ARGUMENT IS WAR in Malay and French: A Perspective from Cognitive Linguistics
("Perdebatan ialah Peperangan" dalam Bahasa Melayu dan Bahasa Perancis: Satu Perspektif dari Sisi Linguistik Kognitif)
Abstract
This paper examines the formation of the conceptual metaphor ARGUMENT IS WAR in Malay and French. This conceptual metaphor is commonly associated with the use of arguments presented by the parties involved in a debating session. It will be viewed and reviewed in particular based on the improved elements in the conceptual metaphor theory such as the concepts of complex and primary metaphors. For this analysis, four linguistic metaphors have been chosen from two Malay novels and one French novel. In order to identify these linguistic metaphors, the metaphor identification procedure was used and two samples in Malay and two samples in French were selected. The findings show that ARGUMENT IS WAR is a complex metaphor formed through a number of primary metaphors that are basic and simple in nature. In addition, the metaphor was also detected as a cognitive process that occurs during the negotiation process. The study shows that the similarities and differences that can be discovered through mapping from the source domain to the target domain are the result of various factors such as manners and ethics, religion and philosophy of life.
Keywords: complex metaphor, primary metaphor, Malay language, French language, similarities, differences
References
Black, M. (1993). More about metaphor. Dlm Ortony, A (pnyt.). Metaphor and thought, hlm 19-41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
Camus, A. (1957). L'étranger. Paris: Gallimard.
Cohen, D. (1995). Argument is War….and War is Hell: Philosophy, Education, and Metaphors for Argumentation. Informal Logic, 17(2), 177-188.
Cervel, S. P.1999. Subsidiarity relationships between image-schemas: an approach to the force schema. Journal of English Studies, (1), 187-207.
Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cienki, A. (2005). Researching Conceptual Metaphors that (may) Underlie Political Discourse. Dicapai pada 16 February 2009, daripada, http://eis.bris.ac.uk/~potfc/Granada/ Papers/Cienki.pdf
Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Evans, V. 2013. Metaphor, lexical concepts, and figurative meaning construction. Journal of Cognitive Semiotics, 5(1-2), 73-107.
Grady, J. (1997). THEORIES ARE BUILDING revisited. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(3): 267-290.
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: the bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. (1993). The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. Dlm. Ortony, A. (pnyt.). Metaphor and thought. Ed. ke-2. hlm 202-251. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh. New York: Basic Books.
Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: a practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pachler, N & Allford, D. (2000). Literature in the communicative classroom. Dlm. Field, K (pnyt.). Issues in modern languages teaching, hlm 237-251. London: Routledge Falmer.
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1-39.
Ritchie, D. (2003)."ARGUMENT IS WAR"-Or is it a Game of Chess? Multiple Meanings in the Analysis of Implicit Metaphors. Metaphor & Symbol, 18(2): 125-146.
Sanford, D. (2008). Discourse and metaphor: A corpus-driven inquiry. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 4(2): 209-234.
Steen, G.J. (2014). The cognitive-linguistic revolution in metaphor studies. Dlm. Littlemore, J & Taylor, J. (pnyt.). Companion to cognitive linguistics, hlm. 117-142. London: Continuum.
Taverniers, M. (2006). Grammatical metaphor and lexical metaphor: Different perspectives on semantic variation. Neophilologus, 90(2): 321-332.
Vanparys, J. (1995). A survey of metalinguistic metaphors. Dlm. L. Goossens, P. Pauwels, B. Rudzka-Ostyn, B., A.-M. Simon-Vandenbergen, & J. Vanparys, J. (pnyt.). By word of mouth:Metaphor, metonymy and linguistic action in a cognitive perspective, hlm 1-34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
van Teefelen, T. (1996). Racism and Metaphor: The Palestinian Israeli Conflict in Popular Literature. Discourse and Society, 5(3): 381-405.
Wittnk, J. 2011. Reliable metaphor analysis in organizational research. Prosiding Persidangan Organizational Knowledge and Learning Capabilities. University of Hull. 12-14 April 2011.
Keywords
Upon acceptance of an article, Authors will be asked to transfer copyright. This transfer will ensure the widest possible dissemination of information. A notification will be sent to the corresponding Author confirming receipt of the manuscript. If excerpts from other copyrighted works are included, the Author(s) must obtain written permission from the copyright owners and credit the source(s) in the article.
