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. 93–128

Deliberate use of metaphor and metonymy as mnemonic devices for identification in a non-linguistic modality

The case of Deir el-Medina (Egypt)

| Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz
The paper concerns a non-linguistic marking system from ancient Egypt in which metaphor was used as a means of communication to specifically refer to identity. The degree to which metaphor was deliberately used, however, differed, depending on the history of the marks in the system (a diachronic dimension) and individual usages by members of the system with various degrees of contextual knowledge (an individual dimension). The use of metaphor is considered in the light of CMT and DMT.
Keywords: metaphorical construct, metonymy, identification, non-linguistic, mnemonic device, ancient perspective, cultural specificity, connectionism, individual dimension, diachronic dimension
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The archaeological material
  • 3.The workings of the system
    • Examples of connections between mark and man
      • Example 1
      • Example 2
      • Example 3
      • Example 4
      • Example 5
    • 3.1A family mark: Semiosis over the passage of time
      • Example 6
  • 4.The role and nature of metaphor and metonymy in the system over time
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 April 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.5.05moe
References (34)
References
Andrássy, P. (2009). Die Teammarken der Bauleute des ägyptischen Alten und Mittleren Reiches. In B. J. J. Haring & O. E. Kaper (Eds.), Pictograms or Pseudo Script? Non-textual identity marks in practical use in Ancient Egypt and elsewhere (pp. 5–48). Leuven & Leiden: Peeters & Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.Google Scholar
Beaux, N. (1988). Étoile et étoile du mer. Revue d’Égyptologie, 39, 197–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boone, E. H. (1994). Introduction: Writing and recoding knowledge. In E. H. Boone & W. Mignolo (Eds.), Writing without words. Alternative literacies in Mesoamerica and the Andes (pp. 3–26). London: Duke University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bruyère, B. (1953). Rapport sur les fouilles de Deir el-Médineh 1948–1951. Le Caire: Institut français d’archéologie orientale.Google Scholar
Chandler, D. (2007). Semiotics. The basics (2nd ed.). London & New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collier, M. (2014). The right side of the gang in years 1 to 2 of Ramesses IV. In B. J. J. Haring, O. E. Kaper & R. van Walsem (Eds.), The Workman’s Progress. Studies in the village of Deir el-Medina and other documents from western Thebes in honour of Rob Demarée. (pp. 1–20). Leuven & Leiden: Peeters & Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.Google Scholar
Daressy, M. G. (1902). Fouilles de la vallée des rois (1898–1899). Le Caire: Imprimerie de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale.Google Scholar
Davies, B. G. (1999). Who’s Who at Deir el-Medina. A prosopographic study of the royal workmen’s community. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.Google Scholar
De Jong, W. (1992). Thebe. Wachtkamer van de eeuwigheid. Amsterdam: Djehoetimes.Google Scholar
De Saussure, F. (1983). Course in general linguistics. Translation and annotation by R. Harris. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Desroches-Noblecourt, C. (1976). Ramsès le Grand: Galeries Nationales du Grand Palais Paris 1976. Paris: Presses Artistiques.Google Scholar
Ditze, B. (2007). Gedrückt – Geritzt – Gekratzt. Die Gefäße mit Topfmarken. In E. B. Pusch (Ed.), Schaber, Marken, Scherben. Die Keramik des Grabungsplatzes Q1 II (pp. 270–507). Hildesheim: Gertsenberg.Google Scholar
Dorn, A. (2011). Arbeiterhütten im Tal der Könige. Ein Beitrag zur altägyptischen Sozialgeschichte aufgrund von neuem Quellenmaterial aus der Mitte der 20. Dynastie (ca. 1150 v. Chr.) I. Basel: Schwabe.Google Scholar
Elkins, J. (1999). The domain of images. New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Evans P. J., Yatsenko S. A. & Perrin, O. T. (Eds.) (2010). Traditional marking systems. A preliminary survey. London: Dunkling Books.Google Scholar
Feierabend, B. S. (2006). Die ägyptische Biene. Ein facettenreiches Insekt. In V. Vaelske, M. Gander, E. Lange, M. Loth & D. Rosen (Eds.), Ägypten. Ein Tempel der Tiere. Begleitbuch zur gleichnamigen Ausstellung im Zoologischen Garten Berlin (pp. 90–91). Berlin: Achet-Verlag.Google Scholar
Gardiner, A. H. (2006).Egyptian grammar: Being an introduction to the study of hieroglyphs (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldwasser, O. (2006). On the new definition of classifier languages and scripts. Lingua Aegyptia, 14, 473–484.Google Scholar
(2002). Prophets, lovers and giraffes: Wor(l)d classification in Ancient Egyptian (Göttinger Orientforschungen IV). Reihe: Ägypten 38/3 = Classification and Categorization in Ancient Egypt 3. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.Google Scholar
(1995). From icon to metaphor. Studies in the semiotics of the hieroglyphs. Fribourg & Göttingen: University Press Fribourg Switzerland & Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Haring, B. J. J. (2009a). Workmen’s marks on ostraca from the Theban necropolis: a progress report. In B. J. J. Haring & O. E. Kaper (Eds.), Pictograms or Pseudo Script? Non-textual identity marks in practical use in Ancient Egypt and elsewhere (pp. 143–167). Leuven & Leiden: Peeters & Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.Google Scholar
(2009b). On the nature of the workmen’s marks of the royal necropolis administration in the new Kingdom. In P. Andrássy, J. Budka & F. Kammerzell (Eds.), Non-textual marking systems, writing and pseudo script from prehistory to modern times (pp. 123–135). Göttingen: Seminar für Ägyptologie und Koptologie.Google Scholar
Harley, T. A. (2008). The psychology of language. From data to theory (3rd ed.). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, M. A. (2008). Moche art and visual culture in ancient Peru. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
Janse H. & De Vries, D. J. (1991). Werk en merk van de steenhouwer: het steenhouwersambacht in de Nederlanden voor 1800. Zwolle & Zeist: Waanders & Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg.Google Scholar
Janssen, J. J. (1992). Literacy and letters at Deir el-Medina. In R. J. Demarée & A. Egberts (Eds.), Village voices. Proceedings of the symposium ‘Texts from Deir el-Medina and their Interpretation’, Leiden, May 3–June 1, 1991 (pp. 81–94). Leiden: Centre of Non-Western Studies.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980), Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
López, J. (1982). Ostraca ieratici. Fascicolo 3: n. 57320–57449. Milano: Cisalpino-La Goliardica.Google 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. 229–356). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Moezel, K. van der (2016). Of marks and meaning. A palaeographic, semiotic-cognitive, and comparative analysis of the identity marks from Deir el-Medina , Universiteit Leiden ([URL]).
Spiegelberg, W. (1921). Aegyptische und andere Graffiti (Inschriften und Zeichnungen) aus der thebanischen Nekropolis (2 Vols). Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Steen, G. (2014). When is metaphor deliberate? In N.-L. Johannesson & D. C. Minugh (Eds.), Selected papers from the 2008 Stockholm Metaphor Festival (pp. 47–63). Stockholm: US-AB.Google Scholar
Van Belle, J. L., Peetroons, R. & Warroux, R. (1984). Dictionnaire des signes lapidaires. Belgique et nord de la France. Louvain-la-Neuve: Ciaco.Google Scholar
Verner, M. (1992). Abusir: Ausgrabungen des Tschechoslowakischen Ägyptologischen Instituts Teil 2: Baugraffiti der Ptahschepses-mastaba. Praha: Universitas Carolina Pragensis.Google Scholar