Cover not available
Part of
Drawing Attention to Metaphor: Case studies across time periods, cultures and modalities
Edited by Camilla Di Biase-Dyson and Markus Egg
[Figurative Thought and Language 5] 2020
► pp. 39–62

A typological framework of attention-drawing strategies for Ancient Egyptian metaphorical language

This contribution proposes a typology of attention-drawing strategies for Ancient Egyptian that is based on qualitative and quantitative analyses of texts from three genres: wisdom literature, letters and narrative. The focus is on the criteria for attention-drawing that may operate in a language like Egyptian, as compared, for example, to English. After outlining the means by which the Egyptian text corpus can be annotated, it is argued that metaphors can be marked at the graphemic level (where categorisation plays a role), the phonemic level (where word play can be important), the lexical-semantic level (which considers co-textual features), the syntactic level (where metaphors are signalled), the text-structure level (in which metaphor patterns are significant) and the pragmatic level (where the reader/hearer is involved). Many metaphors in the examples exemplify a number of these markings simultaneously, further emphasising their attention-drawing potential.
Keywords: metaphor, attention-drawing, Ancient Egyptian, typology, semantics, conceptual metaphor, text structure, pragmatics
Article outline
  • 1.The point of departure
  • 2.Criteria
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Corpus annotation
  • 4.A multidimensional typology
    • 4.1Graphemic strategies
    • 4.2Phonemic strategies
    • 4.3Semantic strategies
    • 4.4Syntactic strategies
    • 4.5Text structure strategies
    • 4.6Pragmatic strategies
  • 5.The role of genre
  • 6.Other quantitative approaches
  • 7.Looking outwards
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 April 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.5.03dib
References (57)
References
Allan, K. (2011). Classifiers. Language, 53(2), 285–311. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beger, A. (2011). Deliberate metaphors? An exploration of the choice and functions of metaphors in US-American college lectures. metaphorik.de, 20, 39–60.Google Scholar
Blackman, A. M. (1932/1972). Middle-Egyptian stories (Repr. ed.), (Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca 2). Brussels: Éditions de la Fondation Egyptologique Reine Elisabeth.Google Scholar
Brdar, M., Zlomislić, J., Šoštarić, B. & Vančura, A. (2009). From metaphorical banana skins to metonymic rittbergers: On two types of polysemy. In M. Brdar, M. Omazić & V. Pavičić Takač (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to English: Fundamental, methodological, interdisciplinary and applied aspects (pp. 151–169). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Černý, J. & Gardiner, A. H. (1957). Hieratic ostraca (Vol. 1). Oxford: Aris & Phillips.Google Scholar
Chantrain, G. (2014). The use of classifiers in the New Kingdom. A global reorganization of the classifiers system? Lingua Aegyptia, 22, 39–59.Google Scholar
Chantrain, G. &Di Biase-Dyson, C. (2018). Making a case for multidimensionality in Ramesside figurative language. In D. A. Werning (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Egyptian-Coptic Linguistics (Crossroads V), (Lingua Aegyptia 25), (pp. 41–66). Hamburg: Widmaier.Google Scholar
Cienki, A. (2013). Conceptual metaphor theory in light of research on speakers’ gestures. Journal of Cognitive Semiotics, 5(1–2), 349–366.Google Scholar
Cameron, L. (2008). Metaphor and talk. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp 197–211). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L. & Deignan, A. (2003). Combining large and small corpora to investigate tuning devices around metaphor in spoken discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 18(3), 149–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cognitive Linguistics Group. (1991). Master Metaphor List (2nd ed.). Berkeley: University of California, [URL], accessed 01.06.2015.Google Scholar
Deignan, A. (2011). Deliberateness is not unique to metaphor. A response to Gibbs. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(1), 57–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Di Biase-Dyson, C. (2016). Spatial metaphors as rhetorical figures. Case studies from wisdom texts of the Egyptian New Kingdom. In F. Horn & C. Breytenbach (Eds.), Spatial metaphorsSpatial metaphors. Texts and transformations (Berlin Studies of the Ancient World 39), (pp. 43–65). Berlin: Edition Topoi.Google Scholar
(2017a). A nautical metaphor for obedience and a likely case of negated disjunction in Egyptian. In C. Di Biase-Dyson, L. Donovan, et al. (Eds.), The cultural manifestations of religious experience. Studies in honour of Boyo G. Ockinga (Ägypten und Altes Testament 85), (pp. 355–362). Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.Google Scholar
(2017b). Metaphor in ‘The Teaching of Menena’. Between rhetorical innovation and tradition. In T. Gillen (Ed.), (Re)productive traditions in Ancient Egypt. Proceedings of the conference held at the University of Liège, 6th–8th February 2013 (Aegyptiaca Leodiensia 10), (pp. 163–179). Liège: Presses universitaires de Liège.Google Scholar
Di Biase-Dyson, C., Kammerzell, F. & Werning, D. A. (2009). Glossing Ancient Egyptian. Suggestions for adapting the Leipzig Glossing Rules. In M. Müller & S. Uljas (Eds.), Proceedings of Crossroads IV, Conference of Egyptian Language Studies, Basel, March 2009 (Lingua Aegyptia 17), (pp. 343–366). Göttingen: Seminar für Ägyptologie und Koptologie.Google Scholar
Fischer-Elfert, H.-W. (1983). Die satirische Streitschrift des Papyrus Anastasi I. Text (Kleine Ägyptische Texte). Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
(1986). Die satirische Streitschrift des Papyrus Anastasi I. Übersetzung und Kommentar (Ägyptologische Abhandlungen 44). Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Gardiner, A. H. (1932). Late Egyptian stories (Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca 1). Brussels: Éditions de la Fondation Egyptologique Reine Elisabeth.Google Scholar
(1957). Egyptian grammar: Being an introduction to the study of hieroglyphs (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gentner, D. (1982). Are scientific analogies metaphors? In D. S. Miall (Ed.), Metaphor: Problems and perspectives (pp. 106–132). Hassocks: Harvester Press Ltd.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. (2011). Are ‘deliberate’ metaphors really deliberate? A question of human consciousness and action. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(1), 26–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goatly, A. (2011). The language of metaphors (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Goosens, L. (1990). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics 1(3), 323–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guglielmi, W. (1983). Eine ‘Lehre’ für einen reiselustigen Sohn (Ostrakon Oriental Institute 12074). Die Welt des Orients, 14, 147–166.Google Scholar
Kammerzell, F. (1998). The sounds of a dead language. Reconstructing Egyptian phonology. Göttinger Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft, 1, 21–41.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction (2nd ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krennmayr, T. (2011). Metaphor in newspapers (Dissertation Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam). Utrecht: LOT.
KRI = Kitchen, K. A. (1969–1983). Ramesside inscriptions: Historical and biographical (8 Vols). Oxford: B.H. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Laisney, V. P.-M. (2007). L’enseignement d’Aménémopé. Studia Pohl: Series Maior 19. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lincke, E.-S. & Kutscher, S. (2012). Motivated sign formation in hieroglyphic Egyptian and German sign language (DGS): Towards a typology of iconic signs in visual linguistic systems. In E. Grossman, S. Polis & J. Winand (Eds.), Lexical semantics in ancient Egyptian (Lingua Aegyptia Studia Monographica 9), (pp. 113–140). Hamburg: Widmaier.Google Scholar
Loprieno, A. (1995). Ancient Egyptian: A Linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mittelberg, I. & Waugh, L. R. (2009). Metonymy first, metaphor second: A cognitive-semiotic approach to multimodal figures of thought in co-speech gesture. In C. Forceville & E. Urios-Aparisi (Eds.), Multimodal metaphor (pp 329–356). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Müller, C. (2008a). Metaphors dead and alive, sleeping and waking. A dynamic view. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008b). What gestures reveal about the nature of metaphor. In A. Cienki & C. Müller (Eds.), Metaphor and gesture (pp 219–245). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, C. (2011). Are ‘deliberate metaphors’ really deliberate? A question of human consciousness and action. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(1), 61–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panther, K.-U. & Radden, G. (Eds.). (1999). Metonymy in language and thought. Human Cognitive Processing 4. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polis, St., Honnay, A.-C. & Winand, J. (2013). Building an annotated corpus of Late Egyptian. The Ramsès project: Review and perspectives. In St. Polis & J. Winand (Eds.), Texts, languages & information technology in Egyptology. Selected papers from the meeting of the Computer Working Group of the International Association of Egyptologists (Informatique & Égyptologie), Liège, 6–8 July 2010 (pp. 25–44). Liège: Presses Universitaires de Liège.Google Scholar
Reintges, C. (1994). Egyptian root-and-pattern morphology. Lingua Aegyptia, 4, 213–244.Google Scholar
Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in discourse, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shen, Y. & Balaban, N. (1999). Metaphorical (in)coherence in discourse. Discourse Processes 28(2), 139–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stauder, A. (2018). Staging restricted knowledge. The sculptor Irtysen’s self-presentation (ca. 2000 BC). In G. Miniaci, J. C. Moreno García, S. Quirke & A. Stauder (Eds.), The arts of making in Ancient Egypt. Voices, images, and objects of material producers 2000–1550 BC (pp. 239-271). Leiden: Sidestone Press.Google Scholar
Steen, G. J. (2008). The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 23, 213–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011a). From three dimensions to five steps: The value of deliberate metaphor. metaphorik.de, 21, 83–110.Google Scholar
(2011b). What does ‘really deliberate really mean? More thoughts on metaphor and consciousness and action. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(1), 53–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Developing, testing and interpreting Deliberate Metaphor Theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 67–72, DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Attention to metaphor: Where embodied cognition and social interaction can meet, but may not often do so. In B. Hampe (Ed.), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse (pp. 279–296). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T. & Pasma, T. (2010a). A method for linguistic metaphor identification (Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 14). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A. & Krennmayr, T. (2010b). Metaphor in usage. Cognitive Linguistics, 21(4), 765–796. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vittmann, G. (1999). Altägyptische Wegmetaphorik (Beiträge zur Ägyptologie 15). Vienna: Veröffentlichungen der Institute für Afrikanistik und Ägyptologie der Universität Wien 83.Google Scholar
Wallington, A. M., Barnden, J. A., Barnden, M. A., Ferguson, F. J. & Glaseby, S. R. (2003). Metaphoricity signals: A corpus-based investigation. Technical Report CSRP-03-05 , School of Computer Science, The University of Birmingham, U.K. [URL], accessed 01.06.2016.
Wb. = Erman, A. & Grapow, H. (Eds.). (1926–1963). Wörterbuch der aegyptischen Sprache (13 Vols). Leipzig: Hinrichs.Google Scholar
Online corpora
DZA / Digitalisiertes Zettelarchiv, [URL], accessed 01.06.2016.
Ramsès Online, [URL], accessed 01.06.2016.
TLA / Thesaurus Linguae Aegyptiae, [URL], accessed 01.06.2016.
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 7 september 2024. 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.