Inconsistency in Conceptual Metaphor Theory

IF 0.5 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
A. Kertész, Csilla Rákosi
{"title":"Inconsistency in Conceptual Metaphor Theory","authors":"A. Kertész, Csilla Rákosi","doi":"10.1163/23526416-bja10054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nAlthough Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980) theory of conceptual metaphor has been extremely popular and successful, it has been criticized in many respects, one of which is its alleged inconsistency. This criticism presupposes that the principle of non-contradiction is the most important pillar of scientific theorizing because its violation turns the theory into logical chaos. Against this background, the paper asks: What kinds of inconsistencies emerge in conceptual metaphor theory and how should they be evaluated? In order to give an answer, the authors introduce Kertész and Rákosi’s (2019) [2012], (2022) p-model as a metatheoretical framework, with the help of which they analyse those arguments which charge conceptual metaphor theory with inconsistency. The authors conclude that if the dichotomy between inconsistency and consistency is replaced by the sophisticated distinctions among strong p-inconsistency, well-motivated permanent p-paraconsistency, temporary p-paraconsistency, and p-consistency, then the initial question can be answered in a straightforward manner.","PeriodicalId":52227,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Semantics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Semantics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/23526416-bja10054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980) theory of conceptual metaphor has been extremely popular and successful, it has been criticized in many respects, one of which is its alleged inconsistency. This criticism presupposes that the principle of non-contradiction is the most important pillar of scientific theorizing because its violation turns the theory into logical chaos. Against this background, the paper asks: What kinds of inconsistencies emerge in conceptual metaphor theory and how should they be evaluated? In order to give an answer, the authors introduce Kertész and Rákosi’s (2019) [2012], (2022) p-model as a metatheoretical framework, with the help of which they analyse those arguments which charge conceptual metaphor theory with inconsistency. The authors conclude that if the dichotomy between inconsistency and consistency is replaced by the sophisticated distinctions among strong p-inconsistency, well-motivated permanent p-paraconsistency, temporary p-paraconsistency, and p-consistency, then the initial question can be answered in a straightforward manner.
概念隐喻理论中的不一致性
尽管Lakoff和Johnson(1980)的概念隐喻理论非常流行和成功,但它在许多方面受到了批评,其中之一是其所谓的不一致性。这种批评的前提是,非矛盾性原则是科学理论化的最重要支柱,因为违反该原则会使理论陷入逻辑混乱。在此背景下,本文提出了一个问题:概念隐喻理论中出现了哪些不一致性?如何评价这些不一致性?为了给出答案,作者引入了kertsamsz和Rákosi (2019) [2012], (2022) p模型作为元理论框架,借助该框架,他们分析了那些使概念隐喻理论具有不一致性的论点。作者得出结论,如果用强p-不一致性、良好动机的永久p-副一致性、临时p-副一致性和p-一致性之间的复杂区分来取代不一致性和一致性之间的二分法,那么最初的问题就可以以一种直截了当的方式得到回答。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cognitive Semantics
Cognitive Semantics Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信