This paper explores the way that teachers use metaphors to think and talk about grammar and what this means for classroom practice. It does so by employing conceptual metaphor theory to analyse teachers’ metalinguistic discourse, focusing particularly on construals of grammar and grammar teaching. Based on a series of interviews with 24 UK-based secondary school English teachers, the findings suggest that teachers make extensive use of metaphor, often mapping the abstract domain of grammar with concrete domains such as construction material and rulebook. The discipline of English studies itself was often construed as a series of separate parts, with grammar occupying a physical space that was often seen as disconnected to other aspects of the curriculum. The findings are discussed in relation to sociocultural contexts, including the current climate of English teaching in the UK, educational policy discourse, public and professional views on language, and the place of grammar on the curriculum.
{"title":"Resources not rulebooks","authors":"I. Cushing","doi":"10.1075/msw.18022.cus","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.18022.cus","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper explores the way that teachers use metaphors to think and talk about grammar and what this means for\u0000 classroom practice. It does so by employing conceptual metaphor theory to analyse teachers’ metalinguistic discourse, focusing\u0000 particularly on construals of grammar and grammar teaching. Based on a series of interviews with 24 UK-based secondary school\u0000 English teachers, the findings suggest that teachers make extensive use of metaphor, often mapping the abstract domain of\u0000 grammar with concrete domains such as construction material and rulebook. The discipline of English\u0000 studies itself was often construed as a series of separate parts, with grammar occupying a physical space that was often\u0000 seen as disconnected to other aspects of the curriculum. The findings are discussed in relation to sociocultural contexts,\u0000 including the current climate of English teaching in the UK, educational policy discourse, public and professional views on\u0000 language, and the place of grammar on the curriculum.","PeriodicalId":51936,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and the Social World","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47646021","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article reviews The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language 97811387753679781315672953
本文回顾了《劳特利奇隐喻与语言手册》97811387753679781315672953
{"title":"E. Semino & Z. Demjén (Eds.) (2017). The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language","authors":"K. Y. R. D. Lavalette","doi":"10.1075/msw.19007.lav","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.19007.lav","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language 97811387753679781315672953","PeriodicalId":51936,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and the Social World","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43850055","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article reviews Creativity in English as a Lingua Franca: Idiom and Metaphor 978-1-5015-1688-7
《英语中的创造力：习语与隐喻》978-1-5015-1688-7
{"title":"Marie-Luise Pitzl (2018). Creativity in English as a Lingua Franca: Idiom and Metaphor","authors":"Fiona MacArthur","doi":"10.1075/msw.19008.mac","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.19008.mac","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews Creativity in English as a Lingua Franca: Idiom and Metaphor 978-1-5015-1688-7","PeriodicalId":51936,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and the Social World","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46720019","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper analyzes three sources of discourse on immigration in the United States: congressional debates from the 1920s representing two polarized sides, a speech by President Obama, and a speech by President Trump. The goal of this analysis was to explore how the conceptual metaphors used in discussing immigration may have changed over the past century, in order to gain insight into the current polarization surrounding this topic. Results reveal striking similarities between Trump’s rhetoric and metaphorical framing and the 1920s anti-immigration side’s arguments, in that both situate the United States as a victim of immigration. In contrast, although there are fewer similarities between Obama’s metaphors and metaphorical frames and those used by earlier supporters of immigration, the claim that immigrants are a benefit to the United States remains constant.
{"title":"Cattle, progress, and a victimized nation","authors":"Graham Smith","doi":"10.1075/msw.18011.smi","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.18011.smi","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper analyzes three sources of discourse on immigration in the United States: congressional debates from the\u0000 1920s representing two polarized sides, a speech by President Obama, and a speech by President Trump. The goal of this analysis\u0000 was to explore how the conceptual metaphors used in discussing immigration may have changed over the past century, in order to\u0000 gain insight into the current polarization surrounding this topic. Results reveal striking similarities between Trump’s rhetoric\u0000 and metaphorical framing and the 1920s anti-immigration side’s arguments, in that both situate the United States as a victim of\u0000 immigration. In contrast, although there are fewer similarities between Obama’s metaphors and metaphorical frames and those used\u0000 by earlier supporters of immigration, the claim that immigrants are a benefit to the United States remains constant.","PeriodicalId":51936,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and the Social World","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49422281","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Across languages, the head and sexualized body parts (i.e., vagina, breasts, penis, testicles) are conceptualized in a number of ways, for example as fruits and vegetables: heads are conceptualized as cabbages, vaginas as figs, breasts as melons, penises as carrots, and testicles as olives, to only name a few. The present study draws on the theories of conceptual metaphor and metonymy by Lakoff & Johnson (1980) to analyze the conceptualizations of the five body parts as fruits and vegetables in English, Spanish and French. For this purpose, a slang dictionary-based database of 184 conceptualizations was compiled. Research on the head and sexualized body parts is particularly interesting as they represent the core of intellect and sexuality respectively, which makes them prone to being conceptualized in a variety of expressive and euphemistic ways. The results of the present study show that female body parts are primarily conceptualized as sweet fruits, while the penis as well as the head are mostly understood of as savory vegetables. This finding suggests a case of gender stereotyping, whereby sweet-natured women are denied intelligence as the head is stereotypically seen as a male body part (i.e., as a savory vegetable).
{"title":"Gender stereotyping","authors":"Kristina Dziallas","doi":"10.1075/msw.18007.dzi","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.18007.dzi","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Across languages, the head and sexualized body parts (i.e., vagina, breasts, penis, testicles) are conceptualized\u0000 in a number of ways, for example as fruits and vegetables: heads are conceptualized as cabbages, vaginas as figs, breasts as\u0000 melons, penises as carrots, and testicles as olives, to only name a few. The present study draws on the theories of conceptual\u0000 metaphor and metonymy by Lakoff & Johnson (1980) to analyze the conceptualizations\u0000 of the five body parts as fruits and vegetables in English, Spanish and French. For this purpose, a slang dictionary-based\u0000 database of 184 conceptualizations was compiled. Research on the head and sexualized body parts is particularly interesting as\u0000 they represent the core of intellect and sexuality respectively, which makes them prone to being conceptualized in a variety of\u0000 expressive and euphemistic ways. The results of the present study show that female body parts are primarily conceptualized as\u0000 sweet fruits, while the penis as well as the head are mostly understood of as savory vegetables. This finding suggests a case of\u0000 gender stereotyping, whereby sweet-natured women are denied intelligence as the head is stereotypically seen as a male body part\u0000 (i.e., as a savory vegetable).","PeriodicalId":51936,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and the Social World","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46675186","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The concept of ‘metaphorical framing’ is currently witnessing renewed interest in metaphor research, but for discourse-oriented work it remains a problematic analytical tool given the variety of senses it has been employed with. The present paper considers an approach to metaphorical frames in discourse, by proposing the notion of discursive metaphorical frames to capture the complex, systematic metaphorical representations prominent across discourse. The perspective follows the direction of recent integrated approaches to metaphor, frames and discourse (e.g., Burgers et al., 2016; Cameron et al., 2009; Semino et al., 2016) and is proposed as particularly suited to studying public discourses, as ideologically laden, multi-textual and multi-voiced. The approach is illustrated through an analysis of metaphorical representations of language in Serbian and British newspapers. The analysis reveals the deeper social ideologies underlying the newspaper discussions on language in Serbia and Great Britain, including similarities as well as notable differences, pointing to the diverse ideological processes shaping contemporary media metadiscourses. The results are also discussed in relation to the adopted approach, to frames of presentation, (sub)domain representations and the dynamics of metaphor use in public discourse.
{"title":"Discursive metaphorical frames in newspaper texts on language change","authors":"Ksenija Bogetić","doi":"10.1075/MSW.17013.BOG","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/MSW.17013.BOG","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The concept of ‘metaphorical framing’ is currently witnessing renewed interest in metaphor research, but for\u0000 discourse-oriented work it remains a problematic analytical tool given the variety of senses it has been employed with. The\u0000 present paper considers an approach to metaphorical frames in discourse, by proposing the notion of discursive\u0000 metaphorical frames to capture the complex, systematic metaphorical representations prominent across discourse. The\u0000 perspective follows the direction of recent integrated approaches to metaphor, frames and discourse (e.g., Burgers et al., 2016; Cameron et al., 2009; Semino et al., 2016) and is proposed as particularly suited to studying public\u0000 discourses, as ideologically laden, multi-textual and multi-voiced. The approach is illustrated through an analysis of\u0000 metaphorical representations of language in Serbian and British newspapers. The analysis reveals the deeper social ideologies\u0000 underlying the newspaper discussions on language in Serbia and Great Britain, including similarities as well as notable\u0000 differences, pointing to the diverse ideological processes shaping contemporary media metadiscourses. The results are also\u0000 discussed in relation to the adopted approach, to frames of presentation, (sub)domain representations and the dynamics of metaphor\u0000 use in public discourse.","PeriodicalId":51936,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and the Social World","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46945044","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Although the Conceptual Metaphor Approach (CMA) has been claimed to be effective with respect to English idiom acquisition for EFL/ESL learners at elementary level, the claim awaits further investigation with empirical evidence (Beréndi, Csábi, & Kövecses, 2008; Boers, 2004). How CMA benefits these learners’ idiom acquisition and in what way it can best be implemented in their classrooms remain unknown. This study addresses these issues and sheds light on the effectiveness of CMA through a quasi-experiment, in which metaphor is exploited as an intervention that explicitly introduces the connection between idioms and the underlying Conceptual Metaphor theme. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected from 43 participants through questionnaires, tests and a semi-structured interview with the instructor. Results from an immediate post-test showed that participants under CMA scored higher than their counterparts who were undergoing a Memorizing Translation Approach, though the difference was statistically insignificant (p = 0.08). A one-week delayed post-test found that CMA facilitated idiom acquisition at a statistically significant level (p < .05). Findings from participants’ drawings and the semi-structured interview showed that CMA had contributed to an engaging and active learning experience. Pedagogical implications of this study are discussed further.
{"title":"The effectiveness of the Conceptual Metaphor Approach to English idiom acquisition by young Chinese\u0000 learners","authors":"M. Pan","doi":"10.1075/MSW.17024.PAN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/MSW.17024.PAN","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Although the Conceptual Metaphor Approach (CMA) has been claimed to be effective with respect to English idiom\u0000 acquisition for EFL/ESL learners at elementary level, the claim awaits further investigation with empirical evidence (Beréndi, Csábi, & Kövecses, 2008; Boers,\u0000 2004). How CMA benefits these learners’ idiom acquisition and in what way it can best be implemented in their\u0000 classrooms remain unknown. This study addresses these issues and sheds light on the effectiveness of CMA through a\u0000 quasi-experiment, in which metaphor is exploited as an intervention that explicitly introduces the connection between idioms and\u0000 the underlying Conceptual Metaphor theme. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected from 43 participants through\u0000 questionnaires, tests and a semi-structured interview with the instructor. Results from an immediate post-test showed that\u0000 participants under CMA scored higher than their counterparts who were undergoing a Memorizing Translation Approach, though the\u0000 difference was statistically insignificant (p = 0.08). A one-week delayed post-test found that CMA facilitated\u0000 idiom acquisition at a statistically significant level (p < .05). Findings from participants’ drawings and the\u0000 semi-structured interview showed that CMA had contributed to an engaging and active learning experience. Pedagogical implications\u0000 of this study are discussed further.","PeriodicalId":51936,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and the Social World","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46255712","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper studies metaphor use in British Public Bill Committee debates. It focuses on the way in which legislators frame their arguments in metaphorical terms under the form of figurative analogies. Because these figurative analogies can be misleading by oversimplifying the issue under discussion, resisting them by putting forward counter-argumentation is a crucial and necessary skill. The purpose of this paper is to explore the phenomenon of countering figurative analogies in legislative debates, and to show that resistance to figurative analogies is a complex phenomenon comprising various types of criticisms to different types of metaphor. To this end, we present qualitative analyses of a number of case studies of resistance to figurative analogies found in the British Public Bill Committee debates on the Education Bill 2010–11 by employing the three-dimensional model of metaphor (Steen, 2011) and the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation (Van Eemeren, 2010).
{"title":"Figurative analogies and how they are resisted in British Public Bill Committee debates","authors":"K. Y. R. D. Lavalette, C. Andone, G. Steen","doi":"10.1075/MSW.17027.LAV","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/MSW.17027.LAV","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper studies metaphor use in British Public Bill Committee debates. It focuses on the way in which\u0000 legislators frame their arguments in metaphorical terms under the form of figurative analogies. Because these figurative analogies\u0000 can be misleading by oversimplifying the issue under discussion, resisting them by putting forward counter-argumentation is a\u0000 crucial and necessary skill. The purpose of this paper is to explore the phenomenon of countering figurative analogies in\u0000 legislative debates, and to show that resistance to figurative analogies is a complex phenomenon comprising various types of\u0000 criticisms to different types of metaphor. To this end, we present qualitative analyses of a number of case studies of resistance\u0000 to figurative analogies found in the British Public Bill Committee debates on the Education Bill 2010–11 by employing the\u0000 three-dimensional model of metaphor (Steen, 2011) and the pragma-dialectical theory of\u0000 argumentation (Van Eemeren, 2010).","PeriodicalId":51936,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and the Social World","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43461759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Veale, T., Shutova, E., Beigman Klebanov, B. (2016). Metaphor: A Computational\u0000 Perspective","authors":"David O’Reilly","doi":"10.1075/MSW.18033.ORE","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/MSW.18033.ORE","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51936,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and the Social World","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48798970","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gesture is aptly described as a “backdoor” to cognition (Sweetser, 2007, p. 203). Co-speech gesture has been shown to aid in the representation of abstract concepts (Parrill & Sweetser, 2004) and, specifically, encode metaphorical source domains (Cienki, 1998). This paper examines how co-speech gesture aligns with spoken and written narrative to support a spatially based representation of gender identity. Repeated gestural patterns include inward facing palms used to mime fictive category boundaries, gestural mapping of motion across metaphorical gender regions, manual deictic reference to interior and exterior self, and distancing from past gender assignment signaled through emblematic scare quotes. The data examined in this paper confirm the important role gesture plays in supplementing the instantiation of the metaphorical models that organize transgender speakers’ experience with and discussion of gender and transition.
手势被恰当地描述为认知的“后门”(Sweetser, 2007, p. 203)。共同语音手势已被证明有助于抽象概念的表征(Parrill & Sweetser, 2004)，特别是编码隐喻源域(Cienki, 1998)。本文研究了共同语言手势如何与口头和书面叙述对齐，以支持基于空间的性别认同表示。重复的手势模式包括向内的手掌，用来模仿虚构的类别边界，跨越隐喻性性别区域的运动手势映射，对内部和外部自我的手动指示性参考，以及通过象征性的恐吓引号表示的与过去性别分配的距离。本文研究的数据证实了手势在补充隐喻模型实例化方面的重要作用，这些隐喻模型组织了跨性别说话者对性别和过渡的体验和讨论。
{"title":"Gesturing the source domain","authors":"Jenny Lederer","doi":"10.1075/MSW.17016.LED","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/MSW.17016.LED","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Gesture is aptly described as a “backdoor” to cognition (Sweetser,\u0000 2007, p. 203). Co-speech gesture has been shown to aid in the representation of abstract concepts (Parrill & Sweetser, 2004) and, specifically, encode metaphorical source domains (Cienki, 1998). This paper examines how co-speech gesture aligns with spoken and written\u0000 narrative to support a spatially based representation of gender identity. Repeated gestural patterns include inward facing palms\u0000 used to mime fictive category boundaries, gestural mapping of motion across metaphorical gender regions, manual deictic reference\u0000 to interior and exterior self, and distancing from past gender assignment signaled through emblematic scare quotes. The data\u0000 examined in this paper confirm the important role gesture plays in supplementing the instantiation of the metaphorical models that\u0000 organize transgender speakers’ experience with and discussion of gender and transition.","PeriodicalId":51936,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and the Social World","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46547099","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：