Article published in:Metaphor Variation in Englishes around the World
Edited by Marcus Callies and Alexander Onysko
[Cognitive Linguistic Studies 4:1] 2017
► pp. 82–109
Emotion metaphors in new Englishes
A corpus-based study of ANGER
Research into emotion concepts has become an established part of the cognitive-linguistic research agenda and has often revolved around the competing notions of universality (from the perspective of embodied cognition) and (cross- and within-cultural) variation (see Kövecses 2005). At the same time, a relatively recent approach to socio-variational aspects of language in the form of Cognitive Sociolinguistics has created an ideal platform for the study of variation in institutionalized second-language varieties of English, often referred to as new Englishes (see Kristiansen & Dirven 2008; Wolf & Polzenhagen 2009). This paper aims at bringing together these two research strands in a study devoted to variation on the level of metaphor in new Englishes, specifically involved in the conceptualization of emotion. While metaphor is theoretically understood within the framework of Conceptual Metaphor Theory (Lakoff & Johnson 1980), this study will make use of a corpus-based method of metaphor retrieval and identification informed by Stefanowitsch’s (2004, 2006) Metaphorical Pattern Analysis (MPA) and Steen et al.’s (2010) method for linguistic metaphor identification (MIPVU). anger metaphors will be examined for four second-language varieties of English, namely those spoken in Nigeria, Kenya, India, and Singapore, which are represented in the Global Web-based English corpus (GloWbE; Davies 2013).With the assumption that metaphor variation emerges in a variety’s preference for certain source domains in emotion-based mappings vis-à-vis other varieties, the main questions at the core of the analysis are: (1) Which source domains are employed in a respective variety to conceptualize anger? and (2) To what extent are the source domain preferences of new Englishes similar to a norm-providing variety, namely British English? Although initial results reveal much similarity, some differences in the data are highlighted at a deeper level of analysis. Thus, a discussion of the results provides a basis for inter-variety comparison of anger metaphors and, thus, contribute to the universality / variation debate.
Keywords: metaphor variation, new Englishes, emotion metaphors, corpus-based metaphor study, Conceptual Metaphor Theory
Published online: 16 October 2017
Ansah, G. N.
(2013) Corpus of Global Web-Based English: 1.9 billion words from speakers in 20 countries. Available online at http://corpus.byu.edu/glowbe/ (Last accessed on March 3rd 2017)
Davies, M., & Fuchs, R.[ p. 107 ]
Díaz-Vera, J. E.
Evans, V., & Green, M.
Kristiansen, G., & Driven, R.
Lakoff, G., Espenson, J., & Goldberg, A.
(1991) Master metaphor list [PDF file]. Retrieved from http://araw.mede.uic.edu/~alansz/metaphor/METAPHORLIST.pdf(Last accessed on March 3rd 2017)
Lakoff, G., & Kövecses, Z.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
Mukherjee, J., & Schilk, M.
Schneider, K. P., & Barron, A.[ p. 108 ]
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T.
Wolf, H. -G.
Wolf, H. -G., & Polzenhagen, F.
Wolf, H. -G., & Chan, T.
(2016) Understanding Asia by means of cognitive sociolinguistics and cultural linguistics – the example of GHOSTS in Hong Kong English. In G. Leitner, A. Hashim & H. -G. Wolf (Eds.), Communicating with Asia: The future of English as a global language (pp. 249–266). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cited by 5 other publications
Díaz-Vera, Javier E.
Funke, Nina & Tobias Bernaisch
Zadobrivscaia, O. F. & V. G. Egorova
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 december 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.