Kamil Wiśniewski - linguist, translator, and philosopher :)

Classification of metaphors by Lakoff and Johnson

A change in the perception of metaphors by linguists, psychologists, literary studies researchers and even dictionary publishers and language course books writers was noticeable after the publication of ‘Metaphors we live by’ written by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. This inconspicuous-looking book published in 1980 turned out to be a milestone in cognitive linguistics and in the analysis of metaphors, and their use and importance for both linguists and ordinary language users. Many of the theories presented by these two linguists are still acknowledged as either valid or a breakthrough which enabled further advance in the study of metaphors.
The book presents a thorough taxonomy of metaphors with numerous examples of their use in ordinary, everyday language and in the language of science. However, as the authors prove, the use of metaphors is not only normal in casual speech, but is embedded in the very way people perceive, think about, and therefore describe the world (Kalisz, 2001:95-99). Throughout the book, its authors provide evidence that metaphors are inherent in our lives and as Lakoff and Johnson state the case:
“metaphor is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature”. (Lakoff, Johnson, 1980:3).
In addition to that, the authors claim that most of people’s cognitive processes are to some extent metaphorical.
Lakoff and Johnson (1980) began to formulate their conceptual metaphor theory by developing ideas they drew from Reddy’s conduit metaphor which describes human communication (Reddy, 1979, 1993). In that metaphor, ideas are objects, words are containers and the entire communication process is seen as sending the ideas in the words to the addressee who can get the ideas out of the words. Such conduit metaphors which are present in the English language include:
(1) a. IDEAS {OR MEANINGS} ARE OBJECTS
b. LINGUISTIC EXPRESSIONS ARE CONTAINERS
c. COMMUNICATION IS SENDING.

It has been estimated that about seventy percent of the expressions used to talk about language make use of such metaphors. This can be seen in the examples of the following phrases which embody the conduit metaphor:
(2) a. It’s hard to get that idea across to him.
b. I gave you that idea.
c. Your words seem hollow.
d. His words carry little meaning
e. The sentence is without meaning.
f. Try to pack more thought into fewer words. (Lakoff, Johnson, 1980:11)
As Lakoff and Johnson point out, most such phrases reflect an ordinary way of talking about human communication and therefore it might be difficult to realize that certain metaphors are indeed present there (Lakoff, Johnson, 1980:11). However, these linguists argue that the CONDUIT metaphor is not a sufficient explanation of many other expressions found in everyday language. Such a metaphor in which one concept is structured in terms of another is called a structural metaphor and is the first one in the compilation presented by the linguists.
Orientational metaphors according to the authors of Metaphors We Live By do not structure one concept in terms of another, but rather organize entire systems of concepts with respect to each other. The name orientational metaphor is connected with the fact that such metaphors have something to do with spatial orientation in most cases, including image schemas such as central-peripheral, in-out, front-back, up-down, and others (Lakoff, Johnson, 1980:14). Such metaphors in human languages are natural due to the physical and cultural orientation of people, thus “such metaphorical orientations are not arbitrary” (Lakoff, Johnson, 1980:14). Numerous metaphors and expressions exemplifying the implementation of orientational metaphors in everyday language are provided in their classification. A very common one is given in (3):

(3) HAPPY IS UP; SAD IS DOWN:

a. I’m feeling up.
b. That boosted my spirits.
c. My spirits rose.
d. Thinking about her gives me a lift.
e. I’m feeling down.
f. He’s really low these days.

The physical basis for such a metaphor as that in (3) is connected with the posture one adopts with changing emotional states: an upright posture is associated with good mood and happiness, while a dropping posture is connected with bad mood and sadness.

(4) CONSCIOUS IS UP; UNCONSCIOUS IS DOWN

a. Get up.
b. Wake up.
c. He rises early in the morning.
d. He’s under hypnosis.
e. He sank into coma.
f. He fell asleep.

According to Lakoff and Johnson (1980:15) this metaphor relates to the fact that when humans are asleep they are lying down and that they stand up when they are awaken.

(5) MORE IS UP; LESS IS DOWN

a. My income rose last year.
b. His income fell last year.
c. He is underage.
d. If you’re too hot, turn the heat down.

e. The number of books printed each year keeps going up.
The basis for this metaphor is the observation that adding more substance to a container raises the level the substance reaches in the container.

(6) GOOD IS UP; BAD IS DOWN

a. Things are looking up.
b. Things are at an all-time low.
c. He does high-quality work.

d. We hit a peak last year, but it’s been downhill ever since.
As the authors put it, the “physical basis for personal well-being: Happiness, health, life, and control - the things that principally characterize what is good for a person – are all UP” (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:16).

Many more examples of orientational metaphors and phrases which exemplify their realization in language are provided in this book. Its authors argue that the majority of our basic concepts are organized with the use of some spatially-based metaphors. In addition to that, the high degree of systematicity of such metaphors suggests that they are not being used arbitrarily, but are deeply entrenched in our experience of spatial orientations (Lakoff, Johnson, 1980:18).
The next type of metaphor thoroughly described and defined by Lakoff and Johnson consist of Entity and Substance Metaphors, also known as Ontological Metaphors. Those metaphors are connected with our experiences with physical objects, including our bodies. The most usual case of ontological metaphors is related to the perception of ideas, events, emotions and activities as substances, or concrete entities. Ontological metaphors are said to have many purposes and that is why they themselves are varied. One type of ontological metaphor is viewing an abstract notion as an entity:

(7) INFLATION IS AN ENTITY

a. We need to combat inflation.
b. Inflation makes me sick.
c. Inflation is backing us into corner.
d. Inflation is lowering our standard of living.

(8) THE MIND IS A MACHINE

a. My mind just isn’t operating today.
b. I’m a little rusty today.

c. We’ve been working on this problem all day and now we’re running out of steam.

The use of such a metaphor to describe an abstract concept enables us to identify some of its aspects, quantify it, and act accordingly. Yet, that is not the sole purpose of ontological metaphors as they can also fulfill other functions, such as referring, quantifying, identifying aspects of a situation, identifying causes, and others (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:26). Lakoff and Johnson claim that “the range of ontological metaphors that we use for such purposes is enormous” (1980:26) yet only just a few examples should be enough to illustrate the concept:
Sentences (9) (a-c) illustrate ontological metaphors that are used to refer to situations and events.
(9) a. The honor of our country is at stake in this war.
b. The middle class is a powerful silent force in American politics.
c. That was a beautiful catch.
Sentences (10) (a-c) illustrate the use of ontological metaphor to quantify qualities, situations and events.
(10) a. It will take a lot of patience to finish this book.
b. There is so much hatred in the world.
c. You’ve got too much hostility in you.
In turn, sentences (11) (a-c) illustrate a set of metaphors that identify causes.
(11) a. The pressure of his responsibilities caused his breakdown.
b. The brutality of war dehumanizes us all.
c. His emotional health has deteriorated recently.

What is more, several different kinds of ontological metaphors can be distinguished, such as the container metaphor, the entity metaphor and the substance metaphor. Container metaphors are those which represent certain concepts as having an inside and on outside and are construed as being able to hold something else, as for instance the metaphors given in sentences (12) (a-e) (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:50,51):

(12) LIFE IS A CONTAINER

a. I’ve had a full life.
b. Life is empty for him.
c. There’s not much left for him in life.
d. Her life is crammed with activities.
e. Get the most out of life.

In addition, sentences (13) (a-e) present a variety of instantions of the high level ontological metaphor THE EYES ARE CONTAINERS FOR EMOTIONS:
(13) EYES ARE CONTAINERS FOR THE EMOTIONS

a. I could see the fear in his eyes.
b. His eyes were filled with anger.
c. There was passion in her eyes.
d. His eyes displayed his compassion.
e. She couldn’t get the fear out of her eyes.

The next type of ontological metaphors namely entity metaphors are those which represent abstractions as concrete physical objects. An exemplary entity metaphor and its linguistic realization is given in (14) (a-d) (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:28).

(14) THE MIND IS A BRITTLE OBJECT

a. Her ego is very fragile.
b. I’m going to pieces.
c. His mind snapped.

d. You have to handle him with care since his wife’s death.

What is interesting is the fact that Lakoff and Johnson consider personification as a type of entity metaphor. They point out that this is not only a literary stylistic device, but is also our everyday way of perceiving and talking about certain concepts. Among the examples of casual use of personification are the expressions given in (15) (a-c) (Lakoff, Johnson, 1980:33):

(15) a. Life has cheated me.
b. This fact argues against the standard theories.

c. His religion tells him that he cannot drink fine French wines.

The substance metaphor is the kind of metaphor in which an abstract entity such as idea, emotion, event or activity is represented as a solid material (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:31, Internet source 1). Typical examples are given in (16) (a-c).
(16) a. There was a lot of good running in the race.
b. I couldn’t do much sprinting until the end.
c. How much window-washing did you do?

As Kalisz (2001) suggests there is often very little difference between ontological and structural metaphors. What is more, he claims that ontological metaphors are based on structurally uncomplicated and simple physical notions, for example INFLATION IS AN ENTITY, as in ‘Inflation is backing us into corner’, while structural metaphors stand for more complex domains, for instance ARGUMENT IS A BUILDING as in ‘We’ve got a foundation for the argument, now we need a solid framework’ (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:99). Buildings are made up of foundations, require projects and other important factors, all of which are transferred to argumentation in this structural metaphor. Moreover, Kalisz argues that differentiating an ontological metaphor from a structural metaphor is more a matter of, as he puts it, ‘quantity’ than ‘quality’ (Kalisz, 2001:97). He goes on to say that since it is the degree of complexity of the metaphorical expression that is a crucial factor in differentiating its type, it is not always possible to put a rigid border between the two and thus be able to make a decision about which kind of metaphor a particular expression represents.
George Lakoff, the co-author of the above mentioned typology of metaphors, a few years after publishing Metaphors We Live By, wrote another book devoted to the description of metaphor use, this time in collaboration with Mark Turner. In their book entitled More than Cool Reason these authors added one more type of metaphor to supplement and complete the classification. As they point out, it is not only the mapping of concepts, or conceptual structures that enable creating metaphors, but also the mapping of images. Metaphors which map images are simply called image metaphors. According to Lakoff and Turner (1989:90) the only difference between image metaphor and all the other kinds of metaphors is that they do not map concepts on other concepts, but map ‘the structure of one domain onto the structure of another’ (Lakoff, Turner, 1989:90).
Similar to a conceptual metaphor, an image metaphor has its source in human cognition and the linguistic implementation of this kind of metaphor is only the representation of the way people perceive the world and think about it. Yet, in the case of image metaphors, the mapping of one domain onto the other might be slightly more complex, as, according to linguists, the mapped image structure includes both attribute structures and part-whole structure. Attribute structures include, for example, physical shape, color, or curvature, whereas part-whole relations are those of relation of a roof to the whole house, for instance (Lakoff and Turner, 1989:90). In most cases of the usages of image metaphors, it is not stated precisely which part of the source image is to be mapped onto the target image, yet that is automatically inferred by language users.
What is more, Lakoff and Turner make an important distinction between image metaphors and image-schema metaphors. As the authors put it:
“Image-metaphors map rich mental images onto other rich mental images. They are one-shot metaphors, relating one rich image with one other rich image. Image-schemas, as their name suggests, are not rich mental images; they are instead very general structures, like bounded regions, paths, centers” (Lakoff and Turner, 1989:99).
The authors provide several examples of both image metaphors, and image-schema metaphors. The use of image metaphors is exemplified by the poem entitled “Free Union”.
(17) My wife whose hair is a brush fire
Whose thoughts are summer lightening
Whose waist is an hourglass
Whose waist is the waist of an otter caught in the teeth of a tiger
Whose mouth is a bright cockade with the fragrance of a star of the first magnitude
Whose teeth leave prints like the tracks of white mice over snow
Whose tongue is made out of amber and polished glass
Whose tongue is a stabbed wafer. (Lakoff and Turner, 1989:90).
Metaphors in this poem are clearly visible, yet the author leaves to the readers’ imagination many important facts only implied in the writing, such as the color of the wife’s hair, or the overall shape of her waist. Such inferences can only be made by mapping images of burning bushes onto hair, and confronting the image of an hourglass with the image of a woman’s waist.
In order to show a contrast between an image metaphor and an image-schema metaphor, examples of the latter are also provided. These include high level ontological metaphors such as LIFE IS A FLAME, or STATES ARE LOCATIONS, whose linguistic realizations include, for example, expressions such as pass out, tune out, snuff out (Lakoff and Turner, 1989:97).