Three cognitive frameworks for analyzing metaphoric plant names: Cognitive Grammar, Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Conceptual Blending Theory

Hubert Kowalewski

Abstract


The aim of the article is to examine the applicability of three theoretical frameworks developed within Anglophone cognitive linguistics, Ronald Langacker’s Cognitive Grammar, George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory, and Gilles Fauconnier and Mark Turner’s Conceptual Blending Theory, in the study of semantic motivation behind folk plant names. Even though none of the theories has been originally developed as a tool for reconstruction what Jerzy Bartmiński terms the linguistic worldview, the theories may help to capture semantic nuances behind folk names and contribute to in-depth and comprehensive descriptions of folk conceptualizations. Since the scope of applicability of the three frameworks overlaps on conceptual metaphors, the article demonstrates the analysis of the metaphoric name gęsi pępek (lit. ‘goose navel’; daisy, Bellis perennis) and discusses strengths and weaknesses of the three frameworks in the task of reconstructing conventional folk imagery encoded in the name.

Keywords


folk plant names; Cognitive Grammar; Conceptual Metaphor Theory; Conceptual Blending Theory; linguistic worldview

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bartmiński, Jerzy. 2009. Aspects of Cognitive Ethnolinguistics. Edited by Jörg Zinken. Translated by Adam Głaz. Sheffield and Oakville, CT: Equinox.

Bartmiński, Jerzy, ed. 2019. Słownik stereotypów i symboli ludowych. Vol. 2., Iss. 3. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.

Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner. 1998. Conceptual Integration Networks. Cognitive Science 22: 133–187.

Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner. 2002. The way we think. Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.

Forceville, Charles J., and Eduardo Urios-Aparisi, eds. 2009. Multimodal metaphor. Berlin-Boston: De Mouton Gruyter.

Grady, Joseph, Todd Oakley, and Seanna Coulson. 2007. Blending and metaphor. In The Cognitive Linguistics Reader, edited by Vyvyan Evans, Benjamin Bergen, and Jörg Zinken, 420–440. London-Oakville: Equinox.

Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, George. 1993. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Metaphor and thought, edited by Andrew Ortony, 202–229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Langacker, Ronald W. 1990. Subjectification. Cognitive Linguistics 1: 5–38.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar. A basic introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.

Majewski, Erazm, ed. 1894. Słownik nazwisk zoologicznych i botanicznych polskich. Vol. 2. Warszawa.

Mierzwińska-Hajnos, Agnieszka. 2010. The linguistic worldview revisited. A cognitive analysis of plant terms. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 46(4): 457–479. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10010-010-0023-5.

Pelcowa, Halina, ed. 2017. Słownik gwar Lubelszczyzny. Vol. 5. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.

Suppes, Patrick. 1960. A comparison of the meaning and uses of models in mathematics and the empirical sciences. Synthese 12(2–3): 287301.

Talmy, Leonard. 1988. The relation of grammar to cognition. In Topic in cognitive linguistics, edited by Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn, 163–205. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Van Fraassen, Bas C. 1980. The scientific image. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Wyderka, Bogusław, ed. 2008. Słownik gwar śląskich. Vol. 10. Opole: Państwowy Instytut Naukowy.

Zinken, Jörg. 2009. The Ethnolinguistic School of Lublin and Anglo-American Cognitive Linguistics. In Jerzy Bartmiński, Aspects of cognitive ethnolinguistics, edited by Jörg Zinken, translated by Adam Głaz, 1–5. Sheffield and Oakville, CT: Equinox.

Acknowledgments: I am grateful to Dr Katarzyna Prorok for sharing her knowledge on folk plant names during writing of this article. I would also like to thank Jolanta Rebejko for her help in the preparation of the figures.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/et.2022.34.79
Date of publication: 2022-09-30 20:08:37
Date of submission: 2022-05-11 10:17:39


Statistics


Total abstract view - 498
Downloads (from 2020-06-17) - PDF - 338

Indicators



Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 Hubert Kowalewski

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.