conceptual domains corresponds to neural mappings in the brain.

This idea, and a detailed examination of the underlying processes, was first extensively explored by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson in their work “Metaphors We Live By”(1980). Other cognitive scientists study subjects similar to conceptual metaphor under the labels "analogy" and "conceptual blending".

Conceptual metaphors are seen in language in our everyday lives. Conceptual metaphors shape not just our communication, but also shape the way we think and act. In George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s work, Metaphors We Live By (1980), we see how everyday language is filled with metaphors we may not always notice. An example of one of the commonly used conceptual metaphors is "argument is war". This metaphor shapes our language in the way we view argument as war or as a battle to be won. It is not uncommon to hear someone say "He won that argument" or "I attacked every weak point in his argument". The very way argument is thought of is shaped by this metaphor of arguments being war and battles that must be won. Argument can be seen in many other ways other than a battle, but we use this concept to shape the way we think of argument and the way we go about arguing.

Conceptual metaphors are used very often to understand theories and models. A conceptual metaphor uses one idea and links it to another to better understand something. For example, the conceptual metaphor of viewing communication as a conduit is one large theory explained with a metaphor. So not only is our everyday communication shaped by the language of conceptual metaphors, but so is the very way we understand scholarly theories. These metaphors are prevalent in communication and we do not just use them in language; we actually perceive and act in accordance with the metaphors.

“Metaphors We Live By”(1980) also has a great contribution to the development of linguistics. First, compared with conventional metaphor theory, conceptual metaphor theory undoubtedly provides a wider linguistic context for metaphors. Conceptual metaphor is a system of metaphor that lies behind much of everyday language and forms everyday conceptual system, including most abstract concepts; Second, challenged with western philosophy and semantic theory, George Lakoff and Mark Johnson states meaning arises, not just from the internal structures of the organism, nor only from the outside world, but rather from an interaction between the organism and environment. For example, container, as one of the most basic objects, is frequently used in peop le’s everyday life. Similarly, the numerous concrete objects that have visible boundaries in people’s physical experience are also regarded as a type of “container”, like clothes, room, cup, cars and sometimes, even people’s bodies. For instance, moving from one room to another is moving from one container to another. Since people are in constant contact with such objects by going in and out of these concrete boundaries, people’s encounter with containment and boundedness is one of the most pervasive features of their bodily experience. As a matter of fact, it is through that universal experience of bounding surface and in- out orientation that people form a particular kind of metaphor, i.e. CONTAINER METAPHOR, as reflected in the following examples:

I pour the coffee into a cup.

We are enveloped in darkness.

Do get the idea out of your head.

He takes out a bottle of milk from the refrigerator.

All the expressions above are so commonly used that human beings think that they are self- evident. People usually ignore that the expressions are metaphors because the mapping of CONTAINER experience has become one of their inner unconscious mechanism of thinking. Finally, according to George Lakoff and Mark Johnson (1980:139), “conventional metaphors are metaphors that structure the ordinary conceptual system of our culture, which is reflected in our everyday language”. When people speak of the degree to which a conceptual metaphor is conventionalized in the language, they mean the extent to which it underlies a range of everyday linguistic expressions. Conventional metaphor has infused into every aspect of the society. Without realizing that a metaphorical conceptualization is being processed, people can easily understand and use the expressions, such as: “He is in trouble now”, “I’ve got a stomachache”, etc.

In “Metaphors We Live By” (1980), George Lakoff and Mark Johnson suggest that metaphors not only make our thoughts more vivid and interesting but that they actually structure our perceptions and understanding. It has led many readers to a new recognition of how profoundly metaphors not only shape our view of life in the present but set up the expectations that determine what life well be for us in the future.

本文来源：https://www.bwwdw.com/article/n8qe.html