Philosophical Discussion on Metaphor in the Paradigms of Cognitive Linguistics and Analytical Philosophy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32405/2413-4139-2021-2(27)-131-138Keywords:
metaphor, conceptual metaphor, philosophical metaphor, cognitive linguistics, analytical philosophyAbstract
The article is devoted to the role of metaphors in philosophy. In contrast to the rhetorical meaning
of metaphor as a figure of language and a trope, philosophical metaphor reveals the semantic meaning of
philosophical theory. In the narrow sense, philosophy uses metaphorical language, because in the process
of creating new ideas, traditional terminology is not able to form appropriate means of expression. In
the broadest sense, metaphors form the basis of any metaphysical system. The meaning of metaphor is a
traditional problem of continental philosophy, where H. Blumenberg, P. Ricoeur, J. Derrida contributed to the
philosophical metaphorology. American philosophy started its philosophical discussion on metaphor in logical
and linguistics aspects. Cognitive and analytical approaches to the philosophical analysis of metaphors are
especially important. It is determined that philosophy uses metaphorical language not only for the formation of
means of expression: metaphors are the basis of any metaphysical system. Analytic philosophy has an accent on
logical and linguistics aspects of metaphorical propositions, their status of truth/false etc. In terms of cognitive
linguistics the analytic approach is too literal. Lakoff–Johnson’s cognitive theory of “conceptual metaphors”
considers metaphor as a fundamental basis of thinking and opens new avenues not only in the philosophical
understanding of scientific problems, but also in the development of methodology of humanities.
Downloads
References
Використані літературні джерела
1. Blumenberg H. Paradigms for Metaphorology / H. Blumenberg. – Cornell University Press, 2016. – 104 p.
2. Blumenberg H. Light as a Metaphor for Truth: At the Preliminary Stage of Philosophical Concept
Formation / H. Blumenberg // Modernity and the Hegemony of Vision [ed. David Michael Levin]. – Berkeley :
University of California, Berkeley, 1993. – P. 30–86.
3. Ricoeur P. The Rules of Metaphor. The creation of meaning in language / P. Ricoeur. – London and
New York : Routledge, 2004. – 454 p.
4. Derrida J. White Mythology: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy / J. Derrida, T. Moore // New
Literary History. – 1974. – Vol. 6. – No. 1. – P. 5–74.
5. Lakoff G. Metaphors we lived by / G. Lakoff, M. Johnson. – Chicago : The University of Chicago
Press, 1980. – 192 p.
6. Lakoff G. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought /
G. Lakoff. – New York : Basic Books, 1999. – 640 p.
7. Johnson M. Philosophy’s Debt on Metaphor / M. Johnson // The Cambridge Handbook on
Metaphor and Thought. – Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2008. – P. 39–52.
8. Дениско П. Розпізнання мети та джерела метафори у візуальних творах мистецтва / П. Де
ниско // Філософська думка. – 2015. – № 4. – С. 104–119.
9. Гальченко М. С. Візуальні метафори в цифровому освітньому просторі / М. С. Гальченко,
Є. Р. Борінштейн, Н. В. Іванова, Г. В. Ільїна // Інформаційні технології та засоби навчання. – 2021. –
Том 81. – № 1. – С. 1–14.
10. Pepper S. Metaphor in Philosophy / S. Pepper // The Journal of Philosophy. – 1928. – Vol. 25. –
No. 5. – P. 130–132.
11. Cohen D. Arguments and Metaphors in Philosophy / D. Cohen. – Lanham : UPA, 2004. 248 p.
12. Kovecses Z. Metaphor. A Practical Introduction / Z. Kovecses. – Oxford : University Press, 2002. – 285 p.
13. Davidson D. What metaphors mean / D. Davidson // Critical Inquiry. – 1978. – No. 5 (1). – Р. 31–47.
14. Rorty R. The Contingency of Language / R. Rorty // Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity. – Cambridge :
Cambridge University Press, 1989. – P. 3–22.
References
1. Blumenberg, H. (2016). Paradigms for Metaphorology. Cornell University Press, 104 p.
2. Blumenberg, H.; David Michael Levin [ed.]. (1993). Light as a Metaphor for Truth: At the Preliminary
Stage of Philosophical Concept Formation. Modernity and the Hegemony of Vision. Berkeley: University of
California, Berkeley, P. 30-86.
3. Ricoeur, P. (2004). The Rules of Metaphor. The creation of meaning in language. London and New
York: Routledge, 454 p.
4. Derrida, J., &Moore, T. (1974). White Mythology: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy. New Literary
History. Vol. 6. No. 1. P. 5–74.
5. Lakoff, G., & Jonson, M. (1980). Metaphors we lived by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 192 p.
6. Lakoff, G. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought.
New York: Basic Books, 640 p.
7. Johnson, M. (2008). Philosophy’s Debt on Metaphor. The Cambridge Handbook on Metaphor and
Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, P. 39–52.
8. Denysko, P. (2015). Rozpiznannia mety ta dzherela metafory u vizualnykh tvorakh mystetstva [Design
of metaphors and metaphors in visual works of art]. Filosofska dumka – Philosophical thought. 4. P. 104–119.
9. Halchenko, M. S., Borinshtein, Y. R., Ivanova, N. V., & Ilina, H. V. (2021). Vizualni metafory v
tsyfrovomu osvitnomu prostori [Visual metaphor in digital lighting space]. Informatsiini tekhnolohii ta zasoby
navchannia – Information technologies and technologies. 81(1). P. 1–14.
10. Pepper, S. (1928). Metaphor in Philosophy. The Journal of Philosophy. Vol. 25. Nо. 5. P. 130–132.
11. Cohen, D. (2004). Arguments and Metaphors in Philosophy. Lanham, 248 p.
12. Kovecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor. A Practical Introduction. Oxford : University Press, 285 p.
13. Davidson, D. (1978). What metaphors mean. Critical Inquiry. No. 5 (1). Р. 31–47.
14. Rorty, R. (1989). The Contingency of Language. Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity. Cambridge :
Cambridge University Press, P. 3–22.
