metaphors we live by.docx

1、metaphors we live byIs it true that all of us, not just poets, speak in metaphors, whether we realize it or not? Is it perhaps even true that we live by metaphors? In Metaphors We Live By George Lakoff, a linguist, and Mark Johnson, a philosopher, suggest that metaphors not only make our thoughts mo

2、re vivid and interesting but that they actually structure our perceptions and understanding. Thinking of marriage as a contract agreement, for example, leads to one set of expectations, while thinking of it as team play, a negotiated settlement, Russian roulette, an indissoluble merger, or a religio

3、us sacrament will carry different sets of expectations. When a government thinks of its enemies as turkeys or clowns it does not take them as serious threats, but if the are pawns in the hands of the communists, they are taken seriously indeed. Metaphors We Live By has led many readers to a new reco

4、gnition of how profoundly metaphors not only shape our view of life in the present but set up the expectations that determine what life well be for us in the future. (from introduction in The Conscious Reader)Metaphors We Live By by George Lakoff and Mark JohnsonOur selection comprises chapters 1, 2

5、, 3, and part of 4 of Metaphors We Live By (1980).CONCEPTS WE LIVE BYMetaphor is for most people device of the poetic imagination and the rhetorical flourish-a matter of extraordinary rather than ordinary language. Moreover, metaphor is typically viewed as characteristic of language alone, a matter

6、of words rather than thought or action. For this reason, most people think they can get along perfectly well without metaphor. We have found,on the contrary, that metaphor is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which

7、 we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature.The concepts that govern our thought are not just matters of the intellect. They also govern our everyday functioning, down to the most mundane details. Our concepts structure what we perceive, how we get around in the world, and how we

8、 relate to other people. Our conceptual system thus plays a central role in defining our everyday realities. If we are right in suggesting that our conceptual system is largely metaphorical, then the way we thinks what we experience, and what we do every day is very much a matter of metaphor.But our

9、 conceptual system is not something we are normally aware of. in most of the little things we do every day, we simply think and act more or less automatically along certain lines. Just what these lines are is by no means obvious. One way to find out is by looking at language. Since communication is

10、based on the same conceptual system that we use in thinking and acting, language is an important source of evidence for what that system is like.Primarily on the basis of linguistic evidence, we have found that most of our ordinary conceptual system is metaphorical in nature. And we have found a way

11、 to begin to identify in detail just what the metaphors are halt structure how we perceive, how we think, and what we do.To give some idea of what it could mean for a concept to be metaphorical and for such a concept to structure an everyday activity, let us start with the concept ARGUMENT and the c

12、onceptual metaphor ARGUMENT IS WAR. This metaphor is reflected in our everyday language by a wide variety of expressions:ARGUMENT IS WARYour claims are indefensible.He attacked every weak point in my argument.His criticisms were right on target.I demolished his argument.Ive never won an argument wit

13、h him.you disagree? Okay, shoot!If you use that strategy, hell wipe you out.He shot down all of my arguments.It is important to see that we dont just talk about arguments in terms ofIt is important to see that we dont just talk about arguments in terms of war. We can actually win or lose arguments.

14、We see the person we are arguing with as an opponent. We attack his positions and we defend our own. We gain and lose ground. We plan and use strategies. If we find a position indefensible, we can abandon it and take a new line of attack. Many of the things we do in arguing are partially structured

15、by the concept of war. Though there is no physical battle, there is a verbal battle, and the structure of an argument-attack, defense, counter-attack, etc.-reflects this. It is in this sense that the ARGUMENT IS WAR metaphor is one that we live by in this culture; its structures the actions we perfo

16、rm in arguing. Try to imagine a culture where arguments are not viewed in terms of war, where no one wins or loses, where there is no sense of attacking or defending, gaining or losing ground. Imagine a culture where an argument is viewed as a dance, the participants are seen as performers, and the

17、goal is to perform in a balanced and aesthetically pleasing way. In such a culture, people would view arguments differently, experience them differently, carry them out differently, and talk about them differently. But we would probably not view them as arguing at all: they would simply be doing som

18、ething different. It would seem strange even to call what they were doing arguing. In perhaps the most neutral way of describing this difference between their culture and ours would be to say that we have a discourse form structured in terms of battle and they have one structured in terms of dance.

19、This is an example of what it means for a metaphorical concept, namely, ARGUMENT IS WAR, to structure (at least in part) what we do and how we understand what we are doing when we argue. The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another. It is not that a

20、rguments are a subspecies of war. Arguments and wars are different kinds of things-verbal discourse and armed conflict-and the actions performed are different kinds of actions. But ARGUMENT is partially structured, understood, performed, and talked about in terms of WAR. The concept is metaphoricall

21、y structured, the activity is metaphorically structured, and, consequently, the language is metaphorically structured.Moreover, this is the ordinary way of having an argument and talking about one. The normal way for us to talk about attacking a position is to use the words attack a position. Our co

22、nventional ways of talking about arguments presuppose a metaphor we are hardly ever conscious of. The metaphors not merely in the words we use-it is in our very concept of an argument. The language of argument is not poetic, fanciful, or rhetorical; it is literal. We talk about arguments that way be

23、cause we conceive of them that way-and we act according to the way we conceive of things.The most important claim we have made so far is that metaphor is not just a matter of language, that is, of mere words. We shall argue that, on the contrary, human thought processes are largely metaphorical. Thi

24、s is what we mean when we say that the human conceptual system is metaphorically structured and defined. Metaphors as linguistic expressions are possible precisely because there are metaphors in a persons conceptual system. Therefore, whenever in this book we speak of metaphors, such as ARGUMENT IS

25、WAR, it should be understood that metaphor means metaphorical concept.THE SYSTEMATICITTY OF METAPHORICAL CONCEPTSArguments usually follow patterns; that is, there are certain things we typically do and do not do in arguing. The fact that we in part conceptualize arguments in terms of battle systemat

26、ically influences the shape argument stake and the way we talk about what we do in arguing. Because the metaphorical concept is systematic, the language we use to talk about that aspect of the concept is systematic.We saw in the ARGUMENT IS WAR metaphor that expressions from the vocabulary of war, e

27、.g., attack a position, indefensible, strategy, new line of attack, win, gain ground, etc., form a systematic way of talking about the battling aspects of arguing. It is no accident that these expressions mean what they mean when we use them to talk about arguments. A portion of the conceptual netwo

28、rk of battle partially characterizes file concept of an argument, and the language follows suit. Since metaphorical expressions in our language are tied to metaphorical concepts in a systematic way, we can use metaphorical linguistic expressions to study the nature of metaphorical concepts and to ga

29、in an understanding of the metaphorical nature of our activities.To get an idea of how metaphorical expressions in everyday language icon give us insight into the metaphorical nature of the concepts that structure our everyday activities, let us consider the metaphorical concept TIME IS Money as it

30、is reflected in contemporary English.TIME IS MONEYYoure wasting my time.This gadget will save you hours. I dont have the time to give you.How do you spend your time these days? That flat tire cost me an hour.Ive invested a lot of time in her.1 dont have enough time to spare for that.Youre running ou

31、t of time.You need to budget your time.Put aside aside some time for ping pong.Is that worth your while?Do you have much time left?Hes living on I borrowed time.You dont use your time, profitably.I lost a lot of time when I got sick.Thank you for your time.Time in our culture is a valuable commodity

32、. It is a limited resource that we use to accomplish our goals. Because of the way that the concept of work has developed in modern Western culture, where work is typically associated with the time it takes and time is precisely quantified, it has become customary to pay people by the hour, week, or year. In our culture TIME IS MONEY in many ways: telephone message units, hourly wages, hotel room rates, yearly budgets, interest on loans, and paying your debt to society by serving time. These practices are relatively new in the history of the human race, and by no me