Ontological Metaphors in Stories Written by Children

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Ali Masoumi
Maryam Kordbacheh Kordbacheh
Graduate Student in General Linguistics, Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies
Abstract
Metaphor in cognitive semantics is the fundamental mechanism of language and thought. By analyzing the representations of metaphor in language, we would discover the most significant processes of mind. Moreover, since it has been always fruitful for cognitive linguists to study acquisition and development of language, the authors of this paper decided to investigate the frequency and variation of conceptual metaphors that children use in their own stories. The reason behind selecting such data as the research corpus was that investigation on ontological metaphors in children’s literature reveals the manifestation and usage of such mechanisms by children. In order to achieve the above mentioned purpose, 60 pieces of scripts (including story, letter, summery, and poem) written by children were selected from Aroosak-e Sokhangoo[1], a monthly published magazine in Iran. Once the scripts were studied, the sentences containing conceptual metaphors were elicited and constituted the research corpus. Then the domains based on which the conceptual metaphors had been formed were determined and accordingly the representations were classified. Eventually, the statistics of the conceptual metaphors employed by children have been presented, showing that whether they have a tendency to cognitively use metaphor in their language or not. The outcome of this study provides information about the knowledge extent, high-frequent domains of conceptualization, and traces of emotional and cultural elements represented in the language of children.
 
[1]- meaning: talking doll

Keywords

- دبیرمقدم، م.(1378)، زبان‌شناسی نظری: پیدایش و تکوین دستور زایشی، تهران: انتشارات سخن.
----------(1374) «فعل مرکب در زبان فارسی»، مجله‌ زبان‌شناسی، س12، ش1 و 2، ص 2-46، (تاریخ انتشار 1376) ماهنامه‌ هنری، ادبی، فرهنگیِ عروسک سخنگو، تهران.
 
-Charteris-Black, J., (2004), Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis, New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
-Fauconnier, G., (2003), “Cognitive Linguistics”, In: Lynn Nadel (Ed.): Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science, Vol. 1, London: Nature Publishing Group.
-Fauconnier, G., and Turner, M., (2002), The way we think: conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities, New York: Basic Books.
-Gärdenfors, P., (1999), “Some Tenets of Cognitive Semantics”, In: Peter Gardenfors and Jens Allwood (Eds.): Cognitive Semantics: Meaning and Cognition, Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Co.
-Kovecses, Z., (2010), Metaphor, A Practical Introduction, (2nd Edition), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-Lakoff, G., (1993), “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor”, In Metaphor and Thought, (2nd Edition) Andrew Ortony (Ed.), 202–251. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M., (1980), Metaphors We Live By, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
-Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M., (1999), Philosophy in the Flesh: the Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought, New York: Basic Books.
-Luchjenbroers, J., (Ed.),( 2006), Cognitive Linguistics Investigation, Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Co.
-Reddy, M., (1979), “The Conduit Metaphor”, In Metaphor and Thought, (2nd Edition) Andrew Ortony (Ed.), 164-201, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Schön, D. A., (1979), “Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy”, In Metaphor and Thought, (2nd Edition) Andrew Ortony (Ed.), 137-163, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Talmy, L., (2000), Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Vol. 1: Concept Structuring Systems, Cambridge: MIT Press.
-Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 2011, “Protagoras”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protagoras
Pazand Quarterly
Volume 6, 22-23 - Serial Number 22
Special issue: cognitive linguistics
Autumn 2010
Pages 79-98