47
COGNITIVE METAPHOR THEORY AND CONCEPTUAL METAPHORICAL
EXPRESSION (WITH FRENCH EXAMPLES)
Pulatova Nigina Aminovna
Senior Lecturer
Samarkand State Institute of Foreign Languages
niguinterprete@mail.ru
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15738243
Abstract:
This article explores the principles of Cognitive Metaphor Theory (CMT),
developed by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, and analyzes how conceptual metaphorical
expressions structure human thought. Special attention is given to metaphorical expressions in
French, offering a cross-cultural linguistic comparison.
Key Words:
Cognitive Metaphor Theory, Conceptual Metaphor, Metaphorical Expression,
Source and Target Domain, Cross-cultural Metaphor, French Metaphors.
Cognitive Metaphor Theory (CMT) argues that metaphor is not just a stylistic device, but
a fundamental process of human cognition. It helps us understand abstract concepts through
more concrete domains. Language reflects these conceptual mappings. For example, we do not
just talk metaphorically, we
think metaphorically
.
Conceptual metaphors map two domains:
Source domain
: concrete, physical experience
Target domain
: abstract concept
Let’s examine some key conceptual metaphors and their realization in
French
.
A. TIME IS MONEY
This metaphor is common in Western cultures, where time is seen as a limited and
valuable resource.
English
:
You're wasting my time.
I can't afford to lose another hour.
French
:
Je
perds
mon temps.
(I’m losing my time)
Il
gagne
du temps.
(He’s gaining time)
Chaque minute
coûte cher
.
(Every minute is expensive)
B. LIFE IS A JOURNEY Life is often conceptualized as a path with goals, obstacles, and
directions.
English
:
He’s come a long way.
She’s at a crossroads.
French
:
Il a
fait du chemin
.
(He’s made some way)
Elle est à un
carrefour de la vie
.
(She is at a crossroads of life)
Il a
déraillé
.
(He went off track / derailed)
C. ARGUMENT IS WAR
Debate and argument are conceptualized as battles.
English
:
She attacked my point.
48
He defended his position.
French
:
Il a
attaqué
mes idées.
(He attacked my ideas)
Elle
défend
sa position avec force.
(She defends her position strongly)
Ils sont en
désaccord frontal
.
(They are in frontal disagreement)
D. LOVE IS A JOURNEY
Love relationships are seen as two people traveling together.
English
:
We're going in different directions.
Our relationship is at a dead end.
French
:
Nous avons
pris des chemins différents
.
(We’ve taken different roads)
Notre relation est dans une
impasse
.
(Our relationship is in a dead end)
On avance
main dans la main
.
(We move forward hand in hand)
Even though the
underlying metaphors may be universal
, their linguistic realization is
culture-specific.
Example: The Heart as a Metaphor for Emotion
Russian
:
Говорить от сердца
(To speak from the heart)
French
:
Il a le cœur sur la main
(He wears his heart on his sleeve / is generous)
French
:
Avoir mal au cœur
(Literally: to have heartache — can mean nausea or emotional
pain)
Here, while “heart” is a common metaphor for emotion, expressions and connotations
differ in usage.
Metaphors are not limited to poetic or literary language. They
structure our
understanding of politics, science, relationships, and daily experiences
.
Example: THE MIND IS A CONTAINER (LE MENTAL EST UN CONTENANT)
English
:
He has a lot on his mind.
Her head is full of ideas.
French
:
Il a beaucoup de choses
en tête
.
(He has many things in his head)
Ma tête est
pleine
.
(My head is full)
Je dois
vider
mon esprit.
(I need to empty my mind)
Cognitive Metaphor Theory demonstrates that
metaphors are central to human
cognition
, not just to rhetoric. Through metaphors, we conceptualize the world around us. The
use of
French metaphorical expressions
provides insight into how cultural and linguistic
factors shape these mappings. A comparative study reveals both universal and culture-specific
dimensions of metaphor.
References:
Используемая литература:
Foydalanilgan adabiyotlar:
1.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980).
Metaphors We Live By
. University of Chicago Press.
2.
Kövecses, Z. (2010).
Metaphor: A Practical Introduction
. Oxford University Press.
49
3.
Danblon, E. (2002).
Rhétorique et rationalité
. Paris: L’Harmattan.
4.
Bonhomme, M. (1998).
Les figures de style
. Paris: Belin.
