CONTEXT IN METAPHOR PRODUCTION Zoltán Kövecses Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest

Structure of the talk 1. Brief intro to CMT 2. Some preliminary notions of metaphorical meaning making and communication 3. Common contextual factors 4. Local and global contextual factors 5. Conclusions

1. Introducing CMT Conceptual metaphor theory (CMT) A IS B Mappings between A and B Metaphorical inferences from B Embodiment: meaningfulness ANGER IS FIRE

Linguistic metaphors: That kindled my ire. Those were inflammatory remarks. Smoke was coming out of his ears. She was burning with anger. He was spitting fire. The incident set the people ablaze with anger.

A conceptual metaphor is a systematic set of correspondences between two domains of experience. Source and target domain. Correlation between the two.

the cause of fire  the cause of anger causing the fire  causing the anger the thing on fire  the angry person the fire  the anger the intensity of fire  the intensity of anger Coherent view of fire mapped onto anger. Conceptualizing a domain.

Do metaphors arise from the body alone?

2. Some preliminary notions of metaphorical meaning making and communication Relevant context What is the appropriate context for the interpretation of this metaphor? Hearer’s perspective vs. Speaker’s perspective What is it in the present context that I can make use of to create the appropriate metaphor that the hearer can understand and will interpret correctly?

Referential scene and joint attention Based on Sinha (2007).

Joint action and common ground Using symbols with another interlocutor about a referential situation as part of a communicative exchange, that is, symbolically representing it for the other, is a form of “joint action” (Clark, 1996). using symbols (making utterances), just like other joint actions, assumes a large amount of shared knowledge between speaker and hearer. Clark (1996) calls this “common ground.”

3. Common contextual factors Knowledge about the main elements of the discourse Speaker, Hearer, Topic „You’re documenting something that was never intended to live this long. You never intended to live this long.” Frank Jump, New York City photographer surviving aids despite predictions to the contrary is for the old mural advertisements to survive their expected “life span”

Common contextual factors Surrounding discourse – cotext „The Americanization of Japanese car industry shifts into higher gear.” (USA Today) [showing „contempt” for the law] which helped to tilt the balance – and Mr Hain – over the edge (The Times)

Common contextual factors Previous discourse on the same topic Tony Blair example, from Semino (2008): I can only go one way. I’ve not got a reverse gear. progress is motion forward but when you’re on the edge of a cliff it is good to have a reverse gear

Common contextual factors Ideology Conservatives: the nation is a strict father family Liberals: the nation is a nurturant parent family (Lakoff)

Common contextual factors Physical environment Flora, fauna, landscape, weather conditions, sounds, etc. British English vs. American English Dutch vs. Afrikaans (Dirven)

Common contextual factors Social situation gender, class, politeness, work, education, social organizations, social structure, etc. American men and women. Frontier as virgin land vs. garden (Kolodny)

Common contextual factors Cultural situation Anger metaphors. Hot fluid, fire in Europe (Grondelears and Geeraerts) Gas in China (Ning Yu)

Common contextual factors History American vs. Hungarian history Conceptualization of life. LIFE IS A PRECIOUS COMMODITY / A GAME LIFE IS A STRUGGLE / A COMPROMISE (Köves)

Common contextual factors Concerns and interests Action-oriented vs. passive / hedonistic take a shower vs. have a shower (Wierzbicka) Professional interests teachers, doctors, athletes use of metaphors

Common contextual factors The body as context Primary metaphors – embodiment - universality (Grady, Lakoff, Johnson) The „local body” – variation Casasanto: MORAL IS RIGHT / LEFT

Common contextual factors The conceptual system as context: Concerns and interests; ideology; history; + What we have in the metaphorical conceptual system can influence the choice of particular metaphors (either conceptual or linguistic). defend: argument is war travel: I've lived a life that's full I traveled each and every highway And more, much more than this, I did it my way

4. Context types Summary of types Situational context Discourse context Conceptual-cognitive context Bodily context Why these four?

Context types and contextual factors SITUATIONAL CONTEXT DISCOURSE CONTEXT BODILY CONTEXT CONCEPTUAL-COGNITIVE CONTEXT Physical environment Surrounding discourse (co-text) Correlations in experience Metaphorical conceptual system Cultural situation Previous discourse Bodily conditions Ideology Social situation Knowledge about speaker, topic, hearer Body specificities Concerns and interests   Dominant forms of discourse History

Local and global contextual factors Local context: involves the specific knowledge conceptualizers have about some aspect of the immediate communicative situation Global context: consists of their general knowledge concerning the nonimmediate situation that characterizes a community. The two can be combined. They form a gradient.

Summary

5. Conclusions Conceptual metaphor theory: Many metaphors in real discourse are „context-induced” metaphors. Theories of context: Context involves more than just linguistic and situational context: the totality of our experiences – direct or represented. Theories of cognition: Cognition is grounded in multiple ways, including our situational, linguistic, bodily, and cognitive-conceptual experiences and knowledge.

Much of this work comes from WHERE METAPHORS COME FROM. RECONSIDERING CONTEXT IN METAPHOR. Oxford University Press. 2015. THANK YOU!!