Cover not available
Article published In:
Metaphor and the Social World
Vol. 11:1 (2021) ► pp.71–97

Metaphorical blending in complex proverbs

A case study

 | Cadi Ayyad University
Metaphor-based accounts of expressions involving a set of metaphors do not indicate how complex meaning is generated. For instance, meaning of the expression ‘this surgeon is a butcher’ is taken to arise from one metaphor: a person who performs actions with certain characteristics is a member of a profession known for those characteristics (Lakoff, 2008). But this metaphor does not explain its negative meaning. Blending Theory, in contrast, offers a convincing solution to this issue. Notwithstanding, it regards the expression as nonmetaphorical. I aim to combine Metaphor Theory and Blending Theory into a broad approach that best describes complex metaphorical expressions. I will apply it, first, to ‘this surgeon is a butcher’ and, second, to a pair of related proverbs: ‘God is in the details’ and ‘the devil is in the details’. Meanings of these proverbs will be assumed to emerge from three integration networks. Each operation uses two metaphors as inputs and yields a blend, comprising a new metaphor and a coded illocutionary force. The new metaphor structures their meanings, whereas the illocutionary force determines their conditions of use. The proverbs will be shown to behave, paradoxically, both as synonyms and antonyms.
Keywords: proverbs, conceptual metaphor, blending, metaphoric integration, complex meaning, synonymy, antonymy
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical flexibility
    • 2.1Conceptual metaphor theory
    • 2.2Blending theory
    • 2.3Towards a broad approach
  • 3.Synonymy in the field of proverbs
    • 3.1How conceptual metaphors motivate synonymy in proverbs
    • 3.2Three main lines for research on synonymy
  • 4.A case study. A special pair of related proverbs
    • 4.1A metaphor-based account: Some limitations
    • 4.2Three distinct conceptual integration networks
    • 4.3Illocutionary forces are prompts for different categories of meaning
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 8 September 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.19004.lem
References (63)
References
Alverson, H. (1994). Semantics and experience: Universal metaphors of time in English, Mandarin, Hindi, and Sesotho. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Andersson, D. (2013). Understanding figurative proverbs: A model based on conceptual blending. Folklore, 1241, 28–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowdle, B. F., & Gentner, D. (2005). The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 1121, 193–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S. (2001). Semantic leaps. Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cram, D. (1983 [1994]). The linguistic status of the proverb. In W. Mieder (Ed.), Wise words: Essays on the proverb (pp. 73–98). New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics. An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G. (1985 [1994]). Mental Spaces. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Lakoff, G. (2009). On metaphor and blending. Cognitive Semiotics, 51, 393–399. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (1996). Blending as a central process of grammar. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse, and language (pp. 113–130). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
(1998). Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 221, 33–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000). Compression and global insight. Cognitive Linguistics, 111, 283–304.Google Scholar
(2002). The way we think. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
(2003). Polysemy and conceptual blending. In B. Nerlich, V. Herman, Z. Todd & D. Clarke (Eds.), Polysemy: Patterns of meaning in mind and language (pp. 79–94). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D., & Bowdle, B. F. (2001). Convention, form, and figurative language processing. Metaphor and Symbol, 161, 223–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). Metaphor as structure-mapping. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 109–128). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. (1984). Literal meaning and psychological theory. Cognitive Science, 81, 275–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2006). Embodiment and cognitive science. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2011). Are ‘deliberate’ metaphors really deliberate? A question of human consciousness and action. Metaphor and the Social World, 11, 26–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., & Beitel, D. (1995). What proverb understanding reveals about how people think. Psychological Bulletin, 11, 133–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Bogdanovitch, J., Sykes, J., & Barr, D. (1997). Metaphor in idiom comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 371, 141–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Buchalter, D., Moise, J., & Farrar, W. (1993). Literal meaning and figurative language. Discourse Processes, 161, 387–403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., & Chen, E. (2018). Metaphor and the automatic mind. Metaphor and the Social World, 81, 40–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., & Colston, H. L. (2012). Interpreting figurative meaning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., & O’Brien, J. (1990). Idioms and mental imagery: The metaphorical motivation for idiomatic meaning. Cognition, 361, 35–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, S. (2008). How metaphors create categories – quickly. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 67–83). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, S., & Keysar, B. (1990). Understanding metaphorical comparisons: Beyond similarity. Psychological Review, 971, 3–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1993). How metaphors work. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (2nd ed.) (pp. 401–424). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, S., McGlone, M., & Manfredi, D. (1997). Property attribution in metaphor comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 361, 50–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, S., & McGlone, M. S. (1999). When love is not a journey: What metaphors mean. Journal of Pragmatics, 311, 1541–1558. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grady, J., Oakley, T., & Coulson, S. (1999). Blending and metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs & G. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in cognitive linguistics (pp. 101–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Honeck, R. (1997). A proverb in mind. The cognitive science of proverbial wit and wisdom. London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B. (1973). Toward a theory of proverb meaning. Proverbium, 221, 821–827.Google Scholar
Kleiber, G. (1994). Nominales. Essai de sémantique référentielle. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
(1999). Les proverbes: des dénominations d’un type « très très spécial ». Langue Française, 1231, 52–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000). Sur le sens des proverbes. Langages, 1391, 39–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in culture: universality and variation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000). Metaphor and emotion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2011). Recent developments in metaphor theory: Are the new views rival ones? Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 91, 11–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Where metaphors come from: Reconsidering context in metaphor. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed.) (pp. 202–251). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). The neural theory of metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 17–38). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Neural social science. In D. D. Franks & J. H. Turner (Eds.), Handbook of neurosociology (pp. 9–25). New York & London: Dordrecht Heidelberg. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites, Vol. 1. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lemghari, E. (2017). Conceptual metaphors as motivation for proverbs lexical polysemy. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 31, 57–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). A metaphor-based account of semantic relations among proverbs. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, 61, 157–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manser, M., Fergusson, R., & Pickering, D. (2007). The facts on file dictionary of proverbs: Meanings and origins of more than 1,700 popular sayings (2nd ed.). New York: Infobase Publishing.Google Scholar
Michaux, C. (1999). Proverbes et structures stéréotypées. Langue Française, 11, 85–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milner, G. B. (1969). What is a proverb? New Society, 3321, 199–202.Google Scholar
Obelkevich, J. (1987). Proverbs and social history. In P. Burk & R. Porter (Eds.), The social history of language (pp.43–72). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Parades, A. (1970). Proverbs and ethnic stereotypes. Proverbium, 151, 505–507.Google Scholar
Pickering, D. (1997). Dictionary of proverbs. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Simpson, J., & Speake, J. (1998). The concise dictionary of proverbs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Steen, G. (2008). The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 231, 213–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). The contemporary theory of metaphor – now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 91, 26–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Developing, testing, and interpreting deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 901, 67–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, G. M. (1987). Proverbs and cultural models: An American psychology of problem solving. In D. Holland, & N. Quinn, (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 151–172). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yang, Y. X. (2015). The Explanatory power of conceptual integration theory for English proverbs. Studies in Literature and Language, 111, 52–56.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Konyratbayeva, Zhanar M., Ordaly Konyratbayev, Bekzhan Abdualyuly, Raikhan A. Doszhan & Gulmira Mahmut
2024. Ethnosemantic analysis of binary oppositions in toposystems. Semiotica 2024:258 ► pp. 93 ff. DOI logo
Lai, Huei-ling & Hsiao-Ling Hsu
2024. DOG and CAT proverbs. Review of Cognitive Linguistics DOI logo
Lemghari, El Mustapha
2024. Chapter 3. Contradiction in proverbs. In Proverbs within Cognitive Linguistics [Cognitive Linguistic Studies in Cultural Contexts, 16], ► pp. 65 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.