Recently several attempts were undertaken to unite the field of metaphor studies, trying to reconcile the conceptual/cognition and linguistic/discourse approaches to metaphor (Hampe, 2017b). The dynamic view of metaphor espoused by amongst others Gibbs (2017a) as a way to unify the field of metaphor studies is said to converge on findings and theoretical predictions found in cognition and discourse approaches. The author argues this focus on dynamical models to explain the multi-scale socio-cognitive aspects of metaphor as an emergent phenomenon is not robust enough. Complexity and dynamical systems are merely a modelling technique to deploy theory for empirical testing of hypotheses; a dynamic view of metaphor needs a coherent background theory to base its dynamic modelling of metaphor in action on (Chemero, 2009). I argue that it can be successfully based on the ecological-enactive framework available within the modern paradigm of 4E cognitive science. This framework makes possible explanation of both 'lower' cognition and 'higher' cognition emerging in the interaction of an organism with its environment. In addition, I sketch how recent theoretical insights from ecological-enactivism (Baggs and Chemero, 2018) concerning Gibson's notion of environment apply to the attempted unification of the field of metaphor studies. I close by suggesting how an understanding of metaphor as an ecological affordance of the socio-cultural environment can provide a rich basis for empirical hypotheses within a dynamical science of metaphor.
LINK
An agreed definition of metaphor does not appear to exist, with theorists and researchers agreeing only to a more general type of description of metaphor (Cameron, 1999). These general descriptions build on the derivation of the word metaphor from the Greek word meta, meaning above or over, and phorein, meaning to carry or bear from one place to another. Metaphor is, therefore, described as carrying meaning from one domain to another (Kopp, 1995)
DOCUMENT
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to conduct a critical analysis to address cultural metaphors – a much overlooked aspect of cross-cultural studies. Mainstream cultural metaphors (e.g. the iceberg, the software of the mind, the onion, and the distance) are not only limited in number, but are also overwhelmingly based on the static paradigm – as opposed to the dynamic paradigm that is often sidelined in academic discourse.Design/methodology/approachThe paper introduces the Diagram of Diversity Pathways – an interdisciplinary framework that sheds some light on how the inherent meaning and heuristic orientation of static cultural metaphors may stand at odds with evidence from the newly emerged field of neurobiology.FindingsThe implications of these metaphors are called into question, namely, culture is all about differences; values are stable; values guide behaviors; and values are seen as binaries.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper suggests that theorists and practitioners should pay more attention to the contribution and scholarly work of the dynamic paradigm since there appears to be substantial compatibility between them.Originality/valueThe matching of neurobiology and dynamic paradigm brings into focus alternative metaphors which not only offer insightful perspectives but also may open doors to perceive culture in a new way. Furthermore, cultural metaphors deserve more academic scrutiny because metaphors and theory development can have a symbiotic existence.
DOCUMENT
