7
METAPHOR IN LINGUISTIC RESEARCH
МЕТАФОРА В ЛИНГВИСТИЧЕСКИХ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯХ
TILSHUNOSLIK TADQIQOTLARIDA METAFORA
Tuychiboyev Ikrom Bahodir o`g`li
Gulistan State Pedagogical Institute
Researcher.ikromtuychibev96@gmail.com, +998915039609
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13897146
ABSTRACT.
This article explores the multifaceted nature of metaphor through various
theoretical perspectives, including cognitive, pragmatic, conflict, anomaly, and interaction
theories. It highlights the evolution of metaphor from a mere figure of speech to a complex
figure of thought, emphasizing its role in shaping meaning and understanding in language. The
article discusses the contributions of different theorists, such as Max Black, and examines how
metaphors can reflect semantic category errors and cognitive processes. By investigating the
interplay between language, thought, and social context, the article reveals the intricate
mechanisms of metaphorical transfer and its significance in communication. Additionally, it
notes the challenges and questions that arise as researchers strive to decode the complexities
of metaphor, indicating a continued need for interdisciplinary study in linguistics, psychology,
and sociology. Overall, the article provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of
metaphor research and its implications for understanding human cognition and language use.
KEY WORDS:
metaphor, cognitive theory, pragmatic approach, conflict theory, anomaly
theory, semantic categories, language use.
ANNOTATSIYA:
Ushbu maqola kognitiv, pragmatik, konflikt, anomaliya va o'zaro ta'sir
nazariyalari kabi turli nazariy nuqtai nazarlar orqali metaforaning ko'p qirrali tabiatini
o'rganadi. U metaforaning oddiy nutqiy shakldan murakkab fikr figurasiga aylanishini yoritib
beradi, uning tilda ma’no va tushunishni shakllantirishdagi rolini ta’kidlaydi. Maqolada Maks
Blek kabi turli nazariyotchilarning hissalari muhokama qilinadi va metafora semantik toifadagi
xatolar va kognitiv jarayonlarni qanday aks ettirishi o'rganiladi. Til, fikr va ijtimoiy kontekst
o'rtasidagi o'zaro ta'sirni o'rganish orqali maqola metaforik uzatishning murakkab
mexanizmlarini va uning muloqotdagi ahamiyatini ochib beradi. Bundan tashqari,
tadqiqotchilar metafora murakkabliklarini dekodlashga intilishlari natijasida yuzaga keladigan
qiyinchiliklar va savollarni qayd etadi, bu esa tilshunoslik, psixologiya va sotsiologiyada
fanlararo oʻrganish zarurligini koʻrsatadi. Umuman olganda, maqola metafora tadqiqotlarining
hozirgi holati va uning inson bilimi va tildan foydalanishni tushunishga ta'siri haqida to'liq
ma'lumot beradi.
KALIT SO‘ZLAR:
metafora, kognitiv nazariya, pragmatik yondashuv, konflikt nazariyasi,
anomaliya nazariyasi, semantik kategoriyalar, tildan foydalanish.
АННОТАЦИЯ.
В этой статье рассматривается многогранная природа метафоры с
различных теоретических точек зрения, включая когнитивные, прагматические,
конфликтные, аномальные и теории взаимодействия. В ней подчеркивается эволюция
метафоры от простой фигуры речи до сложной фигуры мысли, подчеркивая ее роль в
8
формировании смысла и понимания в языке. В статье обсуждается вклад разных
теоретиков, таких как Макс Блэк, и рассматривается, как метафоры могут отражать
ошибки семантической категории и когнитивные процессы. Исследуя взаимодействие
между языком, мыслью и социальным контекстом, статья раскрывает сложные
механизмы метафорического переноса и его значение в коммуникации. Кроме того, в
ней отмечаются проблемы и вопросы, которые возникают, когда исследователи
стремятся расшифровать сложности метафоры, что указывает на постоянную
необходимость междисциплинарного изучения в лингвистике, психологии и
социологии. В целом, в статье дается всесторонний обзор текущего состояния
исследований метафоры и их последствий для понимания человеческого познания и
использования языка.
КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА:
метафора, когнитивная теория, прагматический подход,
теория конфликта, теория аномалий, семантические категории, использование языка.
INTRODUCTION.
Many questions that humanity has encountered throughout evolution,
and which continue to captivate researchers, are linked to the acquisition, encoding, storage,
and transmission of information. Information taken in from the external environment is
actively processed by individuals through thought, relating to various aspects of life. As this
information evolves over time, it requires ongoing organization, encoding, and re-encoding to
ensure its preservation and future transformation.
METHODOLOGY
. This study employs a qualitative approach to examine the multifaceted
nature of metaphor through a comprehensive literature review. The methodology involves
analyzing existing theoretical frameworks, including cognitive, pragmatic, conflict, anomaly,
and interaction theories, to understand their contributions to metaphor research. Primary
sources from notable scholars such as Max Black, Aristotle, and various contemporary linguists
are systematically reviewed to extract key concepts and insights. Additionally, the study
incorporates interdisciplinary perspectives from psychology and sociology to explore the
interplay between metaphor, language, and human cognition. Through this integrative
approach, the research aims to identify emerging patterns, challenges, and questions in
metaphorical studies, contributing to a deeper understanding of metaphorical transfer and its
significance in communication.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.
At the core of every effective informational message lies an
image and its auditory design, reflecting the conceptual and systemic connections of the
surrounding reality. Information received from the external world and stored in memory is
organized as a complex system of images, preserved as models, outlines, and patterns. When
needed, this information is processed at a verbal level through logical thought patterns
developed during cognition. "Words are sensory signs necessary for communication" [1].
During further information processing, logical forms of thought, such as judgments,
conclusions, and questions—more complex than individual words or concepts—reveal
relationships between objects that cannot be directly derived from sensory experience.
Figurative associations are essential components of thought across all levels of mental
activity and in various areas of professional and social life. Whether in daily life, technical and
humanitarian fields, or works of fiction, distinct figurative systems are employed, each
possessing universal, national, social, or professional significance. Any information, even the
9
most abstract, can be broken down into visual and figurative elements or communicated
through simpler associations.
The vast linguistic diversity that exists today only roughly mirrors the images and systems
stored in memory and reflected in an individual's consciousness. With a limited vocabulary, one
can generate countless metaphorical meanings, enriched by the subtle nuances of human
thought and emotion.
Understanding how sensory and cognitive categories are transformed into language
structures, and uncovering the rules governing lexical variation and compatibility based on the
nature of the information and communication context, is a key aspect of linguistic research. The
aim is to grasp the principles of how reality and human personality evolve as interconnected
elements. This requires identifying the processes of translating thoughts into language
structures, assessing their correlation, and analyzing these phenomena strictly from a linguistic
standpoint. Research on the relationship between language and thought must be supported by
parallel investigations and insights from various scientific disciplines.
Metaphor is a subject of scientific research that continually drives advancements in
various disciplines. It captures the attention not only of linguists and literary scholars but also
of psychologists, philosophers, sociologists, political scientists, and cultural theorists. Metaphor
is studied both in terms of its role as a linguistic unit and the mechanisms behind its creation.
Moreover, the process of metaphorization serves as both a linguistic naming tool and a
way of conceptualizing the world [2].
The new concepts formed through metaphor in the linguistic worldview merge logical
entities of different levels, blending the abstract with the concrete. These concepts arise from
the interaction of cognitive processes, empirical experience, cultural context, and the
collective's linguistic competence.
The development of the cognitive theory of metaphor, as explored in the works of both
domestic and international scholars (N.D. Arutyunova, A.N. Baranov, V.G. Gak, Yu.N. Karaulov,
V.N. Telia, G.N. Sklyarevskaya, V.K. Kharchenko, J. Lakoff, M. Johnson, M. Turner, E. McCormack),
necessitates the inclusion of extensive practical material. This underscores the relevance of the
present study, which seeks to examine metaphor through the lens of cognitive linguistics. In
this context, metaphor is linked to specific cognitive structures and is viewed as one of the key
mechanisms for understanding the world, reflecting extra-linguistic reality, and expressing
aspects of human intelligence through language and thought units.
The cognitive notions of reality embedded in metaphorical transfer are expressed
through specific linguistic forms, each carrying distinct semantic, emotional, informational, and
stylistic properties, as well as unique functional roles within a sentence. Metaphors emerge
when one phenomenon is likened to another based on the semantic similarity of the states,
attributes, or actions that define these phenomena. Formally, metaphorical transfer involves
using a word (or phrase, sentence) originally intended to describe certain objects or situations
to name or characterize other objects or situations, relying on the conditional identity of their
attributed predicative features.
Aristotle provided the classical definition of metaphor as a condensed comparison. In
modern linguistics, research into the various functional and pragmatic roles that accompany
the formation and articulation of metaphor in literary texts has led to the identification of
several aspects of its linguistic status: Conceptual – “Metaphor is not merely an unusual way of
10
using words but a method of artistic world-building, reflecting individual creativity in the
subjective content of poetic visions" [3]. Syntactic – “Metaphor is a statement about an object's
properties based on its similarity to something previously designated in the reinterpreted
meaning of a word" [4]; it is also described as “a transposition of identifying vocabulary,
intended to refer to the subject of speech, into the realm of predicates that describe its features
and properties” [5]. Semantic – “Metaphor involves the similarity of dissimilarities, the
identification of concepts that are broadly contradictory” [6]. Poetic – “Metaphor is a dream, a
sleep of language” [7]. Social – “A system of public associations” [8].
In the creation of a metaphor, there are typically two subjects involved: the main
(principal) subject of reference and the auxiliary (generalized) subject, which can take explicit
or implicit forms. The nature of the auxiliary subject, which conveys the attribute, is determined
by the main subject. It’s important to note that the simultaneous presence of both subjects is
not always evident in comparative constructions. For example, in the sentence "Water runs like
from a tub" (I. Krylov), the main object (Water runs (from the hole), like from a tub) is implied
but not explicitly stated.
The associative connections formed during metaphorical transfer can be either universal
or based on the author's subjective assessment of the phenomena being discussed. The
existence of ethnically marked images in language, which form the foundation of phraseological
expressions (such as "cunning as a fox" or "cowardly as a hare"), leads to their frequent use in
literature to portray characters. Some of these images share similar traits (for example, "free as
a bird" or "keen-sighted as an eagle"), while others are specific to particular cultures.
Associative images employed in fiction differ based on the subject of description and the
author’s pragmatic intentions. The selection of images for comparison is largely influenced by
established associations embedded in the minds of native speakers. These images are used to
engage the reader with the events described, making the details more relatable and
recognizable. For example: "Pierre became even more embarrassed, blushed to tears, as
children blush" (L. Tolstoy); "Amalia Ivanovna blushed like a lobster"; "After him ... red as a
peony ... entered the ashamed Razumikhin" (F. Dostoevsky); "The samovar's paint crawled
down Studzinsky's neck and cheeks" (M. Bulgakov).
In these examples, different images are used to illustrate the degree and nature of
blushing: children, lobster, peony, and samovar. Traditionally, the image of a lobster carries a
negative connotation, while the image of a child has a consistently positive association in the
minds of native speakers. In fiction, flowers are typically linked to youth and beauty. The use of
the flower image in this context suggests the hero's youth and inexperience, with the specific
reference to a peony likely reflecting the masculine form of the term.
Another image associated with a red face is the comparison to a poppy flower in fiction:
"Annushka lit up like a poppy flower" (I. Turgenev); "Yes, thank God, you are healthy! There is
no trace of the night's melancholy; your face is like a poppy flower" (A. Pushkin). This same
meaning can also be expressed through metaphorical predication: "Suddenly the color rushed
into her pale face"; "Suddenly the color flooded her whole face"; "The color hit her in the face
again" (F. Dostoevsky).
The variety of associative images corresponding to a predicative feature is influenced by
the frequency of that feature's occurrence and its significance. Typically, the range of images
used for comparison is limited to a few examples: talkative – magpie, parrot; fast – arrow, storm,
11
wind; hypocritical – chameleon; hardworking – bee, ant; soulless – doll, car; insensitive – log,
block of wood; gloomy – cloud; hard – rock, stone, flint; light – feather, cotton, blade of grass;
beautiful – sun, life; soft – wax, clay, etc.
In literary texts, symbolic images correspond to lexemes (such as nouns, verbs, adverbs,
etc.), the meanings of which are traditionally associated with these images.
The system of images and symbols ingrained in the consciousness of native speakers,
which carry stable meanings and positive or negative connotations, enables the selection of
specific options for comparison in each context.
In contemporary studies of metaphor, three primary perspectives on its linguistic nature
can be identified:
•
Metaphor as a means of existence for the meaning of a word,
•
Metaphor as a phenomenon of syntactic semantics,
•
Metaphor as a method of conveying meaning within a communicative act.
Along with this, it is necessary to dwell on some general linguistic theories of metaphor
that exist in modern domestic and foreign linguistic science.
Emotive theories of metaphor. They traditionally exclude metaphor from scientific and
descriptive discourse. These theories deny any cognitive content of metaphor, focusing only on
its emotional character; they consider metaphor as a deviation from the linguistic form, devoid
of any meaning. This view of metaphor is the result of a logical-positivistic attitude to meaning:
the existence of meaning can only be confirmed empirically. Thus, the expression sharp knife
has meaning, since this "sharpness" can be verified during tests, but a sharp word could already
be considered a completely meaningless combination of words, if not for the semantic shade
conveyed exclusively by its emotional coloring.
The concept of tension aligns with the idea that the emotional intensity of a metaphor
arises from the unusual combination of its referents [9].
The theory of metaphor as a substitution (substitutive approach) posits that any
metaphorical expression can be used in place of a literal equivalent and can be entirely replaced
by it. In this view, a metaphor represents the replacement of a correct word with an incorrect
one. This perspective is rooted in Aristotle's definition, which suggests that a metaphor assigns
a name to something that actually belongs to something else.
The cognitive essence of a metaphor can be viewed as its literal equivalent. In this sense,
a metaphor serves as a puzzle for the recipient to decipher. In this form, metaphors rejuvenate
old expressions by dressing them in beautiful language [10].
Comparative Theory posits that a metaphor is essentially an elliptical construction,
serving as an abbreviated form of a simple or artistic comparison.
According to this theory, the meaning of any metaphorical expression can still be
articulated through a literal equivalent, as a literal expression represents one form of explicit
comparison. For instance, when we say "this man is a lion," we are essentially asserting "this
man is like a lion." This implies that we are comparing all the characteristics of the man with
those of a lion to identify the similarities between them. These shared traits form the foundation
of the metaphor. Since comparisons can also be literal, the metaphorical definition is assigned
a stylistic function.
However, the comparative approach fails to account for the asymmetry inherent in many
metaphors. Similarity is generally considered a symmetrical concept; if A is like B, then B should
12
also be like A. Yet, most metaphors do not demonstrate this symmetry. For example, the
metaphor "surgeons are butchers" does not reverse to "butchers are surgeons."
The main issue with the comparative theory is that it relies on literal similarity to explain
metaphor without clarifying how that similarity is determined. After all, any two objects can
exhibit similarity in various ways, and there are countless options for such similarities.
Therefore, the comparative theory of metaphor must elucidate the essence of its fundamental
component—similarity.
In contrast, the next theory of metaphor is grounded in dissimilarity and is known as
conflict theory, first introduced by M. Beardsley.
According to Beardsley, metaphor serves as a prime example of "self-refuting" discourse;
it highlights a specific type of logical contradiction between the subjects of the metaphor. This
logical contradiction can be either direct or indirect. For instance, a direct contradiction is
evident in the expression "metaphysical streets," as streets are inherently physical. An example
of indirect contradiction is found in the phrase "this man is a fox," which implies that it is
logically impossible for a person to possess the attributes of both a human and a fox
simultaneously [11].
Anomaly theory generalizes several later variations of the previously discussed conflict
theory. Proponents of this theory maintain that conflicts and anomalies are intrinsic to
metaphor, influencing its identification and understanding. While the nature of the anomaly
may vary among its advocates, they all agree that it resembles a semantic category error.
Semantic categories classify general types of objects in the world, and a conflict arises when
attributes of one object are incorrectly assigned to its opposite. For instance, metaphors that
ascribe the qualities of animate objects to inanimate ones violate the established rules of these
semantic categories.
Advocates of the anomalous theory argue that such violations of semantic category rules
enable the identification of metaphorical expressions as non-literal; however, they differ in
their interpretations of these expressions.
The primary issue with conflict theory is that metaphorical conflict is seen as an inherent
feature of the words' meanings themselves, independent of context or the author's intentions.
In other words, it is a fundamentally formalistic theory. According to this view, metaphor can
be recognized and understood without consideration of extralinguistic factors, as it is
embedded in "the very structure of meaning" [11]. However, many metaphors do not generate
contradictions or violate any semantic categories when examined in isolation. For example, the
metaphor "No man is an island" emphasizes that people and islands are not the same, while the
metaphor "The old rock is brittle with age" becomes metaphorical only in relation to a specific
context, such as describing a cantankerous old geology professor.
Despite their shortcomings, both conflict theory and anomaly theory have significantly
contributed to the semantic analysis of metaphor. They address important aspects such as the
role of secondary meanings or connotations, as well as the concept of semantic categories and
their conflicts. However, both theories fundamentally assert that literal language is more
foundational than metaphorical language; they maintain that literal interpretation is primary,
with metaphorical interpretation arising only when the literal fails. Consequently, this
perspective views metaphor as merely a mistake or a semantic or contextual anomaly,
positioning metaphorical meaning as secondary to literal meaning.
13
The concept of metaphor as interaction, first proposed by Max Black in 1955 in his article
"Metaphor" (later included in his book Models and Metaphor in 1962 and expanded upon in
"More on Metaphor" in 1993), presents a different perspective. Black divides metaphor into
two components: a literal main subject (referred to as the tenor by Richards) and a
metaphorical auxiliary subject (known as the vehicle). Each of these components has its own
conceptual systems, which Black describes as "systems of commonplaces," encompassing a set
of properties and associative implications.
Thus, In Black's view, metaphor transcends mere words and encompasses a collection of
widely accepted knowledge and associated ideas. It represents the interaction between two
conceptual systems, allowing the properties and associations of the auxiliary subject to be
applied to the main subject. Consequently, the main subject is examined through the "filter" of
the auxiliary system, which selectively emphasizes, obscures, and organizes the defining
characteristics of the main subject.
CONCLUSION.
The cognitive approach to metaphor has redefined its status, viewing it not
merely as a trope or figure of speech but also as a figure of thought. Additionally, the pragmatic
approach—which explains the understanding of metaphor through the rules of language use—
has paved the way for the development of the activity theory of metaphor.
In the past three decades, linguistic research has shifted its focus toward the functioning
of language in speech, as well as the formation and transmission of meaning in utterances,
revealing new dimensions of long-studied phenomena, including metaphor. This shift has been
furthered by the influence of psychology and sociology, leading to the emergence of
interdisciplinary research areas that explore the connection between speech activity, thinking,
and human cognitive abilities.
The complexity and multifaceted nature of metaphor make it challenging to identify which
of the current perspectives will ultimately play a decisive role in understanding the intricacies
of metaphorical transfer. Each new observation or discovery advances researchers toward a
solution while simultaneously generating new questions and challenges.
References:
1.
Локк Дж. Опыт о человеческом разумении: Собр. соч.: в 3 т. М.: Мысль, 1985. Т. 1.
2.
Лакофф Дж., Джонсон М. Метафоры, которыми мы живем: Пер. с англ. / под ред. А.Н.
Баранова. М., 2004.
3.
Виноградов В.В. О поэзии Анны Ахматовой // Виноградов В.В. Поэтика русской
литературы: Сб. М.: Наука, 1976.
4.
Телия В.Н. Вторичная номинация и ее виды // Языковая номинация. Виды
наименований: Сб. М.: Наука, 1977.
5.
Арутюнова Н.Д. Метафора и дискурс. Вступ. ст. к сб. «Теория метафоры». М.:
Прогресс, 1990.
6.
Павлович Н.В. Язык образов. Парадигмы образов в русском поэтическом языке. М.:
Наука, 1995.
7.
Дэвидсон Д. Что означают метафоры // Теория метафоры: Сб. М.: Прогресс, 1990.
8.
Блэр М. Метафора // Теория метафоры: Сб. М.: Прогресс, 1990.
9.
McCormack E. R. A cognitive theory of metaphor. Cambridge, London, 1985.
10.
Black M. Models and metaphors. Ithaca, NY, 1962.
14
11.
Beardsley M. C. The metaphorical twist // Philosophy and phenomenological research,
1958.
12.
Black M. More about metaphor // metaphor and thought. Cambridge, 1993.
13.
Tuychibaev, B. (2023). OF PRESERVATION AND USE OF STONE MONUMENTS IN
PARTICULAR ISSUES.
Science and innovation
,
2
(C4), 70-75.
14.
Tuychiboev, B. B. (2021). THE ERA OF INITIAL IRON AGE MATERIAL CULTURE IN THE
MID-SYRDARYA.
Bulletin of Gulistan State University
,
2021
(2), 79-86.
