Studies in Literature and Language
Three Core Controversies of Original Conceptual Metaphor Theory Revisited
Abstract
This article first introduces the main hypotheses of the original version of Conceptual Metaphor Theory (henceforth, abbreviated as CMT) presented in Metaphors We Live By. On this basis, it then evaluates its three controversial assumptions, referring to the research results of other influential CMT scholars. The three assumptions are: (1) metaphorical languages are possible because there exist metaphorical concepts which we can verify by their corresponding metaphorical expressions (language-concept-language circular reasoning); (2) conventional metaphors underlying literal expressions are the metaphors we live by and the object of CMT study while novel metaphors underlying figurative expressions are not the metaphors we live by since they lack systematic corresponding expressions (definition and scope of conceptual metaphors); (3) we understand the abstract target domain via the concrete source domain (unidirectional cross-domain mappings). In order to settle these tree controversies, future metaphor researchers should endeavor to find supporting evidences from multimodal manifestations, different languages and cultures and psychological experiments.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Bartlett, J. J., & Ruangjaroon, S. (2022). A war of words: Dissecting the foundational claims of CMT. Axiomathes, (32), 435–451.
El Refaie, E. (2019). Visual metaphor and embodiment in graphic illness narratives. New York: Oxford University Press.
Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the minds hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.
Forceville, C., & Urios-Aparisi, E. (Eds.) (2009). Multimodal metaphor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Gibbs Jr., R. W. (2022). Metaphorical experience contiguity or cross-domain mappings? Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 20(1), 7-32.
Grady, J. E. (1997). Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. (2008). The neural theory of metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp.17-38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press..
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Steen, G. J. (2013). The contemporary theory of metaphor—Now new and improved! In F. Gonzalvez-Garcia et al. (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy revisited beyond the contemporary theory of metaphor (pp.27-65). Amsterdam Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company..
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/12975
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Share us to: 
Online Submission: http://cscanada.org/index.php/sll/submission/wizard
Please send your manuscripts to sll@cscanada.net，or sll@cscanada.org for consideration. We look forward to receiving your work.
We only use three mailboxes as follows to deal with issues about paper acceptance, payment and submission of electronic versions of our journals to databases: caooc@hotmail.com; sll@cscanada.net; sll@cscanada.org
Articles published in Studies in Literature and Language are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).
STUDIES IN LITERATURE AND LANGUAGE Editorial Office
Address: 1055 Rue Lucien-L'Allier, Unit #772, Montreal, QC H3G 3C4, Canada.
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org
E-mail: office@cscanada.net; office@cscanada.org; caooc@hotmail.com
Copyright © 2010 Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture 
