A Cognitive Analysis Of Metaphor, Metonymy And Image Schema’s Interaction Patterns

Lakoff (1987) contents that we human beings structure our knowledge about theworld in terms of idealized cognitive models. Metaphorical mappings, metonymicmappings and image-schematic structure are three of four types of structuringprinciple of an ICM. In recent years, the study of conceptual interaction in CognitiveLinguistics has attracted the attention of many scholars, and the research ofcorrelation between metaphor and other types of structuring principle has got its placein Cognitive Linguistics.With the philosophy of experiential realism, this thesis analyzes the conceptualinteraction patterns of metaphor, metonymy, and image schemas to examine the waythey are related in conceptual interaction by the analyses of the expressions in Englishand Chinese. In this thesis, the interaction patterns are illustrated by figures andmainly answer the following research questions:(1) What is the way metaphors and image schemas are related in conceptualinteraction?(2) What is the way metonymies and image schemas are related in conceptualinteraction?(3) What is the role image schemas play in structuring the relationship of thesource and target domains of numerous metaphors and understanding the role ofmetonymy in reasoning?(4) what is the experiential bases of the interaction patterns of metaphor,metonymy and image schemas?(5) What is the role metaphor play in the interplay?In this thesis, metaphor and metonymy are described as conceptual mappings,which differ only in the nature of the domains involved. As two different cognitiveprocess, they based our bodily and physical experiences. Metaphor has the function ofunderstanding and metonymy serves the function of understanding. Image schema isdefined as pre-conceptual abstract knowledge structures based on recurrent patterns ofexperience.The analyses reveal that conceptual interaction frequently involves the activationof three types of cognitive model (i.e. metaphor, metonymy and image schemas). Inevery case of conceptual interaction, the metaphor always provides the basic pattern for the conceptual interplay where both the metonymy and the image schemas areeasily accommodated. The appearance of image schema in conceptual interaction areubiquitous and image schemas can fully interpret the way conceptual interactionworks. Image schema is basic for our understanding of the role of metonymic inreasoning. Image schemas are needed in order to determine the source and targetdomains of a metonymic mapping and are capable of endowing the expression with astrong axiological value. Metonymy in conceptual interaction is always subsidiaryboth to metaphor and image-schematic structure. Metonymy allows the requirementof the mapping imposed by the metaphor and develops within either the source or thetarget domain of the metaphor. The metonymy complies with the logic of the imageschema it may interact with. Experiential realism ascribes an especially important roleto image schematic structures. And conceptual metaphors and metonymies are notarbitrary but are grounded in our bodily and physical experience. Once established,conceptual metaphors and metonymies will impose its structure on real life and willbe made real in various ways.