Konceptualna metafora - uniwersalność czy idiosynkratyczność
Aleksander Kiklewicz
Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w OlsztynieAbstrakt
The subject of the article is the widespread in the contemporary linguistics (and also Slavo nic studies) theory of the conceptual metaphor, initiated by the American researchers G. Lakoff and M. Johnson in the eighties of the twentieth century. Analyzed are the most important me thodological assumptions of this branch of linguistics, those peculiarities of the description of the linguistic material that contemporary linguistics owes to the cognitive (and interpretational, to be precise) perspective of sign systems. The author focuses on one of the postulates of the cognitive theory of metaphors, namely on the postulate of universality, challenging its abso- lute character. The most particular subject of analysis on the part of the author is connected with the factors of realization of conceptual metaphors in the linguistic communication: discursive, cultural-cogniti ve, situational and linguistic ones.
Bibliografia
Anuth B. S. (1998), Beobachtungen zur M etapher. Ein phraseologischer Versuch, http:// www.hausarbeit.de/faecher/hausarbeit/lin/11144.html.
Bateson G./'Bateson M. С. (1988), Angels fear: an investigation into the nature and meaning o f the sacred, London. Цит. по: Бейтсон Г./ Бейтсон M. К. (1994), Ангелы страшатся, Москва.
Beardsley М. С. (1962), The Metaphorical Twist, „Philosophy and Phenomenological Research” 22/3, p. 293-307. Цит. по: Бирдсли M. (1990), М ет аф орическое сплет ение, [в:] Арутюнова Н. Д./Журинская М. А. (ред.), Теория метафоры, Москва, с. 201-218.
Bemâth А. (2001), Über Nietzsches B egriff der M etapher in seinem Essay „Über Wahrheit und Lüge im aussermoralischen Sinne". Komponenten einer terminologischen Untersuchung, „Jahrbuch der ungarischen Germanistik”, s. 15-32.
Black M. (1962), Models and Metapher. Studies in Language, Ithaca/London. Цит. по: Блэк M. (1990), Метафора, [в:] Арутюнова Н. Д./Журинская М. А. (ред.), Теория метафоры, Москва, с. 153-172.
Black М. (1979), More About Metaphor, [в:] Ortony A. (ed.), Metaphor and Trought, Cambridge, р. 19-43.
Cassirer E. (1925), Sprache und Mythe, Leipzig/Berlin. Цит. по: Кассирер Э. (1990), Сила метафоры, [в:] Арутюнова Н. Д./Журинская М. А. (ред.), Теория метафоры, Москва, с. 33-43.
Dobrzyńska Т. (1994), Mówiąc przenośnie... Studia о metaforze, Warszawa.
Furdal A. (1990), Językoznawstwo otwarte, Wrocław.
Goodman N. (1981), Metaphor as Moonlighting, [in:] Johnson M. (ed.), Philosophical Perspecti ves on Metaphor, Minneapolis, p. 221-227.
Grice H. P. (1975), Logic and conversation, [in:] Cole P./Morgan J. L. (eds.), Syntax and se mantics, V. 3, New York, p. 41-58.
Jäkel О. (1994), Wirtschaftswachstum oder Wir steigen das Bruttosozialprodukt: Quantitäts-Me taphern aus der Ökonomie-Domäne, [in:] Bungarten T. (hrsg.), Unternehmenskommunikation. Linguistische Analysen und Beschreibungen, Tostedt, s. 84—101.
Jäkel O. (1997), Metaphern in abstrakten Diskurs-Domänen: Eine kognitiv-linguistische Un tersuchung anhand der Bereiche Geistestätigkeit, Wirtschaft und Wissenschaft, Frankfurt a.M./ Berlin/Bem/New York/Paris/Wien.
Jäkel O. (2002), Hypotheses Revisited: The Cognitive Theory o f Metaphor (Applied to Religious Texts), http://www.metaphorik.de.
Jakobson R. (1989), W poszukiwaniu istoty języka. Wybór pism, t. 1, Warszawa. Johnson M. (1987), The body in the mind, Chicago.
Käufer D. (1983), Metaphor and Its Ties to Ambiguity and Vagueness, „Rhetoric Society Quarter ly” 13/3-4, p. 209-220.
Lakoff G./Johnson M. (1980), Metaphors We Live By, Chicago/London. Lakoff G. (1987), Wome, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind, Chicago/London.
Leezenberg M. (2001), Contexts o f Metaphor, Amsterdam/London/New York et al. Martin W. (1997), A Frame-based Approach to Polysemy, [in:] Cuyckens H./Zawada B. (eds.), Polysemy in Cognitive Linguistics, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, p. 100-120.
Miller G. A. (1979), Images and Models, Similes and Metaphors, [in:] Ortony A. (ed.), Metaphor and Trought. Cambridge, p. 202-248. Nerlich B./ Hamilton C. A./ Rowe V. (2002), The Socio-Cultural Role o f Metaphors, Frames and Narratives, www.metaphorik.de. 2.
Pinkal M. (1980), Semantische Vagheit: Phänomene und Theorien. I. „Linguistische Berichte” 70, s. 1-26.
Pinkal M. (1985), Logik und Lexikon. Die Semantik des Unbestimmten, Berlin/New York.
Sinha С. (1999), Grounding, mapping, and acts o f meaning, [in:] Janssen T./Redeker G. (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Foundation, Scope, and Methodology, Berlin - New York, p. 223-255.
Taylor J. R. (1989), Linguistic Categorization. Prototypes in Linguistic Theory, Oxford.
Bateson G./'Bateson M. С. (1988), Angels fear: an investigation into the nature and meaning o f the sacred, London. Цит. по: Бейтсон Г./ Бейтсон M. К. (1994), Ангелы страшатся, Москва.
Beardsley М. С. (1962), The Metaphorical Twist, „Philosophy and Phenomenological Research” 22/3, p. 293-307. Цит. по: Бирдсли M. (1990), М ет аф орическое сплет ение, [в:] Арутюнова Н. Д./Журинская М. А. (ред.), Теория метафоры, Москва, с. 201-218.
Bemâth А. (2001), Über Nietzsches B egriff der M etapher in seinem Essay „Über Wahrheit und Lüge im aussermoralischen Sinne". Komponenten einer terminologischen Untersuchung, „Jahrbuch der ungarischen Germanistik”, s. 15-32.
Black M. (1962), Models and Metapher. Studies in Language, Ithaca/London. Цит. по: Блэк M. (1990), Метафора, [в:] Арутюнова Н. Д./Журинская М. А. (ред.), Теория метафоры, Москва, с. 153-172.
Black М. (1979), More About Metaphor, [в:] Ortony A. (ed.), Metaphor and Trought, Cambridge, р. 19-43.
Cassirer E. (1925), Sprache und Mythe, Leipzig/Berlin. Цит. по: Кассирер Э. (1990), Сила метафоры, [в:] Арутюнова Н. Д./Журинская М. А. (ред.), Теория метафоры, Москва, с. 33-43.
Dobrzyńska Т. (1994), Mówiąc przenośnie... Studia о metaforze, Warszawa.
Furdal A. (1990), Językoznawstwo otwarte, Wrocław.
Goodman N. (1981), Metaphor as Moonlighting, [in:] Johnson M. (ed.), Philosophical Perspecti ves on Metaphor, Minneapolis, p. 221-227.
Grice H. P. (1975), Logic and conversation, [in:] Cole P./Morgan J. L. (eds.), Syntax and se mantics, V. 3, New York, p. 41-58.
Jäkel О. (1994), Wirtschaftswachstum oder Wir steigen das Bruttosozialprodukt: Quantitäts-Me taphern aus der Ökonomie-Domäne, [in:] Bungarten T. (hrsg.), Unternehmenskommunikation. Linguistische Analysen und Beschreibungen, Tostedt, s. 84—101.
Jäkel O. (1997), Metaphern in abstrakten Diskurs-Domänen: Eine kognitiv-linguistische Un tersuchung anhand der Bereiche Geistestätigkeit, Wirtschaft und Wissenschaft, Frankfurt a.M./ Berlin/Bem/New York/Paris/Wien.
Jäkel O. (2002), Hypotheses Revisited: The Cognitive Theory o f Metaphor (Applied to Religious Texts), http://www.metaphorik.de.
Jakobson R. (1989), W poszukiwaniu istoty języka. Wybór pism, t. 1, Warszawa. Johnson M. (1987), The body in the mind, Chicago.
Käufer D. (1983), Metaphor and Its Ties to Ambiguity and Vagueness, „Rhetoric Society Quarter ly” 13/3-4, p. 209-220.
Lakoff G./Johnson M. (1980), Metaphors We Live By, Chicago/London. Lakoff G. (1987), Wome, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind, Chicago/London.
Leezenberg M. (2001), Contexts o f Metaphor, Amsterdam/London/New York et al. Martin W. (1997), A Frame-based Approach to Polysemy, [in:] Cuyckens H./Zawada B. (eds.), Polysemy in Cognitive Linguistics, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, p. 100-120.
Miller G. A. (1979), Images and Models, Similes and Metaphors, [in:] Ortony A. (ed.), Metaphor and Trought. Cambridge, p. 202-248. Nerlich B./ Hamilton C. A./ Rowe V. (2002), The Socio-Cultural Role o f Metaphors, Frames and Narratives, www.metaphorik.de. 2.
Pinkal M. (1980), Semantische Vagheit: Phänomene und Theorien. I. „Linguistische Berichte” 70, s. 1-26.
Pinkal M. (1985), Logik und Lexikon. Die Semantik des Unbestimmten, Berlin/New York.
Sinha С. (1999), Grounding, mapping, and acts o f meaning, [in:] Janssen T./Redeker G. (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Foundation, Scope, and Methodology, Berlin - New York, p. 223-255.
Taylor J. R. (1989), Linguistic Categorization. Prototypes in Linguistic Theory, Oxford.
Kiklewicz, A. (2004). Konceptualna metafora - uniwersalność czy idiosynkratyczność. Acta Polono-Ruthenica, 1(IX), 249–261. Pobrano z https://czasopisma.uwm.edu.pl/index.php/apr/article/view/3765
Aleksander Kiklewicz
Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie
Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie
