Current Approaches to Metaphor Analysis in Discourse
The goals of research on conceptual metaphor in discourse are at present remarkably multifaceted, from describing specific social, pragmatic, rhetorical, aesthetic, and discursive functions in real discourse data, through assessing
metaphor entrenchment in the cultural and conceptual system, to identification methods as well as criteria for metaphorical mapping description and classification. The volume the reader is about to explore provides a broad panorama of perspectives tackling diverse aspects of metaphor analysis, including a wide range of topics such as the levels of source domain knowledge configuration, new Metaphor analysis in discourse. Introduction 7
target domain knowledge, conscious usage, metaphor identification procedures, communicative functions, linguistic metaphor, visual modes of metaphorical expression, corpus processing, trans-modal metaphor, among others. One of the assets of this collective work consists in showing how the scrutiny of metaphorical connections in multimodal discourse reveals the conceptual nature of metaphorical thinking. The book is organized in three parts, each one focussing on certain aspects of metaphor analysis in discourse. The first part emphasizes the description and characterization of metaphorical knowledge. The chapters offer a view on knowledge configurations like image schemas, frames, scenarios and domains that configure particular kinds of discourse and knowledge. The second
part puts the stress on communicative aspects, particularly on the analysis of author/speaker intentionality and the tools to measure intention and effect in metaphor usage. Finally, the third block in the volume delves into the intricacies of disclosing metaphorical codes in non-linguistic modes of semiosis, be it cartoons, film, or other visual media.
The paper focuses on syntactic metaphor, which is manifested in the metaphorical mapping across syntactic domains, or in the metaphor-driven polysemy of constructions. Syntactic metaphor underpins the diversity of morphosyntactic expression of the Stimulus argument in Russian psych verbs. While the Experiencer role in Russian emotion verbs is normally coded as nominative or dative, there is no uniform expression of Stimulus. Different emotion types require specialized Stimulus expression: dative for ‘to rejoice’, instrumental for ‘to be proud’, genitive for ‘to fear’ and ‘to be ashamed of’, prepositional constructions for different types of ‘JOY’, ‘SADNESS’ and ‘ANGER’. The paper employs corpus methods to demonstrate that all of the constructions used to encode Stimulus in Russian psych verbs are predominantly used to express other semantic roles. We suggest that, in each case, the role of Stimulus is the result of a metaphoric mapping from the domain of another semantic role, the latter determined by the type of emotion and the event structure of the corresponding psych verb. Thus, Stimulus in radovat’sja ‘to rejoice’ is syntactically metaphorized as Addressee (dative), because it implies overt manifestation of positive feeling directed at the stimulus. Anger involves a violent reaction. Hence the Stimulus in serdit’sja ‘to get angry’ is syntactically expressed as Patient of aggressive physical actions with ‘at’ construction. Other metaphoric mappings between semantic roles include pride is attracting attention, sadness is thinking and others. The paper also shows that conventionalized syntactic metaphor can give rise to a novel metaphor which occurs spontaneously in discourse, such as silence is aggression.