OPPOSITIONAL METAPHOR LIGHT AND DARK VIA THE ASSOCIATIVE EXPERIMENTS
Keywords:
binary opposition, associative experiment, cognitive mechanism, conceptual metaphor, universalityAbstract
Cognitive linguistics considers language as a window into human consciousness providing insights into its structures and reflecting fundamental properties of the human mind. Therefore, it reveals new prospects in studying binary oppositions within human consciousness via their language manifestations. This study aims to analyse the interplay of cognitive mechanisms of contradistinction and conceptual metaphors. The paper presents an empirical investigation of the binary opposition LIGHT-DARK based on the data of the Associative Thesauri. The working hypothesis is that associative network is motivated by hierarchical conceptual structures existing in the speakers’ minds. Therefore, responses evoked by certain stimuli can be regarded as the reflection of corresponding conceptual structures. The responses obtained via AE confirm a tight connection between LIGHT and DARK and human ability of seeing as it was described by Wierzbicka (1996: 288). Furthermore, the obtained responses give possibility to trace the ways, in which LIGHT – ABILITY OF SEEING – REASONING, on the one hand, and DARK – INABILITY TO SEE – ABSENCE OF KNOWLEDGE/EDUCATION, on the other hand, are interconnected and all together generate metaphors in systematic way. The analysis of the responses reveals binary oppositions interacting with the opposition LIGHT – DARK. The consciousness of contemporary bearers of languages and cultures preserves deep-rooted relations of the light – dark opposition with the corresponding parts of other binary oppositions, namely day – night; sun – moon; white – black, red – black; sky – earth; happiness – unhappiness, life – death, etc. within the evaluative opposition positive – negative. Blended with metaphorical mappings, the LIGHT – DARK opposition creates complex mental images, which can be termed ‘oppositional metaphors’.
References
Brent, Berlin & Kay, Paul. 1991. Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution. University of California Press.
Deese, James. 1965. The structure of associations in language and thought. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press.
Evans, Nicholas & Levinson, Stephen C. 2009. “The myth of language universals: language diversity and its importance for cognitive science”. Behavioral and brain sciences 32(5): 429–492.
Hampe, Beate. 2005. “When down is not bad, and up not good enough: A usage-based assessment of the plus–minus parameter in image-schema theory”. Cognitive Linguistics 16(1): 81–112.
Hargrave, Susanne. 1982. “A report on colour term research in five Aboriginal languages”. Work Papers of SILAAB (Series B) 8: 201–226.
Heine, Bernd. 1997. Cognitive Foundations of Grammar. Oxford University Press.
Hertz, R. 2004. Death and the Right Hand. Routledge.
Jones, Rhys & Meehan, Betty. 1978. “Anbarra Conept of Colour”. Hiatt, Lester Richard (ed.), Australian Aboriginal Concepts. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. 20–39.
Kay, Paul & McDaniel, Chad K. 1978. “The Linguistic Significance of the Meanings of Basic Color Terms”. Language 54(3): 610–646.
Krzeszowski, Tomasz P. 1997. Angels and devils in hell: Elements of axiology in semantics. Warsaw: Energeia.
Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Luodonpää-Manni, Milla, Esa Penttilä, & Viimaranta, Johanna. 2017. “Introduction”. Luodonpää-Manni, Milla & Penttilä, Esa & Viimaranta Johanna (eds.), Empirical Approaches to Cognitive Linguistics: Analyzing Real-Life Data. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 1–21
Paradis, Carita. 2016. “Corpus methods for the investigation of antonyms across languages”. Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria & Juvonen, Paeivi (eds.), The Lexical Typology of Semantic Shifts. De Gruyter. 131–156.
Shmiher, Taras. 2011. “The cognitive foundations of translation studies analysis: translating the concept ofGRACE from the SERMON ON LAW AND GRACE of Hilarion of Kyiv”. Inozemna philologia 123: 154–160.
Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From etymology to pragmatics: metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Talmy, Leonard. 2003. “Concept structuring systems”. Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Taylor, John R. 2003. “Meaning and context”. Cuyckens, Hubert (ed.), Motivation in Language: Studies in Honor of Günter Radden. John Benjamins Publishing. 27–48
Toporov, Vladimir N. 1987. “Ob odnom arkhaicheskom indoyevropeyskom elemente v drevnerusskoy dukhovnoy kul'ture *svęt-.” [About one archaic Indo-European element in the ancient Russian spiritual culture * svęt-] B. A. Uspenskiy (ed), Yazyki kultury i problemy perevodimosti. Moskva: Nauka. 184–252.
Weinreich, Uriel. 1963. “On the Semantic Structure of Language.” Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed), Universals of Human Language. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. 114–171.
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1996. Semantics: Primes and Universals. Oxford University Press.