scholarly journals Translating emotion-related metaphors: A cognitive approach

ExELL ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 87-101
Author(s):  
Jasmina Hanić ◽  
Tanja Pavlović ◽  
Alma Jahić
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Translation Studies ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Cognitive Approach ◽  
Source Domain ◽  
Language And Culture ◽  
Source Language ◽  
Conceptual Domain ◽  
Domain Source

Abstract The paper explores the existence of cognitive linguistics principles in translation of emotion-related metaphorical expressions. Cognitive linguists (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Lakoff, 1987) define metaphor as a mechanism used for understanding one conceptual domain, target domain, in terms of another conceptual domain, source domain, through sets of correspondences between these two domains. They also claim that metaphor is omnipresent in ordinary discourse. Cognitive linguists, however, also realized that certain metaphors can be recognized and identified in different languages and cultures whereas some are language- and culture-specific. This paper focuses on similarities and variations in metaphors which have recently become popular within the discipline of Translation Studies. Transferring and translating metaphors from one language to another can represent a challenge for translators due to a multi-faceted process of translation including both linguistic and non-linguistic elements. A number of methods and procedures have been developed to overcome potential difficulties in translating metaphorical expressions, with the most frequent ones being substitution, paraphrase, or deletion. The analysis shows the transformation of metaphorical expressions from one language into another and the procedures involving underlying conceptual metaphors, native speaker competence, and the influence of the source language.

scholarly journals Hyperbolic markers in modeling hyperbole: a scenario-based account

2021 ◽  
Vol 85 ◽  
pp. 61-71
Author(s):  
Carla Ovejas Ramírez
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Meaning Construction ◽  
The Other ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Real Situation ◽  
Source Domain ◽  
The Real ◽  
Theoretical Context ◽  
Hypothetical Scenario

This article discusses hyperbolic markers in modeling hyperbole from the perspective of a scenario-based account of language use within the framework of Cognitive Linguistics. In this view, hyperbole is seen as a mapping across two conceptual domains (Peña y Ruiz de Mendoza, 2017), a source domain, here relabeled as the magnified scenario, which contains a hypothetical unrealistic situation based on exaggeration, and a target domain or observable scenario which depicts the real situation addressed by the hyperbolic expression. Since the hypothetical scenario is a magnified version of the observable scenario, the mapping contains source-target matches in varying degrees of resemblance. Within this theoretical context, the article explores resources available to speakers for the construction of magnified scenarios leading to hyperbolic interpretation. Among such resources, we find hyperbole markers and the setting up of domains of reference. Finally, the article also discusses hyperbole blockers, which cancel out the activity of the other hyperbolic meaning construction mechanisms.

Algorithms as Structural Metaphors: Reflections on the Digital-Cultural Feedback Loop

Leonardo ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-177
Author(s):  
Romy Achituv
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Loop ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Conceptual Domain ◽  
Cross Domain ◽  
Domain Mapping

The author argues that the application of digital algorithmic structures to analog media may illuminate hidden values and perceptions inherent in the digital technologies themselves. The paper sets out the understanding of metaphor in contemporary cognitive linguistics, in which metaphor is perceived as a conceptual device that creates meaning through cross-domain mapping—that is, partially mapping (projecting) one conceptual domain onto another. While the projected domain is intended to elucidate the target domain, the author argues that metaphor itself is self-reflexive—drawing attention to characteristics of the projected domain.

Interpreting Biblical Metaphors: Introducing the Invariance Principle

2015 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-389
Author(s):  
Kevin Chau
Keyword(s):  
Invariance Principle ◽  
Logical Structure ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Cognitive Approach ◽  
Source Domain ◽  
Extended Analysis ◽  
The Many

The scholarship concerning biblical metaphor has profited widely from the conceptual (cognitive) approach to metaphor, but a key principle from this approach, the Invariance Principle, has been widely overlooked as a valuable tool for the interpretation of biblical metaphors. The Invariance Principle allows biblical scholars to evaluate logically and with consistency the many varied interpretations that are often generated from exegetically difficult metaphors. This principle stipulates that the logical relationships of a metaphor’s source domain (the metaphorical elements) must correspond to the structure of logical relationships in the target domain (the literal elements). An extended analysis of the partridge metaphor in the riddle-based proverb of Jer 17:11 demonstrates how the Invariance Principle can be used to evaluate previous interpretations and to provide logical structure for generating a fresh interpretation to this proverb.

scholarly journals A Study on Chinese TALK Metaphor from Corpus-based Approach

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 346
Author(s):  
Ruifeng Luo
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Empirical Method ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Knowledge Resources ◽  
Source Domain ◽  
Linguistic Research ◽  
Basic Language ◽  
Language Knowledge ◽  
Actual Use ◽  
Concrete Entity

Metaphor is a vitally important concept in Cognitive Linguistics and refers to the mapping from source domain to the target domain. It is the mapping from the concrete entity to the abstract one, through which we can understand the process of men’s mental cognition to handle abstract things through specific ones and has been researching by many linguistic scholars by means of traditional methods such as introspection. The Corpus method is a newly utilized and empirical method to conduct linguistic research and contains the language materials of real and the actual use of language, and corpus is the carrier of basic language knowledge resources based on the computer. The real corpus must be processed (analysis and processing), in order to become useful resources. This paper takes advantage of CCL Corpus(Center for Chinese Linguistics Corpus) which is the biggest Chinese Corpus in China constructed by Beijing University to investigate TAKL metaphor and conduct the empirical research to make metaphor research more objective and convincing.

Translation Studies and the cognitive theory of metaphor

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 262-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Samaniego Fernández
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Cognitive Theory ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Translation Studies ◽  
Main Concern ◽  
Translation Theory ◽  
Cognitive Approach ◽  
True Nature ◽  
Descriptive Translation Studies ◽  
Metaphor And Metonymy

Although metaphor has always been a main concern in TS, little has been done to apply a far-raging cognitive theory of metaphor and metonymy to translation. As a rule, the few authors that have tried to deal with it are eclectic in their cognitive approach and show a prescriptive bias as concerns translation theory. However, thanks to the influence of disciplines like Cognitive Linguistics, among others, Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS) can undertake a more realistic study of metaphor translation which reflects the true nature of metaphor and the underlying regularities of its interlinguistic transfer, including cases excluded a priori by traditional studies for being ‘unfaithful’, ‘anomalous’ or ‘incorrect’ renderings.

scholarly journals Aiming for Cognitive Equivalence – Mental Models as a Tertium Comparationis for Translation and Empirical Semantics

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pawel Sickinger
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Translation Studies ◽  
Empirical Method ◽  
Mental Processes ◽  
Informant Agreement ◽  
Dynamic Equivalence ◽  
Reader Reception ◽  
Lexical Field ◽  
Tertium Comparationis

This paper introduces my concept of cognitive equivalence (cf. Mandelblit, 1997), an attempt to reconcile elements of Nida’s dynamic equivalence with recent innovations in cognitive linguistics and cognitive psychology, and building on the current focus on translators’ mental processes in translation studies (see e.g. Göpferich et al., 2009, Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, 2010). My approach shares its general impetus with Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk’s concept of re-conceptualization, but is independently derived from findings in cognitive linguistics and simulation theory (see e.g. Langacker, 2008; Feldman, 2006; Barsalou, 1999; Zwaan, 2004). Against this background, I propose a model of translation processing focused on the internal simulation of reader reception and the calibration of these simulations to achieve similarity between ST and TT impact. The concept of cognitive equivalence is exemplarily tested by exploring a conceptual / lexical field (MALE BALDNESS) through the way that English, German and Japanese lexical items in this field are linked to matching visual-conceptual representations by native speaker informants. The visual data gathered via this empirical method can be used to effectively triangulate the linguistic items involved, enabling an extra-linguistic comparison across languages. Results show that there is a reassuring level of inter-informant agreement within languages, but that the conceptual domain for BALDNESS is linguistically structured in systematically different ways across languages. The findings are interpreted as strengthening the call for a cognition-focused, embodied approach to translation.

“The suburbs are exploding”

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 103-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefanie Peeters
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Metaphor ◽  
The Other ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Conceptual Metaphor Theory ◽  
Source Domain ◽  
Conceptual Domain ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Metaphor Theory ◽  
The One

Ever since Lakoff and Johnson (1980) introduced their Conceptual Metaphor Theory, metaphors have been seen as important ‘framing devices’: as metaphor involves constructing one conceptual domain in terms of another, the choice of the latter (or source domain) affects how the former (or target domain) is represented. Based on a corpus of French written press reporting, this article will, on the one hand, show that the notion of ‘framing’ is, in line with the findings of Conceptual Metaphor Theory, useful for analysing metaphors as well as for indicating their constructive force. On the other hand, however, this article will defend the idea that an analysis of metaphors in terms of frames does not always suffice and needs to be complemented. Following a recent strand in metaphor studies that shows an increasing awareness of the importance of studying metaphors as linguistic and discursive phenomena (cf. Cameron, 2003; Semino, 2008), we will claim that a more co-text-oriented metaphor approach has to be adopted to account for the nuances and evaluative associations metaphors are able to convey.

scholarly journals Translation of Metaphor from the Perspective of Cognitive Linguistics

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. p12
Author(s):  
Li Chunying
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Daily Life ◽  
Cultural Meaning ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Straightforward Manner ◽  
Source Domain ◽  
Direct Translation ◽  
Translation Strategy ◽  
Free Translation ◽  
Image Schema

Metaphor not only contains the characteristic connotation of the language itself, but also the words that cannot be expressed in a straightforward manner. The traditional metaphor view holds that metaphor is only used to beautify and modify language, but cognitive linguistics regards metaphor as a mapping of thinking, mainly through people’s existing experience and knowledge to understand new things, that is to say, from a known concept domain to understand another unknown concept domain. Therefore, metaphor can be regarded as a medium for establishing connection between the source domain and the target domain, and it also plays an important role in our study and daily life. This paper analyzes the translation of metaphor from the perspective of cognitive linguistics. Through the translation of various metaphors, we find that in the process of metaphor translation, we need to distinguish the source schema from the image schema metaphor; also it is necessary to distinguish the type of text; as well as the cultural meaning behind the text and the value to be conveyed. The translation strategy of direct translation or free translation, naturalization or alienation is used to translate the target domain.

scholarly journals A cognitive analysis of Proverbs 1:20–33

2019 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pieter M. Venter
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Cognitive Analysis ◽  
Cognitive Approach ◽  
Metaphoric Language

This article uses cognitive linguistics and an embodied cognitive approach to analyse the passage of Proverbs 1:20–33. The poem, presented as a prophetic threat, uses metaphoric language to depict the dialogue between personified wisdom and metaphorised human beings. The analysis indicates that there is a coherence of metaphors in the target domain shared by both metaphorised source domains of wisdom and the hearers. Using bodily metaphors it stresses the need of wisdom to be internalised by men.

The inflexibility of invariance

1999 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Stockwell
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Alternative Solution ◽  
Target Domain ◽  
Cognitive Poetics ◽  
Source Domain ◽  
George Lakoff ◽  
Mapping Process ◽  
Invariance Hypothesis ◽  
Metaphorical Mapping ◽  
Linguistic Basis

The Invariance Hypothesis was originally proposed by George Lakoff and Mark Turner in 1989. Since then, a range of versions has evolved so that there are currently both strong and weak statements of it. In general, the Invariance Hypothesis suggests a constraint on the information carried in a metaphorical mapping, as modelled in cognitive linguistics. It seeks to preserve the receiver’s knowledge about the target domain of a metaphor, so that the target retains its basic conceptual integrity in the mapping process. In other words, only that amount of the source domain that is consistent with the preservation of the target is mapped. Invariance is proposed to resolve a perceived problem in accounting for some metaphors, in order to sustain the claims of cognitive linguistics to be a useful and applicable model of language. However, I believe that this is mistaken, and that acceptance of the Invariance Hypothesis is itself a threat to the value of cognitive linguistics, as applied to literature (where it has come to be called cognitive poetics or cognitive stylistics). I will use literary examples to argue for the rejection of the Invariance Hypothesis, which curtails the perception of metaphor as creative, and cannot explain its capacity for reference to a new sense beyond source and target. This limitation is counter to the larger claims of cognitive linguistics concerning the linguistic basis and embodiment of culture and perception. Finally, I suggest an alternative solution, arising from the analysis of literary examples, which preserves the general value of cognitive linguistics while escaping the inflexibility of invariance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document