Cognitive Semantics Quest for the Ultimate Source Domain-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Cognitive Semantics Quest for the Ultimate Source Domain

Published:2023-06-23 Issue:XXV Volume:1 Page:185-197
ISSN:2450-0852
Container-title:Acta Neophilologica
language:
Short-container-title:an

Author:

Drogosz Anna Maria

Abstract

The paper is an attempt to answer the question asked in Cognitive Semantics: Which experiential domain should be considered to be more fundamental or “ultimate”: space, an object or a human being? It is argued that they represent three domains of behaviour identified by archaeologists (the technical domain, the domain of social relations, and the natural history domain), and consequently are equally ultimate. It is also argued that the ability to project knowledge from one domain to the other was the crucial stage in the development of metaphor and abstract thinking, and that this ability (called cognitive fluidity or conceptual integration) was exapted from the physical to abstract domain.

Publisher

Uniwersytet Warminsko-Mazurski

Subject

General Medicine

Reference46 articles.

1. Black, M. (1962), Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.

2. Brown, T.L. (2003), Making Truth: Metaphor in Science. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

3. Casasanto, D. (2010), Space for Thinking. In: Evans, V./Chilton, P. (eds.), Language, Cognition and Space: The State of the Art and New Directions. London: Equinox Publishing: 453–478.

4. Cienki, A. (1997), Some Properties and Groupings of Image Schemas. In: Verspoor, M./Lee, D./Sweetser, E. (eds.), Lexical and Syntactical Constructions and the Construction of Meaning. Amsterdam ‒ Philadelphia: John Benjamins: 3–15.

5. Drogosz, A. (2010), EXISTENCE IS LIFE: Metaphors of Language that Ecolinguistics Lives by. In: Puppel, S./Bogusławska-Tafelska, M. New Pathways in Linguistics. Olsztyn: Katedra Filologii Angielskiej: 59–74.