Not Signed-In
Which clippings match 'Polysemy' keyword pg.1 of 1
16 NOVEMBER 2014

In cognitive linguistics metaphors are not simply stylistic devices but processes which enable understanding through the mapping of source domains onto target domains

"The conception of metaphor in cognitive linguistics contradicts the conception of metaphor in literary studies in fundamental ways: Metaphor is not a stylistic device, but an experiential and cognitive process, in which we use properties, relations, and entities that characterize one domain of experience and/or knowledge (source domain) to understand, think, plan, and talk about a second domain (target domain) that is different in kind from the first. [7]

According to CMT [conceptual metaphor theory], source domains come from everyday bodily perception and movement. They are grounded in embodied experience (grounding hypothesis). Source domains are needed to make sense of target domains. By definition, a conceptual metaphor is a unidirectional mapping across cognitive domains. The mappings are tightly structured and structure from a source domain is (partially) mapped onto a target domain. The mapping is highly selective, as there are ontological correspondences according to which entities in the source domain (agents, objects, trajectories and so forth) systematically correspond to entities in the target domain. The point is, that we do not copy structure from SD [source domains] to TD [target domains], but we import whole sets of knowledge / inferences / entailments from the source domain into the target domain. The mapping does not work according to an arbitrary rule, but it is a tightly packed, highly selective and constrained process that allows us to reason about abstract domains. [7]"

(Alexandra Jandausch, 2012)

[7] Lakoff, George (1997): "Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind". Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Jandausch, A. (2012). "Conceptual Metaphor Theory and the Conceptualization of Music". 5th International Conference of Students of Systematic Musicology. Montreal, Canada.

Fig.1. The Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation, Passive Smoking: Shotgun [http://adsoftheworld.com/media/print/the_roy_castle_lung_cancer_foundation_passive_smoking_shotgun].

[The source domain in the following image refers to the concept of a shotgun, which through its mapping onto the target domain of the cigarettes communicates the idea that smoking kills.]

1

TAGS

2012 • abstract conceptual relations • Alexandra Jandausch • analogue correspondence • argument is war • automated metaphorical mappings • basic metaphor theory • bodily movement • bodily perception • cognitive domain • cognitive linguistics • cognitive process • conceptual correspondence • conceptual domainconceptual metaphor • conceptual metaphor theory • conceptualisation of music • cross-modal metaphor • domain of experience • domain of knowledge • embodied experience • experiential process • Friedemann Pulvermuller • George Lakoff • Gilles Fauconnier • grounding hypothesis • image schema theory • image schemas • inference • inference patterns • Jay Seitz • Jean Mandler • literary studies • love is a journey • mapping • mappings • Mark Johnson • Mark Turner • metaphor • metaphoric relations • Michael Tomasello • mnemonic • movement-movement metaphor • musicology • ontological correspondence • patterns of semantic change • perceptual-affective metaphor • perceptual-perceptual metaphor • polysemyrepresentational thinkingrepresentational thinking expressed in metaphors • systematic correspondence • target-domain as source-domain • target-domain is source-domain • theories are buildings • theory of music • unconscious metaphorical mappings • unidirectional mapping • University of Cologne • Vittorio Gallese

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
21 JULY 2012

Roland Barthes: Readerly and Writerly Texts

"The writerly text is a perpetual present, upon which no consequent language (which would inevitably make it past) can be superimposed; the writerly text is ourselves writing, before the infinite play of the world (the world as function) is traversed, intersected, stopped, plasticized by some singular system (Ideology, Genus, Criticism) which reduces the plurality of entrances, the opening of networks, the infinity of languages."

(Roland Barthes, p.5)

1). Roland Barthes (1970). "S/Z" translated by Richard Miller, Blackwell Publishing.
2). A British one penny coin from 1903, which has been defaced by Suffragettes. Crown copyright.

1

TAGS

1970 • codes of meaning • Comedie Humaine • criticismdifferancegenusHonore de Balzacideology • infinity of languages • languagelisable • lisible • literary criticismnarratology • opening of networks • ourselves writing • plasticised • plural • plurality • plurality of entrances • polysemouspolysemypost-structuralismreaderly textsRoland Barthes • S/Z • Sarrasine • scriptiblestructuralism • structuralist analysis • text • text of the story • the pastwriterly texts

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
15 JUNE 2012

Audience Research: Reception Analysis

"Despite the (implicit) nominal link to the work on what is also called 'Reception Theory', within the field of literary studies, carried out by Wolfgang Iser, Hans Jauss and other literary scholars (particular in Germany), the body of recent work on media audiences commonly referred to by this name, has on the whole, a different origin, although there are some theoretical links (cf., the work of Stanley Fish) than the work in literary theory. In practice, the term 'reception analysis', has come to be widely used as a way of characterising the wave of audience research which occurred within communications and cultural studies during the 1980s and 1990s. On the whole, this work has adopted a 'culturalist' perspective, has tended to use qualitative (and often ethnographic) methods of research and has tended to be concerned, one way or another, with exploring the active choices, uses and interpretations made of media materials, by their consumers.

As indicated in the previous discussion of 'The Media Audience', the single most important point of origin for this work, lies with the development of cultural studies in the writings of Stuart Hall at the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies at the University of Birmingham, England, in the early 1970s and, in particular, Hall's widely influential 'encoding/decoding' model of communications (see the discussion of 'The Media Audience' for an explanation of this model). Hall's model provided the inspiration, and much of the conceptual framework for a number of C.C.C.S' explorations of the process of media consumption, notably David Morley's widely cited study of the cultural patterning of differential interpretations of media messages among The 'Nationwide' Audience and Dorothy Hobson's work on women viewers of the soap opera Crossroads. These works were the forerunners of a blossoming of cultural studies work focusing on the media audience, throughout the 1980s and 1990s, including, among the most influential, from a feminist point of view, the work of Tania Modleski and Janice Radway on women consumers of soap opera and romance, and the work of Ien Ang, Tamar Liebes and Elihu Katz, Kim Schroder and Jostein Gripsrud on international cross cultural consumption of American drama series, such as Dallas and Dynasty.

Much of this work has been effectively summarised and popularised, especially, in the United States by John Fiske, who has drawn on the theoretical work of Michel de Certeau to develop a particular emphasis on the 'active audience', operating within what he terms the 'semiotic democracy' of postmodern pluralistic culture. Fiske's work has subsequently been the object of some critique, in which a number of authors, among them Budd, Condit, Evans, Gripsrud, and Seamann have argued that the emphasis on the openness (or 'polysemy') of the message and on the activity (and the implied 'empowerment') of the audience, within reception analysis, has been taken too far, to the extent that the original issue––of the extent of media power––has been lost sight of, as if the 'text' had been theoretically 'dissolved' into the audience's (supposedly) multiple 'readings' of (and 'resistances' to) it.

In the late 1980s, there were a number of calls to scholars to recognise a possible 'convergence' of previously disparate approaches under the general banner of 'reception analysis' (cf. in particular, Jensen and Rosengren), while Blumler et al. have claimed that the work of a scholar such as Radway is little more than a 're–invention' of the 'uses and gratifications' tradition––a claim hotly contested by Schroder. More recently, both Curran and Corner have offered substantial critiques of 'reception analysis'––the former accusing many reception analysts of ignorance of the earlier traditions of media audience research, and the latter accusing them of retreating away from important issues of macro–politics and power into inconsequential micro–ethnographies of domestic television consumption. For a reply to these criticisms, see Morley, 1992."

(David Morley, The Museum of Broadcast Communications)

1

TAGS

1970s1980s1990sactive audience • active choices • activity • American drama series • Anna-Maria Seemann • audienceaudience research • Billy Budd • Celeste Condit • Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studiescommunication theorycommunications and cultural studiesconsumersconsumption • Crossroads (television series) • cultural patterning • cultural studies • culturalist perspective • Dallas (television series) • David Morley • differential interpretations • domestic television consumption • Dorothy Hobson • Dynasty (television series) • Elihu Katz • Elizabeth Evans • empowerment • encoding/decoding • ethnographic researchfeminist perspective • Hans Jauss • Ien Ang • international cross cultural consumption • interpretation • James Curran • Janice Radway • Jay Blumler • John Corner • John Fiske • Jostein Gripsrud • Karl Erik Rosengren • Kim Schroder • Klaus Jensen • literary scholarship • literary studiesliterary theory • macro-politics and power • MBC • media • media as text • media audience • media audience research • media audiencesmedia consumption • media messages • media power • media studiesmedia textmessageMichel de Certeau • micro-ethnographies • micro-ethnographies of domestic television consumption • model of communication • multiple readings • Museum of Broadcast Communicationsopennesspolysemy • postmodern pluralistic culture • powerqualitative research methods • reader-response criticism • reader-response theory • reception analysis • reception analysts • reception theory • romance • semiotic democracy • soap opera • Stanley Fish • Stuart Hall • Tamar Liebes • Tania Modleski • television • television consumption • textUnited StatesUniversity of Birmingham • uses and gratifications • Wolfgang Iser • women consumers • women viewers

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
21 JUNE 2006

Inside out: Issues of Interpretation in Virtual Heritage

"This paper discusses the significance of cultural heritage content in virtual heritage, and outlines some of the issues of communicating this content for public interpretation. This discussion is presented in response to a twofold problem identified in the virtual heritage field: firstly; the proliferation of technical research, which tends to represent only tangible cultural heritage, and overlooks the intangible dimensions of sites or artefacts; and secondly, the broader need to contextualise virtual heritage within social, economic and political structures. Instead, a critical framework is proposed through reconceptualising virtual heritage as cultural constructs, and the framework is informed by three broad characteristics: knowledge can be considered multivocal and fragmented; representations can be dynamic and open–ended; and interpretation process is polysemic. The core of the framework emphasises the importance of content (oral histories, dances, music etc.) in guiding the production of virtual heritage, as opposed to technology being the sole motivator. Further still, the framework discusses how content in virtual heritage needs to be transformed from merely representing quantitative data towards cultural information, and this is suggested through representing meaningful relationships between cultural heritage elements. The departure point of this paper is then discussing this framework in relation to interpretation, in particular issues of visual communication, ideology and interactivity. This paper informs a larger research project examining the capacity for intercultural interpretations of virtual heritage in museums."
(Mia Thornton, 2006)

1). Thornton, M. (2006). Virtual Heritage: Open to Interpretation. Communicating Cultural Heritage in the 21st Century, Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology: 52–60.

TAGS

Brighton • CAA2006 • cultural codescultural heritagefragmentedideologyinterculturalMia Thornton • multivocal • museum • open-end • oral historypolysemyrepresentationresearchUKvirtual heritage

CONTRIBUTOR

Mia Thornton
27 MAY 2005

Differance: the formation of form

"The word 'differance', spelled with an 'a', is a coined term, and Derrida contrasts it with the vernacular term 'difference'. Patterns of 'Difference,' he explains, [are ] ...'produced' – deferred –– by 'differance' (Derrida, 1982, p.14). But what does this mean? That difference is deferred by differance? Imagine observing a quilt on the wall with patches of yellow, blue and white. If you notice the yellow and the non–yellow, you see a pattern of concentric boxes. If you notice the blue and the non–blue you see a chequered design. Each pattern is a play of differences, but it is a different set of differences when yellow is differentiated from non–yellow than when blue is differentiated from non–blue, a different set of differences that shows us different patterns. What is interesting about this shift from one pattern to the other is that it not only calls our attention to a new pattern, but that it suppresses our awareness of the other pattern. DifferAnce, defers a pattern of differences (say the pattern of differences between the blue and the not–blue). That is, one pattern of differences pushes into the background another possible play of patterns. You cannot study the pattern of yellows and the pattern of blues at the same time because differance causes one or the other patterns to be 'deferred'. DifferAnce is the hidden way of seeing things that is deferred out of awareness by our distraction with the imagery that captures our attention. Because it contains this other way to see things 'DifferAnce is the...formation of form.'(Derrida, 1976, p.63)."

(Lois Shawver)

Derrida, Jacques. 1982 Differance. In Jacques Derrida (Ed.), Margins of Philosophy, Chicago, USA: The University of Chicago Press.Derrida, Jacques. 1976 Grammatology, Baltimore, USA: The Johns Hopkins.

1

TAGS

defer • deferment • degrees of interrelationdifferanceformation of formJacques Derrida • Lois Shawver • neographism • pattern • patterns of difference • polysemouspolysemyquiltvernacular
Sign-In

Sign-In to Folksonomy

Can't access your account?

New to Folksonomy?

Sign-Up or learn more.