Love and Anger. The grammatical structure of conceptual metaphors

摘要: 1. Introduction This article integrates grammatical analysis into the study of conceptal metaphors. Although accepts lexically based work in metaphors such as Lakoff's Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things, Johnson's The Body Mind, Kovecses' Metaphors Anger, Pride, Love, it argues that these lexical approaches are insufficient to offer rigorous complete cross-reference mapping. It takes hypothesis lexis morpho-syntax interdependent, presented by Langacker especially Concept, Image, Symbol Grammar Conceptualization Talmy "The Relation Cognition" Toward a Cognitive Semantics, examines structure conceptual focuses on two emotion concepts, ROMANTIC LOVE ANGER. Firstly, discussion demonstrates weaknesses examining current lack both sufficient means for verification results tools revealing those results. moves resolve issues concept LOVE. Instead focusing purely metaphor, combines this with structure. In doing so, how evidence may help problems faced analyses. Moreover, drawing invariance proposed Lakoff Contemporary Theory Metaphor" Turner "An Image-Constraint Metaphor," reveals details not visible analysis, further supporting need systematically integrate grammatica l cognitive semantics. Thus, combining internal is more complex than evident from typically taken 2. ?ANGER IS GIVING BIRTH: Verifying Co-occurrence Purely analyses mapping do enough scope they produce. A an assumption. assumption if there reasonable number similar semantic extensions (where source target domains similar), then indicate existence metaphor. All necessary identify domains, or schema (cf. Clausner Croft "Domains Image Schemas"), identification co-occurrence. semantics co-occurrence "everyday metaphors" neither coincidence nor superficial phenomenon, but surface result structuring system. As will be demonstrated below, always case, at times merely "co-incidental." If does necessarily represent mapping, can w e determine which instances co-occurring expressions metaphoric correspondences "coincidental" their similarity? following section attempts answer question. However, before one broaches question "lexical co-incidence," must also confront closely related theoretical problem set membership. 2.1. Set Membership Conceptual Domains One fundamental questions face application prototype theory its processes analysis. Geeraerts, Grondelaers et al., Kleiber, amongst many others, has success level. This, however, remains successfully achieved broach issue directly, outlines importance offers needed properly investigate structures …