Article published In:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Online-First ArticlesFigurativeness of the Japanese flag
A multilevel analysis of the Japan 2011 earthquake distress relief posters
The analysis offered in this article applies the multilevel approach to conceptual metaphor to relief posters, created and distributed widely after the massive Japan 2011 earthquake. The aim of the analysis is to show in what way the multilevel approach to metaphor can be used to illustrate how the figurative meaning of relief posters emerges from the interactions between different levels of schematicity: from basic image schemas and domains, through contextually embedded semantic frames, finishing with metaphorical scenarios at the highest level of specificity and complexity. The present analysis also shows the potential applicability of image schemas as the guiding analytical element, serving as the departure point for the unfolding metaphorical and metonymical interpretation of a multimodal message. Accordingly, it has been shown how the image schemas of part-whole, full-empty, process and force aid the analysis of metaphoricity and how the central metonymic element of the national flag co-constructs the figurative reading of the posters.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1Relief posters and humanitarian communication
- 2.Levels of schematicity in metaphor
- 3.Metaphor-metonymy cline
- 4.Corpus
- 5.Identification procedure
- 6.Results
- 6.1Part-whole image schema
- 6.2Full-empty image schema
- 6.3Process image schema
- 6.4Force image schema
- 7.Discussion and conclusions
- Note
-
References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].
References (58)
Abdel-Raheem, A. (2017). Decoding images: Toward a theory of pictorial framing. Discourse & Society,
28
(4), 327–352. 

Barnden, J.. (2010). Metaphor and metonymy: Making their connections more slippery. Cognitive Linguistics 21(1), 1–34. 

Burgers, C., Konijn, E. A., & Steen, G. J. (2016). Figurative framing: Shaping public discourse through metaphor, hyperbole, and irony: figurative framing. Communication Theory,
26
(4), 410–430. 

Cameron, L. (2011). Metaphor and reconciliation: The discourse dynamics of empathy on post-conflict conversations, London: Routledge.
Cameron, L., Maslen, R., Todd, Z., Maule, J., Stratton, P., & Stanley, N. (2009). The discourse dynamics approach to metaphor and metaphor-led discourse analysis. Metaphor and Symbol,
24
(2), 63–89. 

Cienki, A. (1998). STRAIGHT: An image schema and its metaphorical extensions. Cognitive Linguistics,
9
(2), 107–150. 

Dąbrowska, A. (2023). The role of mental spaces in building metaphors: The case study of the “flądra” nickname in polish. Lublin Studies in Modern Languages and Literature,
42
(2), 79–95. 

Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 

Denroche, C. (2015). Metonymy and language: A new theory of linguistic processing. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Deregowski, J. B. (1971). Symmetry, gestalt and information theory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,
23
(4), 381–385. 

Dyrmo, T. (2022a). Gestural metaphorical scenarios and coming out narratives. Metaphor and the Social World,
12
(1), 23–45. 

(2023a). Metaphors of coming out in Polish: A cognitive linguistic approach. Topics in Linguistics,
24
(1), 94–107. 

(2023b). Levels of metaphor in gesture. Pragmatics and Cognition,
30
(2), 330–353. 

(2024). Image schemas in gestural metaphorical scenarios of swearing. Multimodal Communication,
13
(2), 117–128. 

Forceville, C. (2020). Visual and multimodal communication: Applying the relevance principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Forceville, C. J. (2017). From image schema to metaphor in discourse: The force schemas in animation films. In B. Hampe (Ed.), Metaphor (pp. 239–256). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Gibbs Jr., R. W. (2022). Metaphorical experience: Contiguity or cross-domain mappings? Review of Cognitive Linguistics,
20
(1), 7–32. 

Gibbs, R. W., & Chen, E. (2018). Metaphor and the automatic mind. Metaphor and the Social World,
8
(1), 40–63. 

Goossens, L. (1990). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics,
1
(3), 323–342. 

Hart, C. (2021). Animals vs. armies: Resistance to extreme metaphors in anti-immigration discourse. Journal of Language and Politics,
20
(2), 226–253. 

Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 

Kazemian, R., Rezaei, H., & Hatamzadeh, S. (2022). Unraveling the force dynamics in conceptual metaphors of COVID-19: A multilevel analysis. Language and Cognition,
14
(3), 437–455. 

Keulemans, G. (2016). The Geo-cultural Conditions of Kintsugi
. The Journal of Modern Craft,
9
(1), 15–34. 

Kövecses, Z. (2010). A new look at metaphorical creativity in cognitive linguistics. Cognitive Linguistics,
21
(4), 663–697. 

(2013). The metaphor–metonymy relationship: Correlation metaphors are based on metonymy. Metaphor and Symbol,
28
(2), 75–88. 

(2019). Some consequences of a multi-level view of metaphor. In I. Navarro I. Ferrando (Ed.), Current approaches to metaphor analysis in discourse (pp. 19–34). De Gruyter. 

(2020b). Visual metaphor in Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Cognitive Linguistic Studies,
7
(1), 13–30. 

(2022). Extended conceptual metaphor theory: The cognition-context interface. In U. Schröder, M. Mendes De Oliveira & A. M. Tenuta (Eds.), Metaphorical conceptualizations (pp. 23–40). De Gruyter. 

(2023). Metaphorical creativity in discourse. Lublin Studies in Modern Languages and Literature,
47
(1), 54–70. 

(2024). Proverbs in Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory. In S. Belkhir (Ed.), Proverbs within Cognitive Linguistics: State of the art (pp. 26–39). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 

Krzeszowski, T. P. (1993). The axiological parameter in preconceptional image schemata. In R. A. Geiger & B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Eds.), Conceptualizations and mental processing in language (pp. 307–330). De Gruyer. 

Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 

(1990). The Invariance Hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on image-schemas? Cognitive Linguistics,
1
(1), 39–74. 

Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 

Littlemore, J. (2015). Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Littlemore, J., Arizono, S., & May, A. (2016). The interpretation of metonymy by Japanese learners of English. Review of Cognitive Linguistics,
14
(1), 51–72. 

Mandler, J. M. (2008). On the birth and growth of concepts. Philosophical Psychology,
21
(2), 207–230. 

Mennan, Z. (2009). From simple to complex configuration: Sustainability of gestalt principles of visual perception within the complexity paradigm. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture,
26
(2), 309–323. 

Molek-Kozakowska, K. (2018). Distance crossing and alignment in online humanitarian discourse. Journal of Pragmatics,
124
1, 1–13. 

Murray, M. D. (2022). Cross-cultural communication in a crisis: The universality of visual narrative in the Covid-19 pandemic. SSRN Electronic Journal. 

Musolff, A. (2021). National conceptualisations of the body politic: Cultural experience and political imagination. Singapore: Springer Singapore. 

(2022). Universality and/or cultural specificity of metaphors and analogies? NATIONS as BODIES/PERSOONS. In S. Wuppuluri & A. C. Grayling (Eds), Metaphors and Analogies in Sciences and Humanities (pp. 401–419). Springer. 

Nerlich, B., & David D. Clarke. (2000). Semantic fields and frames: Historical explorations of the interface between language, action, and cognition. Journal of Pragmatics
32
1, 125–150. 

Nie, Y., & Chen, R. (2008). WATER metaphors and metonymies in Chinese: A semantic network. Pragmatics & Cognition,
16
(3), 492–516. 

Olszewska, E., Dyrmo, T., Fabiszak, M. (under review). Where you start is what you get: Schema-driven vs discourse-driven metaphor analysis.
Peña, M. S. (2008). Dependency systems for image-schematic patterns in a usage-based approach to language. Journal of Pragmatics,
40
(6), 1041–1066. 

Rosh, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 11, 303–322.
Sharifian, F. (2017). Cultural linguistics: Cultural conceptualisations and language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 

Tse, C.-S., Huang, Y., Zeng, T., Zhou, Y., & Chan, Y.-L. (2021). The influence of congruency proportion, target eccentricity, and valence strength on the spatial-valence metaphoric congruency effect in a word valence judgment task. Psychological Research,
85
(7), 2610–2635. 
