A Comparative Study On Conceptual Metaphor And Conceptual Integration

With the development of the conceptual mechanism, more and more linguistic scholars have been interested in comparing the conceptual metaphor (CM) and the conceptual integration (CI). They analyze the two theories systematically and extract the similarities and differences between them. While the author explores that the previous inquiring of the two theories has a certain defection as following:[1] Not comprehensive in the explanation of the features of the two theories, shallow coverage.[2] Lack of in-depth analysis of the framework of the two, especially of the detailed description of the blended process of the conceptual integration.[3] Not involving the condition being constructed, the basis, and the rationality of the two theories.Generally, most linguistic scholars have agreed that the two theories have many discrepances, and some of them even believe the two theories are competitive and exist in the different fields (Coulson, 2000). In this paper, the author tentatively suggests that the two theories can be unified under a certain condition, and form a comprehensive cognitive framework for exposing the complex language phenomenon broadly. This is one of the innovations the author suggests in this dissertation.Concretely speaking, the paper will discuss the relation between the CM and CI from the features of them, and analyzing the similarities between them: [1] Both regard the metaphor as a cognitive phenomenon, rather than a pure language phenomenon or the rhetorical device. [2] Both involve at least a kind of relation of mapping. [3] The two-domain structure and the two input space both have counterparts. The difference between CM and CI relies on: [1] Pairs of mental representation vs. multi-elements of projection. [2] Unidirectional mapping and bidirectional blending. [3] Entrenched mapping and novel integrated process. [4] Stable mapping and dynamic projection.In accordance with what discussed above, the author suggests that unifying the two theories under a certain framework, will play a more important role in the study of the language phenomenon and the way of thinking, also can extend the possible meaning construction for the different utterance hierarchy. Therefore, the author intends to unify the two theories from the angle of a new theoretical framework and explore the possibility of the construction of the CMT and BT inherently. So the view focuses on the feasibility of the two complementary theories, being supported by the inheritance of denotation and connotation, in accordance with stereotypical relation. What have been interpreted above can be considered as the second innovation. For example:"商场就是战场."Here, x and y have their own supertype"生意场"and"打仗之地", which share the common supertype"充满竞争的地方"。So, x and y are the similarities, are inherited the connotation of the same supertype. To understand a metaphor is connected with exploring its denotation and connotation, and the way of inheritance of denotation and connotation is differentiated from the bidirectional inputs in blending space, but can interpret the rationality of the blended process. This point perfects the blending theory.In all, the operating of CM and the course of the blending are connected with the inheritance the denotation and the connotation, which is the theoretical basis of unifying the two theories. It can be analyzed like the following: [1] To classify the mapping entity and the counterparts in the two inputs(x and y) under the framework of denotation and connotation, and judge whether their relation between them are similarities[2] To test the rationality of the construction of CM and CI[3] The two-domain contained by metaphor is often constructed under the framework of the stereotypical relation, while the relation among the integrated projection is unstereotypical.