Novel metaphor and conceptual stability

Abstract

This paper discusses three radically different approaches to the issue of novel metaphor: the classic view, according to which metaphor is itself defined by its novelty with respect to our established conceptual systems; the cognitivist view, in which novel conceptual metaphors are considered a possible but relatively rare phenomenon; and the deconstructionist view, in which novelty in metaphor is seen as either impossible or a non-issue. The possibility of reconciling valuable insights yielded in each of these approaches is explored, and the case is made for taking the matter under a nonrepresentationalist, Wittgensteinian angle. KEY-WORDS: novel metaphor, conceptual stability, representationalism, Wittgenstein.RESUMO:Este trabalho discute três abordagens radicalmente diferentes para a questão da metáfora nova: a visão clássica, segundo a qual a metáfora é definida pela sua novidade em relação a sistemas conceituais estabelecidos; a visão cognitivista, em que metáforas conceituais novas são consideradas um fenômeno possível mas relativamente raro; e a visão desconstrucionista, em que a novidade na metáfora é vista como impossível ou uma não-questão. A possibilidade de se reconciliar reflexões valiosas provenientes de cada uma dessas abordagens é explorada e a proposta de se abordar o problema a partir de uma perspectiva wittgensteiniana é defendida. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: metáfora nova, estabilidade conceptual, representacionismo, Wittgenstein.This paper addresses the issue of novel metaphor. My discussion will be centered around the possibility of conceptual novelty in metaphor, around what has once been described by Lakoff and Turner (1989:51) as the attempt to step outside the ordinary ways we think metaphorically [] to offer new modes of metaphorical thought. If novel metaphor is taken D.E.L.T. A., 22:ESPECIAL, 2006 (123-145)

Keajekan Konseptual Dalam Metafora Baru

“…Dalam pendekatan dekonstruksionisme terdapat pandangan bahwa kebaharuan metafora merupakan kemustahilan dan tidak perlu dipermasalahkan. Martins (2006) menyimpulkan bahwa penggunaan wawasan Wittgensteinian tentang bahasa dan makna telah membuka kemungkinan untuk menyatukan ketiga pendekatan di atas dalam pengkajian metafora baru dan keajekan konseptual.…”

“…Sejak 80-an penelitian terhadap metafora baru telah banyak menarik perhatian peneliti dari berbagai disiplin seperti linguistik, antropologi, dan psikologi. Dari sekian banyak penelitian yang mengambil metafora baru sebagai data penelitian, hanya satu kajian (Martins 2006) yang membahas metafora baru dan keajekan konseptual. Namun, Martins (2006) hanya melihat bagaimana tiga pendekatan yang berbeda seperti pandangan klasik, kognitivisme, dan dekonstruksionisme mendekati metafora baru.…”

“…Dari sekian banyak penelitian yang mengambil metafora baru sebagai data penelitian, hanya satu kajian (Martins 2006) yang membahas metafora baru dan keajekan konseptual. Namun, Martins (2006) hanya melihat bagaimana tiga pendekatan yang berbeda seperti pandangan klasik, kognitivisme, dan dekonstruksionisme mendekati metafora baru. Belum ada penelitian sebelumnya yang mencoba melihat bagaimana pengaruh keajekan konseptual terhadap kemapanan metafora baru.…”