Diachronic changes of conceptual metaphors of Bravery in Persian: A cognitive and corpus based approach

Document Type : مقالات علمی پژوهشی

Authors
E. saghafi 1
A. Afrashi 2
M. Assi 3
A. Farzad 4
1 PhD Candidate in General Linguistics, Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor of Linguistics, Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, Iran
3 Professor of Linguistics, Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, Iran
4 Associate Professor of Persian Language and Literature, Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, Iran
10.29252/LRR.12.4.1
Abstract
This paper analyzes the stability or changes of the Persian Language Speakers' views towards Bravery, as one of the concepts of the target domain of Morality from Kövecses's (1393: 43) point of view. The main question of this study is weather the concept of Bravery has changed from 8th to 10th lunar century compaired to the contemporary period. Moreover we aim to find a pattern to represent these changes. To achieve this goal, the authors studied the conceptual change or stability, through comparing the conceptual metaphors of Bravery. The results of this study show changes in some cultural components of this concept in Persian language speaker's society. It should be noted that the comparison of historical and contemporary evidences show that the general source domain of objects in both cases have been remained unchanging but the special source domains of objects have changed. The high frequency source domains of conceptualizing Bravery in Persian language are as follows: Power, Path, War, Material. The theoretical framework of the present research is the theory of conceptual metaphors proposed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) and the Trim's pattern for the conceptual networking of metaphors (2007).



The speeches of a generation are never exactly the same as their fathers or even their children. Although the speech differnces between successive generations may be insignificant and not much attention be paid to it, at intervals of several hundred years or more, the changes will be revealed. Arlotto suggests that variations can be considered as the equipments for historical linguistic discussions. Lakoff and Johnson believe that when a new metaphor is added to a language, it changes the conceptual system of the language as well as the way of understanding and the relative reactions of the people. Moreover they believe that language is constantly changing and adapting itself to the new conditions of the language community as people accept the new metaphorical concepts and lose the old ones. Their example to prove their claim is the changes in the cultures around the world due to the eminence of this metaphor: TIME IS MONEY.

Accordingly, we are going to vrify common conceptual metaphors of Bravery in Persian Language to achieve the stability or changes of the Persian Language Speakers' views towards Bravery, as one of the concepts of the target domain of Morality from Kövecses's (1393: 43) point of view. The main question of this study is weather the concept of Bravery has changed from 8th to 10th lunar century compaired to the contemporary period. Moreover we aim to find a pattern to represent these changes. To achieve this goal, the authors studied the conceptual change or stability, through comparing the conceptual metaphors of Bravery.

The main hypothesis of this research is as follows: The comparison of the metaphorical mappings of Bravery between the extracted metaphors from the historical and contemporary corpus of the Persian Linguistic Database shows that the source domain of conceptualizing Bravery has changed over time in Persian Language. In order to verify the hypothesis, the authors have used a descriptive deductive method applying the corpus based analysis method proposed by Anatol Stefanovich.

The results of this study show changes in some cultural components of this concept in Persian language speaker's society. It should be noted that the comparison of historical and contemporary evidences show that the general source domain of objects in both cases have been remained unchanging but the special source domains of objects have changed. The high frequency source domains of conceptualizing Bravery in Persian language are as follows: Power, Path, War, Material. The theoretical framework of the present research is the theory of conceptual metaphors proposed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) and the Trim's pattern for the conceptual networking of metaphors (2007).

Verifying the conceptual metaphors of Bravery as the active and inactive mappings in time intervals and its presentation through a diachronic network of metaphorical changes can be considered as the innovation of this research

Keywords

Subjects

خداپرستی، فرج‌الله (1376). فرهنگ جامع واژگان مترادف و متضاد زبان فارسی، شیراز: دانشنامۀ فارس.
صابری، زینب و همکاران (1396). «بررسی تطبیقی استعاره‌های مفهومی در کنایه‌های فارسی و مصری»، فصلنامه علمی- پژوهشی پژوهش‌های ادبیات تطبیقی. دوره 6، شماره 2، صص 144-167.
صراحی، محمد امین (1391). بررسی مقابله‌ای استعاره در زبان‌های فارسی و انگلیسی بر اساس نظریۀ استعاره-های مفهومی. پایان‌نامه دکتری. دانشگاه اصفهان.
کووچش، زُلتان (1393). مقدمه‌ای کاربردی بر استعاره. مترجم شیرین پورابراهیم. تهران: انتشارات سمت.
کووچش، زُلتان (1398). استعاره‌‌ها از کجا می‌آیند؟ شناخت بافت در استعاره. مترجم جهانشاه میرزا بیگی. تهران: انتشارات آگاه.
References
Aitchison, J. (1992), ‘Chains, nets or boxes? The linguistic capture of love, anger and fear’, in
W.G. Busse (ed.), Anglistentag (Proceedings 1991), Düsseldorf, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag,
pp. 25–38.
Barcelona, Antonio. (2001). On the systematic contrastive analysis of conceptual metaphors: Case
studies and proposed methodology. InM. P¨ utz (Ed.), Applied cognitive linguistics. Language
pedagogy (Vol. 2, pp. 117–146). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Boers, Frank, and Demecheleer, Murielle. (1997). A few metaphorical models in (Western) economic
discourse. In W. A. Liebert, G. Redeker, and L. Waugh (Eds.), Discourse and perspective in
cognitive linguistics (pp. 115– 129). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chilton, Paul, and Lakoff, George. (1995). Foreign policy by metaphor. In Christina Schaffner and A.
L. Wenden (Eds.), Language and peace (pp. 37– 59). Brookfield, VT: Dartmouth.
Fauconnier, Gilles and Mark Turner. (2002). The Way We Think. New York: Basic Books.
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Gentner, Dedre. 1983. Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive
Science, 7: 155–170.
Kövecses, Zoltan (1986). Metaphors of Anger, Pride and Love. A lexical Approach to the Study
of Concepts. Pragmatics and Beyond VII: 8. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John
Benjamins..
Kövecses, Zoltan. (1990). Emotion Concepts. Berlin and New York: Springer-Verlag.
Kövecses, Zoltan. (2005). Metaphor in Culture: Universality and Variation. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Kövecses, Zoltan. (2006). Language, Mind and Culture: A Practical Introduction. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Kövecses, Zoltan (2010). Metaphor and Emotion: Language Culture and body in Human
feeling, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About
the Mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George and Kövecses, Zoltan. 1987. The cognitive model of anger inherent in
American English. In D. Holland and N. Quinn (eds.), Cultural Models in Language
and Thought, 195–221. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford Dictionary (1991)
Pirzad Mashak, SH., A., Pazhakh, & A. Hayati (2012). A Comparative Study on basic emotion
Conceptual Metaphors in English and Persian Literary Texts. www.ccsenet.org/ies
International Education Studies Vol. 5, No. 1. 200-207.
Riddle, Elizabeth M. (July 2000). The “string” metaphor of life and language
in Hmong. Paper presented at the International Pragmatics Conference, Budapest, Hungary.
Stefanowitsch, Anatol. (2006). Words and their metaphors: A corpus-based approach, Trends
in Linguistics: Studies and Monographs, 171, 63.
Talebinejad, M. R., & Vahid Dastjerdi, H. (2005). A cross-cultural study of
animal metaphors: When owls are not wise! Metaphor and Symbol, 20: 133-150.
Trim, Richard. 2007." Metaphor Networks: The Comparative Evilution of Figurative
Language. UK: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN.
Trim, Richard. 2011. Metaphor and the Historical Evolution of Conceptual Mapping. NewYork:
Palgrave Macmilan.
Yu, Ning (1998). The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor in Chinese: A Perspective from
Chinese. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Language Related Research
Volume 12, Issue 4 - Serial Number 64
September and October 2021
Pages 1-32