Language is a ‘Beautiful Creature’, not an ‘Old Fridge’

Abstract

Direct metaphor has been widely studied from the cognitive perspective, but its functions in the communicative dimension (Steen, 2011) remain less well understood. This study investigates direct metaphor as a tool of metaphorical framing (Ottati et al., 2014; Ritchie & Cameron, 2014) in discourse, by examining a corpus of British newspaper texts on the topic of language and language change. The analysis of direct metaphors is sufficient to point to major ideologies of language and communication in the observed media context, which echo broader anxieties over social change, social organization and control. Most notably, unlike the meanings stressed in existing studies, the vast majority of direct metaphors are here found to serve the specific role of relational argumentation. This function is achieved through a kind of ‘corrective framing’, which explicitly juxtaposes two conflicting representations through an ‘A is B and not C’ type of metaphor. The findings are discussed with respect to deliberateness, metaphorical framing and rhetorical goals in discourse. It is hypothesized that corrective framing is among the major functions of direct metaphor in public discourse, which can influence public opinion in ways different from other metaphorically created representations.

Conceptual Metaphor in Meditation Discourse: An Analysis of the Spiritual Perspective

“…meditating is not leaving the mind blank, but becoming aware all phenomena of experience without intervening). The use of metaphor is very convenient in this respect, as introducing a more tangible SD allows teachers to offer more appropriate explanations while also affording processes of reframing (Bogetić, 2017) and reconceptualisation (Goatly, 2011) (e.g. helping the audience to see a topic like 'meditation' in a new light).…”

“…The example is illustrative of the direct metaphor formula A IS NOT B, BUT C (Cf. Bogetić, 2017), which facilitates the TD to be reconsidered in the light of the contrasting perspectives offered by different SDs.…”

“…Because you are not the sadness, you are the space for the sadness, the sky, the presence. (Foster, 2016, May 19, 6:02) DMs found in SDs like EMOTION, THOUGHT or LIFE EVENTS (see Table 4) are used in this fashion as corrective framing devices (Bogetić, 2017) helping to mark a distance between the meditator and phenomena of experience. Through these metaphors, speakers portray more vividly the idea that the meditator may experience particular kinds of emotions and thoughts (and may often be carried away by them) and that they may identify themselves at some points with some roles or identities in everyday life; but also that all of these (including our own conditionings from past experiences) must be brought to our awareness (via meditation practice) so that we can come to clearly discern that, ultimately, we are not that which we think, experience or do, but -according to the philosophy of the meditation masters-the PRESENCE or PURE CONSCIOUSNESS that allows these phenomena to exist.…”

Yugoslav policy towards the neighboring countries of people's democracy 1953-1958

“…2399 S tim u vezi, on je insistirao da je jedino nemešanje u unutrašnje stavri drugih socijalističkih zemalja i priznanje specifičnih uslova za razvoj socijalizma u svakoj pojedinoj zemlji jedini ispravan put ka postepenom uspostavljanju poverenja i ponovnog jačanja socijalizma u svetu. 2400 Za razliku od njega, kao svojevrstan antipod onome što je govorio Tito, Aleksandar…”

“…2401 Na ove njegove reči svi ambasadori istočnoevropskih zemalja napustili su salu u kojoj se održavao kongres a Ranković je mirno nastavio optuživši Sovjete da umesto da izvuku pouke iz sukoba 1948. godine ponovo "oštre stara zarđala oružja Kominforma" i pozvavši komuniste iz drugih zemalja da dobro razmisle o takvoj strategiji Moskve jer se, po njemu, nije radilo samo o Jugoslaviji i njenoj partiji već o čitavom radničkom pokretu. 2402 Napuštanje kongresne sale od strane ambasadora istočnoevropskih zemalja nije značilo i napuštanje kongresa, sa izuzetkom čehoslovačkog ambasadora Pitharta koji je otputovao za Beograd i pokušavao da od svega napravi diplomatski incident. 2403 Izuzetak, ali u suprotnom smislu, predstavljao je ambasador Poljske, Gruholski, koji je za razliku od svih ostalih ambasadora ostao u sali i nakon njihovog odlaska i saslušao Rankovićevo izlaganje do kraja.…”