On Dissimilarity Of Metaphor Based On Similarity From The Perspective Of Conceptual Integration Theory

Metaphor has been studied for more than two thousand years. But metaphorresearchers restricted their study to the field of rhetorics before1980s when there occurreda cognitive turn. Cognitive linguists argue that metaphor is not only a rhetoric device, butalso a way of thinking. They all hold that similarity is a very important workingmechanism in metaphor construction and understanding. However, little work has beendone in the role of dissimilarity in understanding metaphor. As a most influential andpowerful theory to account for the construction and understanding of metaphor,Conceptual Integration Theory can be used to elucidate the role of dissimilarity inunderstanding metaphor with its two models: the single-scope network and thedouble-scope network.In the light of Conceptual Integration Theory, the thesis attempts to explore the role ofdissimilarity in understanding metaphor by delving into some metaphor cases. The presentstudy argues that metaphor understanding depends on similarity, but dissimilarity alsoplays an important role in interpreting metaphors. Therefore, the process of metaphorunderstanding is seeking similarity in different items and maintaining dissimilarity insimilar items, because similarity is an abstract structure, which is general and meaninglessunless it is interpreted in the real or imaginary experience. The dissimilarity in this studyfirst refers to dissimilarity structures defined by shared topologies in the generic space ofCIT. The single-scope network and double-scope network form a continuum in conceptualintegration. From the pole of single-scope network to the pole of double-scope network,based on created similarity, metaphor understanding increases its dependence on theextraction and integration of dissimilarity structures of two spaces. To put it more precisely,in interpreting metaphors of single-scope network, metaphor inference is a process ofassimilation, relying directly on similarity: analogical inference, based on the commonexperience and knowledge structure, projects to the target domain a general structure fromthe source domain, yet remaining consistent with the existing structure of the target domain.So similarity is abstract. The final understanding of metaphors of single-scope networkcomes from emergent structure which is a combination of dissimilarity structures at TF and TS levels selected from two inputs. While created similarity based on individualexperience is crucial for understanding metaphors of double-scope network. But it is theemergent structure, which is, in fact, a combination of dissimilarities based on universalexperience and conventional conceptual system about two domains that delivers inferenceand leads to the full understanding of metaphors of double-scope networks. Firstly, therelational structure shared by two inputs based on human universal experience and humanuniversal conceptual system is distantly similar. Even if there is shared topology betweenthose two domains in some cases, we still cannot infer metaphorical meaning as we do inthe single-scope network. Secondly, created similarity abstracted from individualexperience is based on conventional dissimilarity, because cognitive mechanism of fusionwith accommodation works here, which attributes salient properties of the sourceinconsistent with the existing features of the target to a particular member in the target.Thirdly, the created similarity based on local context can not deliver the inference ofmetaphor alone, it should combine with other dissimilarity structures at TF, TS or TI levelsselected from two inputs. The integration of these dissimilarity structures conflicts with theconventional conceptual system of target domain leading to the possibility of rich clashes.It is the clash that is very important for the inference of metaphor and the fullunderstanding of metaphor. Fourthly, some metaphors of double-scope network dependon salient differences between two relevant inputs.Furthermore, similarity involved in metaphors is in fact a psychological interpretationbased on experience and context. But different cognitive agents have different experienceand cognitive abilities that may result in different mapping, projection, composition,completion and elaboration. Therefore, dissimilarity among the cognitive agents may bringabout more or less difference in the process of metaphor understanding. Last but not theleast, understanding metaphor is also a process of appreciation. The rhetoric effect ofmetaphor has never been denied by ancient and modern metaphor experts. The vividness ofpoetic effects comes from double image, resulting from the juxtaposition of dissimilarstructures projected from two inputs. The greater the dissimilarity there is, the more poeticeffects it creates.