Teoria integracji pojęciowej – dar niebios czy przekleństwo? Próba ewaluacji z perspektywy językoznawstwa kognitywnego

Joanna Jabłońska-Hood

Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej w Lublinie
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6927-4021


Abstract

This paper is an attempt to critically evaluate and assess conceptual integration theory,
aka blending. Conceptual integration has been a popular paradigm with many linguists
and scholars of different academic orientation for many years since its creation by Fauconnier
and Turner (2002). It has been used to validate research in literature, language
and law, to mention just a few. However, together with its proponents there are numerous
voices of critique that accuse blending of being underspecified and overarching, among
others. I would like to present the critical voices pertaining to conceptual integration
and provide counter argumentation, where possible. Further, I would like to suggest
certain ways of improvement for the theory, as well as put forward its possible direction
of progress from the cognitive linguistic perspective.


Keywords:

conceptual integration theory, mental spaces, cognitive linguistics, blending


Blakemore D. (1992): Understanding Utterances. An Introduction to pragmatics. Oxford.   Google Scholar

Brandt L., Brandt P. A. (2005): Making sense of a blend. A cognitive approach to metaphor. „Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics” 3, pp. 216−249.   Google Scholar

Chilton P. (2008): Reflections on blends and discourse. [In:] Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction. T. Oakley, A. Hougaard (eds.). Amsterdam, pp. 251−256.   Google Scholar

Cienki A. (2008): Looking at analyses of mental spaces and blending / Looking at experiencing discourse in interaction. [In:] Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction. T. Oakley, A. Hougaard (eds.). Amsterdam, pp. 235−246.   Google Scholar

Coulson S. (2011): Constructing meaning. An interview with Gilles Fauconnier, , access: 10.02.2019.   Google Scholar

Coulson S., Oakley T. (2000): Blending basics. „Cognitive Linguistics” 11, pp. 175−196.   Google Scholar

Coulson S., Oakley T. (2008): Connecting the dots: Mental spaces and metaphoric language in discourse. [In:] Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction. T. Oakley, A. Hougaard (eds.). Amsterdam, pp. 27−50.   Google Scholar

Dancygier, B. (2008): The text and the story: Levels of blending in fictional narratives. [In:] Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction. T. Oakley, A. Hougaard (eds.). Amsterdam, pp. 51−78.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G. (1994): Mental Spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge MA.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G. (1997): Mappings in Language and Thought. Cambridge.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G. (2008): How Compression Gives Rise to Metaphor and Metonymy, , access: 05.09 2010.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G., Turner M. (1998): Conceptual integration networks. „Cognitive Science” 22(1), pp. 133−187.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G., Turner M. (1998): Polysemy and conceptual blending, , access: 13.05.2010.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G., Turner M. (1999): Metonymy and conceptual integration. [In:] Metonymy in Language and Thought 4. K. U. Panther, G. Radden (eds.). Amsterdam, pp. 77−90.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G., Turner M. (2000): Compression and global insight. „Cognitive Linguistics” 11, pp. 283−304.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G., Turner M. (2002): The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G., Turner M. (2006): Mental spaces. Conceptual integration networks. [In:] Cognitive Linguistics. Basic Readings. D. Geeraerts (ed.). Berlin, pp. 303−371.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G., Turner M. (2008a): The origin of language as a product of the evolution of Modern Cognition, , access: 13.05.2010.   Google Scholar

Fauconnier G., Turner (2008b): Rethinking Metaphor. [In:] Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought. R. Gibbs (ed.). New York, pp. 53−66.   Google Scholar

Gibbs, R. W. Jr. (2000): Making good psychology out of blending. „Cognitive Linguistics” 11(3/4), pp. 347−258.   Google Scholar

Handl S., Schmid H.-J. (2011): Windows to the Mind: Metaphor, Metonymy and Conceptual Blending. Berlin.   Google Scholar

Harder P. (2005): Blending and polarization: Cognition under pressure. „Journal of Pragmatics” 37, pp. 1636−1652.   Google Scholar

Hougaard A. (2005): Conceptual disintegration and blending in interactional sequences: A discussion of new phenomena, processes vs. products, and methodology. „Journal of Pragmatics” 37, pp. 1653−1685.   Google Scholar

Hougaard A. (2008): Compression in Interaction. [In:] Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction. T. Oakley, A. Hougaard (eds.). Amsterdam, pp. 179−208.   Google Scholar

Hougaard A. R., Hougaard G. R. (2009): Fused bodies: sense-making as a phenomenon of interacting, knowledgeable, social bodies. [In:] Trends in Linguistics. Language and Social Cognition. Expression of the Social Mind. H. Pishwa (ed.). Berlin, pp. 47−78.   Google Scholar

Hougaard G. R. (2008): “Mental spaces” and “blending” in discourse and interaction: A response. [In:] Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction. T. Oakley, A. Hougaard (eds.). Amsterdam, pp. 247−250.   Google Scholar

Jabłońska-Hood. J. (2015): A Conceptual Blending Theory of Humour. Selected British Comedy Productions in Focus. Frankfurt a. Main.   Google Scholar

Libura A. (2010): Teoria przestrzeni mentalnych i integracji pojęciowej. Struktura modelu i jego funkcjonalność. Wrocław.   Google Scholar

Libura A.: Kto, komu i dlaczego grób kopie, czyli o sposobach analizy semantycznej zwrotu „kopać sobie grób”, , access: 15.02.2019.   Google Scholar

McCubbins M. D., Turner M. (2013): Concepts of Law. „Southern California Law Review” 86(3), pp. 517−572.   Google Scholar

Oakley T., Hougaard A. (2008): Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction. Amsterdam.   Google Scholar

Pascual E. (2008): Fictive interaction blends in everyday life and courtroom settings. [In:] Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction. T. Oakley, A. Hougaard (eds). Amsterdam, pp. 79−108.   Google Scholar

Ritchie L. D. (2004): Lost in “conceptual space”: Metaphors of conceptual integration. „Metaphor and Symbol” 19(1), pp. 31−50.   Google Scholar

Steen F., Turner M. (2014): Multimodal Construction Grammar. [In:] Language and the Creative Mind. M. Borkent, B. Dancygier, J. Hinnell (eds.). Stanford, CA, pp. 255−274.   Google Scholar

Tendhal M., Gibbs R. W. (2008): Complementary perspectives on metaphor: Cognitive Linguistics and relevance theory, , access: 10.11.2018.   Google Scholar

Tomassello M. (1995): Joint Attention as Social Cognition. [In:] Joint Attention: its Origin and Role in Development. Ch. Moore, P. Dunham (eds.). Mahwah−New York, pp. 103−130.   Google Scholar

Turner M. (2010): Blending Box Experiments, Build 1.0., , access: 10.02.2014.   Google Scholar

Turner M. (2014): The Origin of Ideas: Blending, Creativity, and the Human Spark. New York.   Google Scholar

Turner M. (2015): Blending in Language and Communication. [In:] Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. E. Dabrowska, D. Divjak (eds.). Berlin.   Google Scholar


Published
2019-11-06

Cited by

Jabłońska-Hood, J. (2019). Teoria integracji pojęciowej – dar niebios czy przekleństwo? Próba ewaluacji z perspektywy językoznawstwa kognitywnego. Prace Językoznawcze, 21(4), 31–58. https://doi.org/10.31648/pj.4689

Joanna Jabłońska-Hood 
Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej w Lublinie
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6927-4021



License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Access to the electronic edition of the journal is open (open access). It does not require any fees, logging in or providing personal data. Every person, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, nationality, faith or political opinion, may read articles published in "Prace Językoznawcze", download versions of texts in PDF file format, identical to the printed version, and submit for publication texts of their authorship, concerning linguistic issues and meeting editorial substantive and editorial requirements and academic ethical standards binding in science.

Authors of texts may place PDF files with their texts or the entire issue of a journal on scientific Internet portals, indicating the source of the text. The number of PDF files to be used is unlimited. It is forbidden to use the texts commercially or to derive material benefits from them. The Editorial Board has the right to publish the received texts in printed and electronic editions and to disseminate their entirety as well as abstracts and keywords on the website of the journal, the publishing platform of the University of Warmia and Mazury, in printed editions and in Internet scientific databases.