This essay discusses the challenges metaphors pose to theories of meaning originating from both the branches of Pragmatics and Semantics. A metaphor is a conventional use of language where one linguistic object, namely a target domain, and the concept behind it is assigned to another linguistic object and the concept behind it, namely a source domain, from which it appears to have borrowed a determined feature even if the two concepts are unlike.
In rhetorics metaphors function as stylistic embellishments to beautify speech and entertain a certain audience for purposes of an ideological effect, such as persuasion or motivation. Namely they have the power to create new prejudices and beliefs and provide a new view of the world.
Contents
1.1.Introduction to Metaphors
1.2. The Features of Metaphors
1.2.1. Metaphors as tropes
1.2.2. Conventionality issues
1.2. 3. Analogical mapping
1.2.4. Asymmetry
1.2.5. Systematicity
1.2.5 Abstraction
1.3. The Functions of Metaphors
1.3.1. Stylistic and ideological effects
1.3.2. Cognitive effects and theory drafting
2.1 Theories of meaning
2.2. Paper Thesis: The Importance of the Context
3.1. The Principles of Compositionality
3.2. The challenge metaphors pose to the Principles of Compositionality
3.3. How the Principles of Compositionality fail to interpret metaphors
4.1. Grice’s Principles of Communication
4.2. The challenge metaphors pose to Grice’s Principles of communication
5. Conclusion: The key importance of the context in the interpretation of metaphors
References
- Quote paper
- Georgia Foskolou (Author), 2019, Interpreting Metaphors through Theories of Meaning. Conventional and Literal Meaning, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/498954
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X.