Candidate of Philology (PhD in Linguistics)
Shakarim
State University of Semey, Kazakhstan;
Karlygash
S. Zhumabayeva, teacher of English and Self-cognition,
M.Auezov school, Zhana-tylek, Kazakhstan.
Political metaphor in cognitive linguistics.
Being a component part of the language,
political metaphor bears the structural and semantic properties common to all
metaphors. At the same time political metaphor has a number of specific
characteristics which are conditioned by its nature and the sphere of its
usage.
On the one hand the interest for the
language of Politics is explained by the peculiarities of modern life: the
increasing role of mass media, the development of informational technologies,
and the tendency to globalization. For politicians metaphor can serve an
instrument which helps to form attitudes in the society.
«Language is
the man’s most powerful weapon. Armed forces can keep people in submission for
long years, even for generations. However only by means of language it is
possible to manipulate human consciousness and persuade people to cooperate in
their own oppression. In the same way understanding of the language becomes the
beginning of political independence» [1].
On the other hand, there are linguistic
reasons for the increasing interest to political metaphor. First of all it
deals with a new concept of metaphor, suggested by J.Lakoff and Mark Johnson.
Their theoretic propositions, worked out in cognitive linguistics, changed
radically the understanding of the nature and essence of this phenomenon. The
approach suggested by them has been actively applied in interpreting political
metaphor and it resulted in increasing number of research on corresponding
subjects.
Secondly, the above mentioned
extralinguistic factors increased the interest to language of politics in
discourse research. Speeches of politicians are researched in various aspects,
as well as from the point of view of metaphors used in these speeches.
Thirdly, nowadays the various aspects of
speech influence are also of vital importance, namely, we observe the revival
of rhetoric in its antique traditions and we also observe the actualization of
metaphor with politics through political argumentation.
Thus we can determine the specificity of
modern political metaphor, and it is the following: as an object of research
this phenomenon should be considered within the boundaries of 3 areas of
humanitarian knowledge: cognitive
linguistics, discourse analysis and rhetoric, each of which contributes to
studying a political metaphor, promoting more perfect studies of its nature and
features of functioning.
Cognitive linguistics cannot be represented as a
single approach with the general concept, a subject and a method of research.
The term “cognitive linguistics” originally was interpreted as
neurolinguistics, a field in neurobiology, an artificial intellect and computer
science. The cognitive approach in Linguistics has arisen in the USA and is
still presented mainly by American scientists. Among them, first of all, are
George Lakoff, William Croft, Ronald Langacker, Leonard Talmi, Zhil Fokonje. It
is their research what composes the core of Cognitive Linguistics. Mainly cognitivists
has had the purpose of creation of integrative pictures of language, thinking
and behavior of the human individuals connected with reception, transformation
and use of different kinds of knowledge – categorization, conceptualization,
memory, thinking, etc.
Within the limits of cognitive linguistics a new
scientific approach – the theory of metaphorical modelling of the reality or
the theory of a conceptual metaphor began to actively develop.
According to M.Skiba, conceptual metaphor is an
abstract way of interpretation of one concepts in terms of others. These ways
of interpretation are fixed in native speakers’ consciousness [2].
For example, such metaphorical projections, as
ARGUMENT (DISPUTE) IS WAR, TIME IS MONEY, LIFE IS A JOURNEY, etc. refer to
conceptual metaphors. That is “… conceptual metaphors transfer one conceptual
sphere into another” [3].
According to I.Kobozeva, conceptual metaphor is a “way
of thinking about one area through the prism of another. Conceptual metaphor
transfers the cognitive structures (frames, figurative schemes and so on) from
area-source (source) to the area-target (target)” [4]. For example, the
conceptual metaphor «Love is a journey» transfers concepts and the things
describing a journey, to the conceptual sphere connected with the feeling of
love. The researcher accompanies the given statement with the following:
|
Source Journey
→ Travellers
→ Vehicle → Destination
point
→ Obstacles
→ Forks → |
Target Love Lovers Relations Aims and goals
in life Difficulties Decisive
moments |
Conceptual metaphor is a way of thinking about one
area through the prism of another. Conceptual metaphor transfers the cognitive
structures (frames, figurative schemes and so on) from area-source (source) to
the area-target (target) [4].
Thus metaphorization in terms of cognitive
linguistics is based on interaction of two structures of knowledge – the
cognitive structure of "source" and the cognitive structure of
"purpose" ("target"). The structure "source" (or
in other terms – initial conceptual area, sphere-source, sphere-donor, a source
of metaphorical expansion) is the semantic sphere to which words in their
original meaning belong. The structure "purpose" (or new conceptual
area, sphere-target, denotative zone, recipient sphere, a direction of
metaphorical expansion) is a semantic sphere to which the words in transferred
meaning belong.
The more the source-sphere is structured
the more nominative opportunities the donor-sphere has, and the stronger the potential
of metaphorical model is. The metaphorical model is one of the actively
operating ways of representation of knowledge.
So according to the theory of conceptual
metaphor, 1) metaphor is an important mechanism by means of which we comprehend
abstract concepts and operate with the help of it; 2) metaphor by its nature is
not a linguistic, but the conceptual phenomenon; 3) metaphorical concept is
based on non-metaphorical concept, i.e. on our sense and motor experience; 4)
metaphor is more likely based on correspondence in our experience, than on
similarities. Thus the area-source and area-purpose in their essence are not
connected; 5) metaphor is not the figurative means which connects two word
meanings, but the basic mental operation which unites two conceptual spheres
and creates an opportunity to use potentialities of structuring of
sphere-source at conceptualization of a new sphere [5].
Thus conceptual metaphors used in a political
discourse, possess such cognitive and influencing potential which sets the
certain vision of the phenomena of the reality, owing to the regular use of the
same base images. This property of a metaphor allows to act on people and to
manipulate their consciousness and behavior. Besides conceptual metaphors are
well familiar to native speakers, and they can be easily reproduced and
recognized.
The above-mentioned properties of
political metaphor show an originality of a political metaphor. These qualities
define special value and specificity of its usage in propagation as means of
psychological and ideological influence on the audience.
Literature.
1. Green D. Shaping political consciousness: The language of politics in
America from McKinley to Reagan. – Ithaca; L.: Cornell Univ. press, 1987. –
XII, 277 p.
2.
Skiba M.E. The concept of ‘Ideology’ in American linguistic consciousness. Author. dis. Candidate. Sciences. - Nizhny
Novgorod, 2003. – p.83.
3.
Lakoff G. Thinking in the mirror classifiers
// New in foreign linguistics. Issue 23. – Ìoscow,
1998. – p.47.
4. Kobozeva I.M. Linguistic semantics. – M:
Editorial URSS, 2000. – 352 p., p.171.
5. Chudinov A.P. Russia in a metaphorical mirror: cognitive study of
political metaphor (1991-2000). – p.17.