Book Note on Metaphors We Live By

悦悦悦

Book Note on Metaphors We Live By:
Reader: 赵悦
Reading Time: 1天
Reading Task: P66-84, Chapter16-18
Summary of the Content:
Chapter 16: Metaphorical Coherence
The chapter emphasizes that metaphors are not isolated but form coherent systems. Lakoff and Johnson illustrate this through the “Time Is Money” and “Time Is a Moving Object” metaphors. Despite being different, these metaphors share an underlying coherence in structuring our understanding of time. For example, expressions like “wasting time” and “time flying” both reflect the concept of time as a valuable resource or a moving entity, creating a consistent framework for conceptualization. The authors argue that such coherence allows metaphors to systematically organize our experiences and thoughts, rather than existing as random linguistic devices.
Chapter 17: Complex Coherences across Metaphors
This chapter extends the idea of coherence to show how multiple metaphors can interact to form complex conceptual systems. It uses the example of arguments, where metaphors like “Argument Is War” and “Argument Is a Building” coexist. While “winning an argument” comes from the war metaphor, “constructing a strong argument” stems from the building metaphor. These metaphors complement each other, with the war metaphor focusing on conflict and victory, and the building metaphor on structure and foundation. The authors highlight that such complex coherences enable us to understand abstract concepts through multiple concrete domains, enriching our conceptualizations.
Chapter 18: Some Consequences for Theories of Conceptual Structure
Lakoff and Johnson challenge traditional theories that view concepts as literal, discrete, and objectively defined. They propose that metaphorical coherence reveals concepts are fundamentally structured by metaphors, which are rooted in our bodily experiences. This has consequences for theories of meaning, as meaning is not absolute but emerges from metaphorical mappings. The chapter argues that conceptual structure is not static but dynamic, shaped by the coherent systems of metaphors we use. It calls for a shift in understanding how we conceptualize the world, prioritizing embodied cognition over abstract, disembodied theories.
Evaluation:
The authors’ analysis of metaphorical coherence is compelling, as it demonstrates the systematic nature of metaphors in our cognitive processes. By showing how different metaphors align to form cohesive conceptual frameworks, they reveal the depth of metaphorical influence on our thinking. The examples provided, such as those about time and arguments, effectively illustrate how coherence allows metaphors to structure our understanding consistently.
Reflection:
This reading has deepened my appreciation for the systematicity of metaphors in language and thought. I now notice how seemingly unrelated metaphorical expressions often share underlying coherences. For example, in discussions of emotions, we use metaphors like “emotional highs/lows” (space) and “emotional storms” (nature), which both structure emotions as entities with measurable qualities or natural forces, creating a coherent conceptual system.
The emphasis on embodied cognition has made me reconsider how we learn and communicate. Metaphors are not just linguistic tools but cognitive frameworks rooted in our physical experiences. This has implications for education, as using metaphorical coherence could help students grasp abstract concepts by connecting them to familiar domains.
Moreover, recognizing the cultural dimension of metaphorical systems encourages me to be more aware of how different cultures might conceptualize the same ideas through distinct metaphors. This awareness is crucial in cross-cultural communication, as misunderstanding metaphorical coherences can lead to misinterpretations.
Overall, these chapters have shifted my perspective on how metaphors shape our understanding of the world, highlighting their role not just in language but in constructing our conceptual realities.