Morality models through metaphors: a cross-linguistic analysis ; Moralės modeliai viešajame diskurse: kontrastyvinė metaforų analizė

Liudmila

Sujets

• Cognitive linguistics
• Conceptual metaphor
• Philology

Informations

• Publié par: vilnius_university
• Publié le: 01 janvier 2010
• Nombre de lectures: 104
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

VILNIUS UNIVERSITY





Liudmila Arcimavičienė







MORALITY MODELS THROUGH METAPHORS IN PUBLIC
DISCOURSE: A CROSS-LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS




Doctoral Dissertation
Humanities, Philology (04 H)










Vilnius, 2010
1
The present research was carried out at Vilnius University in 2005-2009.


Supervisor:

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Inesa Šeškauskienė
(Vilnius University, Humanities, Philology – 04 H)
























2
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ........................................................................................... 6
1. Theoretical framework..................................... 11
1.1. KEY CONCEPTS ...................................................................... 11
1.2. TRADITIONAL THEORY OF METAPHOR .......................... 15
1.3. CONTEMPORARY THEORY OF METAPHOR: PHILOSOPHICAL TENETS .......... 18
1.4. CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR THEORY: empirical findings ................................. 23
1.5. POLITICAL Metaphors............................................................................................. 33
1.6. MORALITY Metaphors ............................ 38
1.7. MORALITY Models in politics ................................................................................ 41
2. Data and Methodology .................................... 44
3. RESEARCH FINDINGS ................................................................. 47
4. MOTION Conceptual Metaphor...................................................... 48
4.1. MOTION Metaphor in English ................................................. 49
4.2. MOTION Metaphor in Lithuanian ............................................ 58
4.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the MOTION Metaphor ................................... 66
5. INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP Conceptual Metaphor ....... 68
5.1. INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP Metaphor in English ... 69
5.2. INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP Metaphor in Lithuanian .............................. 73
5.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the IR Metaphor ............................................... 76
6. STRENGTH Conceptual Metaphor ................................................. 78
6.1. STRENGTH Metaphor in English ........... 79
6.2. STRENGTH Metaphor in Lithuanian ....................................................................... 83
6.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the STRENGTH Metaphor .............................. 87
7. HEALTH Conceptual Metaphor...................................................................................... 88
7.1. HEALTH Metaphor in English ................. 90
7.2. HEALTH Metaphor in Lithuanian ............................................................................ 93
7.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the HEALTH Metaphor ... 98
8. SPORTS Conceptual Metaphor ....................................................................................... 99
8.1. SPORTS Metaphor in English ................. 101
8.2. SPORTS Metaphor in Lithuanian ............................................................................ 105
8.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the SPORTS Metaphor .. 109
9. WAR Conceptual Metaphor .......................................................................................... 110
9.1. WAR Metaphor in English ....................... 112
3
9.2. WAR Metaphor in Lithuanian .................................................................................. 116
9.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the WAR Metaphor ........ 118
10. ESSENCE Conceptual Metaphor ................ 119
10.1. ESSENCE Metaphor in English ............................................................................. 121
10.2. ESStaphor in Lithuanian ........ 124
10.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the ESSENCE Metaphor .............................. 126
11. BUSINESS Conceptual Metaphor ............................................................................... 127
11.1. BUSINESS Metaphor in English ........... 128
11.2. BUSINESS Metaphor in Lithuanian ...................................................................... 130
11.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the BUSINESS Metaphor ............................. 132
12. DIRT Conceptual Metaphor ........................................................................................ 133
12.1. DIRT Metaphor in English ..................... 134
12.2. DIRT Metaphor in Lithuanian ................ 137
12.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the DIRT Metaphor ...................................... 140
13. SENSES Conceptual Metaphor .................................................. 141
13.1. SENSES Metaphor in English ................................................ 142
13.2. SENSES Metaphor in Lithuanian ........... 146
13.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the SENSES Metaphor ................................. 149
14. WHOLENESS Conceptual Metaphor ......................................... 149
14.1. WHOLENESS Metaphor in English ..... 151
14.2. WHOLENESS Metaphor in Lithuanian ................................. 153
14.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the WHOLENESS Metaphor ....................... 154
15. THEATRE Conceptual Metaphor ............................................................................... 155
15.1. THEATRE Metaphor in English ............ 156
15.2. THEATRE Metaphor in Lithuanian ....... 159
15.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the THEATRE Metaphor.............................. 161
16. ANIMALS Conceptual Metaphor ............................................................................... 162
16.1. ANIMALS Metaphor in English ............ 163
16.2. ANIMALS Metaphor in Lithuanian ....... 165
16.3. MORALITY models as reflected in the ANIMALS Metaphor ............................. 167
17. Prevailing MORALITY models in English and Lithuanian public discourse ............. 168
18. CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................... 173
REFERENCES .................. 181
4
Acknowledgements
Whilst working on this dissertation I have been very fortunate to meet many open-minded
and highly qualified linguists, whose support and advice have led me to personal and
academic discoveries. The present study could never be possible without many people, to
mention but a few.
First and foremost, my supervisor Dr. Inesa Šeškauskienė has immensely contributed to my
research by sharing her knowledge and expertise on the peculiarities of academic genre and
metaphor analysis. Due to her patience, experience and an extremely sensible attitude to
research and its organization, I learnt how to appropriately manage the writing of the
dissertation.
The impetus to start analysing metaphors in contemporary society came from Dr. Habil.
Eleonora Lassan, whom I owe a great deal of support and encouragement as well as her
insights into the interpretation of metaphors and their meaning.
I have also received a great deal of help and valuable advice from Dr. Jonė Grigaliūniene,
Dr. Habil. Aurelija Usonienė, Dr. Jurga Cibulskienė, Dr. Augustina Stungienė, Dr. Erika
Katkuvienė, Dr. Rūta Šlapkauskaitė who have kindly revised and professionally commented
on the structure and contents of my dissertation. Due to their most valuable insights and
recommendations, the dissertation has got into the most appropriate shape and acquired an
academic sound.
As the language of the dissertation is English, its authenticity was determined by a native
speaker—Brother Joseph Glebas C.F.X., who refined the present paper with much detail and
accuracy. I strongly appreciate his patience and benevolent assistance in considering the
wording of my ideas.
In the last year of my doctoral studies, I had an opportunity to attend an international
conference where I introduced and discussed my research findings. I owe this to Dr. Habil.
Regina Rudaitytė who assisted in providing sponsorship for attending that conference.
I am also thankful to other doctorate students, who continuously encouraged and
supported me during my writing. My special thanks go to Rita Juknevičienė and Lina
Bikelienė.
Finally, I am whole-heartedly grateful for the support, encouragement and understanding
of my ill moods, while intensively working on the dissertation, which I received from my
colleagues at the Institute of Foreign Languages, to mention but a few: Dr. Aušra Janulienė,
Dr. Danutė Balšaitytė, Dr. Nijolė Braţienienė, Lect. Daina Valentinavičienė, Lect. Vida
Jonaitienė and others.

5
Classical philosophical conceptions of the person have stirred our
imaginations and taught us a great deal. But once we understand the
importance of the cognitive unconscious, the embodiment of mind, and
metaphorical thought, we can never go back to a priori philosophising about
mind and language or to philosophical ideas of what a person is that are
inconsiste