A cross-cultural analysis of conceptual metaphor in language.

摘要

The study aims to gather metaphorical expressions from three languages, namely French, Moore, and English, which represent different linguistic and cultural backgrounds, in order to examine how the everyday metaphors (cf. Lakoff and Johnson 1980) in each language work, to what extent the metaphorical mappings in the three languages are similar, and to what extent they differ. Since the study gathers data by asking speakers to comment on expressions from their own and other languages, it also leads to interesting descriptions of the strategies speakers seem to prefer in discussing different kinds of metaphor.; The findings indicate that the three languages share certain metaphorical domains, including spatial and movement metaphors, container metaphors, personification metaphors, and images of enemies and struggle. To explain these types of metaphors, speakers often responded with related metaphors. This indicates that these kinds of metaphors are those which have become a routine and unconscious part of the speakers' everyday conceptualization. These potential universal metaphors were well understood by the speakers from all three languages/cultures.; The findings also indicate that participants were unable to understand certain categories of metaphors in the other two languages, or they needed context to understand such metaphors. They could not produce any related metaphors to explain these, but rather used repetition, rephrasing, or literal phrasings of various sorts to explain them. These metaphorical expressions seem to occur also in only one or two of the languages. Some of these metaphors use quite specific wording or are rooted in culture-specific experience, rather than the basic human experience assumed by Lakoff and Johnson. Speakers produced similar reactions to other kinds of non-literal forms, such as conventional expressions which are also fully established but less pervasive and likely to be more culturally specific.; Since languages do seem to share cognitive metaphors, the study has pedagogical implications: for instance, language teachers might capitalize on the existence of closely related forms in first and second language. Teachers might design lessons to make learners aware of shared domains, while also realizing that less universal expressions need more explanation.