Mediating between the ‘two cultures’ in academia: The role of conceptual metaphor

Vol.3,No.1(2010)

Abstract
This contribution focuses on metaphorical expressions in academic papers in science and in the humanities. It represents an approach to ‘intercultural’ communication in the sense of the so-called ‘two cultures’ after C. P. Snow who referred to the sciences and to the humanities as two different cultures. Unfortunately, within academic discourse today there are few attempts at interdisciplinary communication between sciences and humanities. Only a few fi elds are bridging this gulf (e.g. some of the cognitive sciences). Much of the mediation between the two cultures is carried predominantly by metaphorical expressions. In this contribution, metaphor is analysed as the fi gurative use of verbs of perception within the framework of cognitive linguistics. We will focus on the analysis of source and target domain which are given membership in semantic ontologies.

Keywords:
corpora; academic English; metaphor; cognitive linguistics; conceptualization; conceptual metaphor; cultural linguistics
References

Euler, M. (1997) ‘Sensations of temporality: Models and metaphors from acoustic
perception.’ In: Atmanspacher, H. and Ruhnau, E. (eds) Time, Temporality, Now.
Experiencing Time and Concepts of Time in an Interdisciplinary Perspective.
Heidelberg/Berlin: Springer. 159-178.


Evans, V. and Tyler, A. (2004) ‘Rethinking English ‘prepositions of movement’: The case
of to and through.’ Belgian Journal of Linguistics 18, 247-270.


Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. (2002) ‘Metaphor, metonymy, and binding.’ In: Dirven, R.
and Pörings, R. (eds) Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter. 469-487.


Geeraerts, D. (2002) ‘The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in composite.’ In:
Dirven, R. and Pörings, R. (eds) Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and
Contrast. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 435-465.


Gibb, H. and Wales, R. (1990) ‘Metaphor and simile. Psychological determinants of the
differential use of each sentence form.’ Metaphors and Symbolic Activity 5, (4), 199-
213.


Goldberg, A. (1995) Constructions. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument
Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.


Haase, C. and Schmied, J. (2010 fc.) ‘Conceptualising spatial relationships in academic
discourse: A corpus-cognitive account of locative-spatial and abstract-spatial
prepositions.’ In: Roszkowski, S. (ed.) Proceedings of the Conference on Practical
Applications of Language and Computers, PALC 2009. Frankfurt, New York: Lang.


Hooper, R. (2004) ‘Perception verbs, directional metaphor and point of view in Tokelauan
discourse.’ Journal of Pragmatics 36, 1741-1760. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.06.002


Hyland, K. (2006) English for Academic Purposes. An Advanced Resource Book. 1st ed.
London: Routledge.


Kövecses, Z. (2002) Metaphor. A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.


Lakoff, G. (1996) ‘Sorry, I’m not myself today. The metaphor system for conceptualising
the self.’ In: Fauconnier, G. and Sweetser, E. (eds) Spaces, Worlds, and Grammar.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 91-123.


Papafragou, A., Massey, C. and Gleitman, L. (2002) ‘Motion events in language and
cognition.’ In: Proceedings of the 25th Annual Boston University Conference on
Language Development. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. 1-23.


Scott, M. (1997) ‘PC Analysis of key words and key key words.’ System 25(2), 233-245. DOI: 10.1016/S0346-251X(97)00011-0


Snow, C. P. (1959) The Two Cultures. Rede lecture at the University of Cambridge.

Sweetser, E. (1990) From Etymology to Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.


Talmy, L. (1985) ‘Lexicalization patterns.’ In: Shopen, T. (ed.) Language Typology and
Syntactic Description III: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. 57-149.


Trim, R. (2007) Metaphor Networks. The Comparative Evolution of Figurative Language.
1st ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Metrics

239

Views

187

PDF views