At the crossroads between literature, culture, linguistics, and cognition: local character-based metaphors in fairy tales

Javier Herrero Ruiz

Abstract


This paper resumes the series devoted to metaphors in fairy tales (cf. Herrero 2005a, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2010). We attempt to show how five conceptual metaphors (PEOPLE ARE ANIMALS, PEOPLE ARE PLANTS, IMPERFECT IS IRREGULAR, LOVE IS MAGIC, and REAL PEOPLE ARE FICTITIOUS CHARACTERS) and their variants may occur at a local level in the narration, allowing us to understand the magical depiction of characters and some of the relationships they may establish in the tales under analysis.

The tales, which were compiled by the British author Andrew Lang (1844-1912), are representative of different cultures and have been downloaded from the Project Gutenberg online library. Our research also supports Herrero’s claims that (1) conceptual metaphor may serve as a taxonomic criterion for tales, and that (2) although many of these stories belong to different socio-cultural settings, they are coincident with the same plots and local metaphors employed, which may be a result of their strong experiential basis.


Keywords


Conceptual metaphor; fairy tales; local level; characters; culture; experiential basis.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aarne, A. 1961 (1910). The Types of Folktale: A Classification and Bibliography. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica.

Alarcón, P. 2002. “El acto sexual es comer: descripción lingüístico-cognitiva”. Revista de Lingüística Teórica y Aplicada (RLA) 40: 7-24.

Barcelona, A. 2002. “On the ubiquity and multiple-level operation of metonymy.” Cognitive Linguistics today. Eds. B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk and K. Turewicz. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 207-224.

Becher, M. R. 1983. An den Grenzen des Staunens. Aufsätze zur phantastischen Literatur. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Benczes, R., Barcelona, A. and F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza, eds. 2011. Defining Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics. Towards a Consensus View. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Bettelheim, B. 1976. The Uses of Enchantment. The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales. New York: Vintage Books.

Bowe, K. 1996. To Make the Punishment Fit the Crime: Blended Spaces and Conceptual metaphor. Senior Honor Thesis. Department of Linguistics. University of California at Berkeley.

Clews, E. 1917. “Tales from Guilford County, North Carolina.” Journal of American Folklore 30 (116): 168-200.

Favat, A. 1977. Child and Tale: The Origins of Interest. Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English.

Fillmore, C. 1985. “Frames and the semantics of understanding.” Quaderni di Semantica 6 (2): 222-254.

Fillmore, C. et. al. 2012. Berkeley FrameNet Project. (Accessed 24 May 2014).

Frazer, J. The Golden Bough. A Study in Magic and Religion. (Accessed 29 Jun 2014).

Kövecses, Z. 2011. “Recent developments in metaphor theory: Are the new views rival ones?” Review of Cognitive Linguistics 9 (1): 11-25.

García Landa, J. Á. 1998. Acción, relato, discurso. Estructura de la ficción narrativa. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.

Gibbs, R. W. 2011. “Evaluating Conceptual Metaphor Theory.” Discourse Processes 48 (8): 529-562.

Gonzálvez-García, F., Peña, S. and L. Pérez, eds. 2011. “Metaphor and Metonymy revisited beyond the Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. Recent developments and applications.” Review of Cognitive Linguistics 9 (1).

Grady, J. 1997. “Theories are buildings revisited.” Cognitive Linguistics 8: 261-290.

Hart, M. Project Gutenberg. (Accessed 24 May 2014).

Herrero, J. 2005a. “The knowledge is vision and the authority is a bounded region Metaphors in Fairy Tales.” Interlingüística 16: 569-578.

Herrero, J. 2005b. “The Role of Metaphor and Metonymy as Tools of Lexical Creation: The Case of Spanish Informal Speech.” Odisea 6: 97-118.

Herrero, J. 2006. “Conceptual Metaphors in Fairy Tales. The Cases of: Acquiescence is swallowing, intelligence is light, a child is hope of change and renewal, darkness is a cover, and powerful is witty.” Interlingüística 17: 475-482.

Herrero, J. 2007. “At the Crossroads between Literature, Culture, Linguistics, and Cognition: Death Metaphors in Fairy Tales.” Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada (RESLA) 20: 59-83.

Herrero, J. 2008. “At the Crossroads between Literature, Culture, Linguistics, and Cognition: Punishment and Moral Metaphors in Fairy Tales.” Odisea 9: 117-132.

Herrero, J. 2010. “At the Crossroads between Literature, Culture, Linguistics, and Cognition: life is a journey and the divided-self Metaphors in Fairy Tales.” Odisea 11: 137-153.

Johnson, M. 1987. The Body in the Mind: the Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Jolles, A. 1968 (1930). Einfache Formen. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.

Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G. 1989. “Some Empirical Results about the Nature of Concepts.” Mind & Language 4 (1-2): 103-129.

Lakoff, G. et al. 1994. Conceptual Metaphor Home Page. (Accessed 24 May 2014).

Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh. The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.

Lakoff, G. and M. Turner. 1989. More Than Cool Reason. A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Langacker, R. W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive Grammar, vol. 1. Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Lurie, A. 1990. Don’t Tell The Grown-Ups. Subversive Children’s Literature. London: Bloomsbury.

Luthi, M. 1975. Das Volksmärchen als Dichtung. Aesthetik und Anthropologie. Düsseldorf: Diederichs.

Luthi, M. 1984. The Fairytale as Art Form and Portrait of Man. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Martín, G. 2004. “Los seres incompletos”. El País, 1 Feb., p. 11.

Millet, B. 2003. The Owl and the Nightingale. Translation. (Accessed 28 May 2014).

Pérez, L. 1997. “A Cognitive Analysis of Paul Bowles’s The Sheltering Sky.” Cuadernos de Filología Inglesa 612: 259-278.

Piaget, J. 1932. The moral judgment of the child. London: Routledge, Kegan Paul.

Piaget, J. 1936. Origins of intelligence in the child. London: Routledge, Kegan Paul.

Piaget, J. 1945. Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. London: Heinemann.

Piaget, J. 1957. Construction of reality in the child. London: Routledge, Kegan Paul.

Propp, V. 1998 (1928). Morphology of the Folktale. University of Texas: Austin.

Radden, G. 2005. “The ubiquity of metonymy.” Cognitive and discourse approaches to metaphor and metonymy. Eds. J. L. Otal, I. Navarro and B. Bellés. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. 11-28.

Ruiz, E. and J. Herrero. 2005. “New perspectives on the people are animals metaphor.” Interlingüística 16 (2): 931-941.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. 1997. “Metaphor, Metonymy and Conceptual Interaction”. Atlantis. Revista de la Asociación Española de Estudios Anglonorteamericanos 19 (1): 281-295.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. 1998. “On the nature of blending as a cognitive phenomenon.” Journal of Pragmatics 30: 259-274.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. 2000. “The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy.” Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. A Cognitive Perspective. Ed. A. Barcelona. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 109-132.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. 2011. “Metonymy and cognitive operations.” Defining metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics. Towards a consensus view. Eds. R. Benczes, A. Barcelona and F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 103-123.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. and A. Galera. 2014. Cognitive modeling. A Linguistic Perspective. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. and J. L. Otal. 2002. Metonymy, Grammar, and Communication. Granada: Comares.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. and L. Pérez. 2001. “Metonymy and the Grammar: Motivation, Constraints, and Interaction.” Language and Communication 21 (4): 321-357.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. and L. Pérez. 2011. “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: myths, developments and challenges.” Metaphor and Symbol 26: 161-185.

Sierra, J. 1992. Cinderella. Oryx Press: Phoenix.

Sweetser, E. 1995. “Metaphor, Mythology, and Everyday Language.” Journal of Pragmatics 24 (6): 585-593.

Tatar, M., ed. 1987. The Hard Facts of the Grimms’ Fairy Tales. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Tatar, M. 1993. Off With Their Heads! Fairy Tales and the Culture of Childhood. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Tatar, M. 1999. The Classic Fairy Tales: Texts, Criticism. New York: Norton.

Thompson, S. 1930. The Folktale. New York. Dryden Press.

Thompson, S. 1936. Motif Index of Folk-Literature: A Classification of Narrative Elements in Folktale, Ballads, Myths, Fables, Medieval Romances, Exempla, Jest Books and Local Legends. Indiana: Indiana UP.

Uther, H-J. 2000. “The Third Revision of the Aarne-Thompson Tale Type Index.” Enzyklopädie des Märchens. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Uther, H-J. 2004. The Types of International Folktales: A Classification and Bibliography. Helskinka: Academia Scientiarum Fennica.

von Franz, M-L. 1996. The Interpretation of Fairy Tales. Boston, London: Shambhala.

Weber, J. J. 1995. “How metaphor leads Susan Rawlings into suicide: a cognitivelinguistic analysis of Doris Lessing’s ‘To room nineteen’.” Twentieth Century Fiction: From Text to Context. Eds. P. Verdonk and J. J. Weber. London: Routledge. 32-44.

Zipes, J. 1993. Fairy Tale as Myth. Myth as Fairy Tale. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.

Zipes, J., ed. 2015. The Oxford Companion To Fairy Tales. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zipes, J. 2015. Collins English Language Dictionary. (Accessed 10 May 2014).




DOI: https://doi.org/10.18172/jes.3060

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

© Universidad de La Rioja, 2013

ISSN 1576-6357

EISSN 1695-4300