|تعداد مشاهده مقاله||9,887,768|
|تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله||6,482,876|
A Corpus Analysis of Animal-Term Conceptual Metaphors in the Persian Book of Marzbannameh
|Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies|
|مقاله 2، دوره 12، شماره 1، شهریور 2020، صفحه 35-64 اصل مقاله (357.38 K)|
|نوع مقاله: Research Paper|
|شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22111/ijals.2020.5713|
|Mohammad Aliakbari1؛ Yousef Karami* 2|
|1English Language Department, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Ilam University, Ilam, Iran|
|2English Language Department, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Ilam University, Ilam|
|The current study investigated the distribution of animal terms in the Persian book of Marzbannameh and their metaphoric repetition in the users’ opinions, thoughts, and worthiness. By investigating the Persian book of Marzbannameh as one of the famous literary books which is rich of animal conceptual metaphors, a corpus of 376 animal terms in content has been chosen and analyzed. Four raters who were the Persian Literature teachers analyzed accurately the pertinent book for evaluating the available animal metaphors. And, two other raters who were the Persian Literature professors were asked to study the decisions and present the final propositions if they had different ideas about a concept. Moreover, as a supporting research method, focus groups were engaged by the Persian Literature teachers and professors to give their ideas and thoughts about the positive and negative qualities of the contained animals in the selected book. The results offered that animals are not distributed alike in this book, are used with diverse conceptualizations and stood for both positive and negative connotations. Also, it was found that the domestic animals generally have positive characteristics; however, some of them violate this rule, connoting just negative characteristics. After all, the wild animals, except for hawk, generally have negative characteristics.|
|conceptual metaphor؛ animal terms؛ culture؛ users’ ideas|
Aliakbari, M., & Faraji, E. (2014). Conceptualization of man’s behavioral and physical characteristics as animal metaphors in the spoken discourse of Khezel people. Linguistik online, 59(2), 57-59.
Aliakbari, M., & Karami, Y. (2019). A corpus analysis of ‘death’and ‘life’ metaphorical expressions based on Forough Farrokhzad’s Persian poetry book. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 7(4), 178-181.
Benczes, R., & Ságvári, B. (2018). Where metaphors really come from: Social factors as contextual influence in Hungarian teenagers’ metaphorical conceptualizations of life. Cognitive Linguistics, 29(1), 121-154.
Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and corpus linguistics (Vol. 6). John Benjamins Publishing.
Faghih, E. (2001). A contrastive analysis of the interpretations of animal metaphors in Persian and English. The international journal of Humanities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 8(2), 1-16.
Fontecha, A. F., & Catalan, R. M. J. (2003). Semantic derogation in animal metaphor: a contrastive-cognitive analysis of two male/female examples in English and Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(5), 771-797.
Gibbs, R. W. (2006). Metaphor interpretation as embodied simulation. Mind & Language, 21(3), 434-458.
Gibbs, R. W., & Gibbs Jr, R. W. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs Jr, R. W. (Ed.). (2008). The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs Jr, R. W., & Colston, H. L. (2012). Interpreting figurative meaning. Cambridge University Press.
Grady, E. J. (2007). Metaphor in Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Jafari, Z. (2014). Metaphorized animals: an investigation of animal metaphors in King Lear. Journal of International Social Research, 32(7), 354-367.
Kövecses, Z. (2002). Cognitive-linguistic comments on metaphor identification. Language and Literature, 11(1), 74-78.
Kövecses, Z. (2015). Where metaphors come from: Reconsidering context in metaphor. Oxford University Press.
Kövecses, Z. (2017). Levels of metaphor. Cognitive Linguistics, 28(2), 321-347.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. University of Chicago press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Conceptual metaphor in everyday language. The journal of Philosophy, 77(8), 453-486.
Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed.) (pp. 202-251). Cambridge University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites (Vol. 1). Stanford university press.
Liu, D. (2002). Metaphor, culture, and worldview: The case of American English and the Chinese language. University Press of Amer.
Miri, M., & Soori, A. (2015). A contrastive analysis of animal metaphor in English and Persian. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(2), 160-162.
Pan, M. X. (2019). The effectiveness of the conceptual metaphor approach to English idiom acquisition by young Chinese learners. Metaphor and the Social World, 9(1), 59-82.
Porat, R., & Shen, Y. (2017). Metaphor: The journey from bidirectionality to unidirectionality. Poetics Today, 38(1), 123-140.
Rodriguez, I. L. (2009). Of women, bitches, chickens and vixens: Animal metaphors for women in English and Spanish. Cultura, lenguaje y representación: revista de estudios culturales de la Universitat Jaume I, 7, 77-100.
Rashid, S. M., Hajimaming, P., & Muhammad, N. N. (2012). ‘Farm’ animal metaphors in Malay and Arabic figurative expressions: Implications for language learning. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 1(7), 33-39.
Rouhi, M., & Mahand, M. R. (2011). Animal metaphor in cognitive linguistics. Online Submission, 1(4), 251-254.
Veravini, S. (1225-1220). Marzbannameh. Publication of Iranian culture foundation.
Wang, C. & Dowker, A. (2007). Interpretation of animal metaphors: Evidence from Chinese and English children and adults [Paper presentation]. Child Language Seminar, University of Reading.
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 454
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 331