Metaphor as a Rhetorical Device: The semantic meaning, types and ways of translation

1. Metaphor as a Rhetorical Device: The semantic meaning, types and ways of translation

2. Table of content: Abstract Introduction Terminology Purpose of the study; objectives, methodology, research questions Literature review - The traditional & the Modern theory of metaphor - Differences between Metaphor and Simile - Pillars of metaphor in English 6. Types of metaphors - Metaphors in terms of its use and its meaning - metaphors in terms of its concepts 7. Strategies of Translating Metaphors - Translating a metaphor by an identical metaphor in the target language - Metaphors having similar mapping conditions but lexically realized differently - Metaphors of different mapping conditions: Demostication & Foreignization Recommendations Conclusion References

3. Abstract Metaphor is the flavor of language; the decoration that gives our language the taste. It is a means for description that goes beyond the ordinary way of describing things by using usual languages. The aim of this paper is to show that metaphors are not only means by literal language but that they are actually part of our every-day communication. The basis for this paper is the theory of Lakoff and Johnson who dealt with this topic in their work “Metaphors we live by”. This theory is presented and supported by a number of examples of common language. In addition to this, types of metaphors, ways of translating metaphors, and some fields where metaphors are present are shown. The researcher states some recommendations of how to translate and how a translator should take into consideration the value and the culture of the SL when translating, showing that metaphors cannot be ignored in our common language.

4. Terminology Definitions of metaphor vary from one language to another and from one school of language to another. Figures like Aristotle understood metaphor differently than did the modern linguists, philosophers, and rhetoricians. . By going back to Aristotle, he looked at metaphor as the language of the elites that needs special abilities to be produced, whereas modern rhetoricians dealt with metaphor as a figure of speech that needs some cognitive and linguistic abilities to be produced and that can be produced by anyone even by ordinary people in their every-day communication. (Kovecses, Metaphor: A Practical Introduction, 2010).

5. Purpose of the Paper 1- Highlight the different views of metaphors; the traditional and the modern. 2- Explain the different types of metaphors. 3- Investigate the meaning of different types of metaphor metaphors 4- Explain how to translate metaphors

6. Methodology The basis for this paper is the theory of Lakoff and Johnson (1980) who dealt with this topic in their work “Metaphors we live by”.

7. Research Questions: - What are the similarities and differences between the traditional and the modern view towards metaphors? - What are the semantic features of metaphorical expressions in English? - What are the key elements translators should undertake when translating metaphors?

8. Literature Review “We are in the midst of metaphormania. Only three decades ago, the situation was just the opposite: poets created metaphors, everybody used them, and philosophers . . . ignored them. Today we seem possessed by metaphor.” (Johnson M. as cited in Benjamins, 1998, p. 2)

9. The traditional theory of metaphor: There had been some characteristics of the traditional metaphor. These characteristics were proved to be false by modern rhetoricians. These characteristics, as mentioned by (Lakoff, The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor, 1993) are: 1- All everyday conventional language is literal, and none is metaphorical. 2- All subject matter can be comprehended literally, without metaphor. 3- Only literal language can be contingently true or false. 4- All definitions given in the lexicon of a language are literal, not metaphorical. 5- The concepts used in the grammar of a language are all literal, none are metaphorical

10. The modern theory of metaphor: Based on (Lakkoff & Johnson, 1980), this perspective holds that metaphors are present in emotions, events and activities. They claimed, according to (Kovecses, Metaphor: A Practical Introduction, 2010), that metaphor is characterized by the following: 1- Metaphor is a property of concepts, and not of words. This means that a metaphor is a conceptual view (rather than a sequence of words). 2- The function of metaphor is to better understand certain concepts, and not just some artistic or esthetic purpose. 3- Metaphor is often not based on similarity. 4- Metaphor is not only used by special talented people, but it is also used by ordinary people effortlessly in everyday life. Metaphor is an inevitable process of human thought and reasoning. This means that it is a cognitive & linguistic phenomenon.

11. Differences between Metaphor and Simile

12. Pillars of metaphor in English The linguists of the English language, have differed much difference in determining the elements of metaphor. Some linguists consider them two elements; others consider them three elements (Newmark, 1982) says that metaphor has four pillars. 1- The object which describes the metaphor. 2- The image which is described by the object 3- The sensewhich shows the similarities between the object and the image 4- The metaphor; a word or words taken from. Example: - A sunny smile. The object is the word 'smile', and the image is the word 'sun'. The sense may be cheerful, happy, warm. The metaphor is the word sunny i.e. sunny and bright

13. Types of Metaphors Types of metaphors in terms of its use and its semantic meaning according to(Nordquist, 2017):

14. Types of Metaphors

15. Types of Metaphors

16. Types of Metaphors

17. Types of Metaphors

18. Types of Metaphors

19. Types of Metaphors

20. Types of Metaphors

21. Types of Metaphors

22. Types of Metaphors

23. Types of Metaphors

24. Types of Metaphors

25. Types of Metaphors

26. Types of Metaphors

27. Types of Metaphors

28. Types of Metaphors Types of metaphors in terms of its concepts: Conceptual Metaphor: understanding one conceptual domain in terms of another conceptual domain. Examples of this include when we talk and think about life in terms of journeys, about arguments in terms of war, about love also in terms of journeys, about theories in terms of buildings, about ideas in terms of food, about social organizations in terms of plants, and many others. The conceptual domain (A) is conceptual domain (B), which is what is called a conceptual metaphor. (Benczes, 2006) It is mentioned by (Benczes, 2006) that we talk and think about love in terms of food (I hunger for you); madness (They're crazy about one another); the lifecycle of plants (Their love is in full bloom); or a journey (We'll just have to go our separate ways).

29. Types of Metaphors Conceptual Metaphor A- OrientationalMetaphor: An orientational metaphor, as stated by (Nordquist, 2017) is metaphor (or figurative comparison) that involves spatial relationships (such as up-down, in-out, -on-off, and front-back) More is up; less is down: Speak up, please. Keep your voice down, please. Healthy is up; sick is down: He fell ill. Conscious is up; unconscious is down: Wake up. He sank into a coma. Control is up; lack of control is down: I'm on top of the situation. He is under my control. Happy is up; sad is down: I'm feeling up today. He's really low these days. Virtue is up; lack of virtue is down: She's an upstanding citizen. That was a low-down thing to do. Rational is up; nonrational is down: The discussion fell to an emotional level. He couldn't rise above his emotions.

30. Types of Metaphors Conceptual Metaphor B) Ontological Metaphor: It is a type of metaphor or (figurative comparison) in which something concrete is projected onto something abstract. It is a figure that provides ways of viewing events, activities, emotions, ideas, etc., as entities and substances. Examples: Life has cheated me. Inflation is eating up our profits. Cancer finally caught up with him. The computer went dead on me.

31. Types of Metaphors Conceptual Metaphor C)Structural Metaphor: A structural metaphor is a metaphorical system in which one complex concept (typically abstract) is presented in terms of some other (usually more concrete) concept. A structural metaphor Example: Argument is war is an example of a structural metaphor. Structural metaphors are cases where one concept is metaphorically structured in terms of another.

32. Strategies of Translating Metaphors Translators, whose task is to produce a TL text that bears a close resemblance to the SL text, should be aware of cognitive and cultural issues when translating from Arabic into English or vice-versa Therefore, it is not enough for translators to be bilingual, but they should be bicultural as well

33. 1- Translating a metaphor by an identical metaphor in the target language. This category represents metaphors expressing a small number of ideas shared by the two languages and hence expressed, roughly speaking, by similar expressions. Anthropologists call theses shared ideas 'cultural universals.' A universal culture can be thought of as a constellation of common core attitudes and values reflected by practices common to most of the sub-cultures (Emanatian, 1995, p. 165)

34. 1- Translating a metaphor by an identical metaphor in the target language.

35. 2- Metaphors having similar mapping conditions but lexically realized differently Beliefs and religion are aspects of culture that play a very significant role in translation. As is shown in the following examples, although the English examples and their Arabic counterpart metaphors are related to the same conceptual domain, the religion or ethical system in the TL has led to major differences in lexical choice.

36. 2- Metaphors having similar mapping conditions but lexically realized differently

37. 3- Metaphors of different mapping conditions • Domestication:It means “negotiating the metaphorical elements of the source text in terms of target language norms, values, and conventions” (Hatim, 1999, p. 214). A foreign text needs to be domesticated. i.e. brought as nearest as possible to the domestic culture. And a domestic text needs to be brought as closest as possible to the foreign culture in the target language. Such a task could require the translator to move, in the process of transferring the meaning of the metaphoric expression, between the ‘paraphrase’ and ‘metaphrase’ in the absence of the right equivalent. The metaphoric expression ‘to break the ice’ in English has no equivalent metaphoric expression in Arabic. The translation of this image has come to be known as (يكسر حاجز الصمت) where part of the image is kept (يكسر) whereas ‘the ice’ is conceptualized as ‘silence’. But, ‘break’ and ‘silence’ can not stand on their own to trigger the same effect of the source language image on the recipient in the target language. Therefore, different concept is introduced to shape, in full, the image. The barrier (حاجز) is the additional component, which can be ‘broken’.

38. 3- Metaphors of different mapping conditions • 2. Foreignization: It means “negotiating these metaphorical elements in terms of source language norms and conventions” (Hatim, 1999, p. 214). Other translators prefer keeping the values of the SL and exposing audience to them.

39. Recommendations Translators, whose task is to produce a TL text that bears a close resemblance to the SL text, should be aware of cognitive and cultural issues when translating from Arabic into English or vice-versa. Therefore, it is not enough for translators to be bilingual, but they should be bicultural as well. It is recommended that translators be trained in coping with metaphor translation not only in foreign-language programs, but also in their native language. Sometimes, even native speakers are not always able to comprehend the figurative meaning of messages in their own language. Some translators prefer changing the SL values and making them readable for the TL audience. This is termed Domestication. Other translators prefer keeping the values of the SL and exposing audience to them.

40. References: Abu-Ssaydeh, A.-F. (2004). Translation of English idioms into Arabic. Babel, 50(2), pp. 114-131. Al-Ali, M. (2004). Familiar words in unfamiliar contexts. Perspectives. Studies in Translatology, 12(2), pp. 134-144. Al-Hasnawi, A. R. (2007). A Cognitive Approach to Translating Metaphors. Translation Journal, 11(3). Retrieved 05 08, 2017, from http://translationjournal.net/journal/41metaphor.htm Benczes, R. (2006). Creative Compounding in English: The Semantics of Metaphorical and Metonymical Noun-Noun Combinations. Amsterdam\Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. Benjamins, J. (1998). The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: A Perspective from Chinese. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Brown, T. L. (2003). Making Truth: Metaphor in Science. Illinois: University of Illinois Press. Cohen, M. Z. (2003). Three Approaches to Biblical Metaphor: From Abraham Ibn Ezra and Maimonides to David Kimhi. Leiden: Brill.

41. Emanatian, M. (1995). Metaphor and the Expression of Emotion: The Value of Cross- Cultural Perspectives. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10(3), pp. 163-182. Hatim, B. (1999). Implications of Research into Translator Invisibility. International Journal of Translation Studies, 11(2), pp. 201-222. Kant, C. C. (2007). Cognitive Metaphor and Continental Philosophy. London and New York: Routledge. Knowles, M., & Moon, R. (2006). Introducing Metaphor. London and New York: Routledge. Kovecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction (2 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kovecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction (2 ed.). Oxford: University Press. Lakoff, G. (1993). The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (2 ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Mandelblit, N. (1995). The cognitive view of metaphor and its implications for translation theory: Translation and Meaning. Maastricht: Maastricht Universitaire Press. Newmark, P. (1982). Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Nordquist, R. (2017, 04 25). Thought Co. Retrieved 05 07, 2017, from Conceptual Metaphor: https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-conceptual-metaphor-1689899 Radden, G., & Dirven, R. (2007). Cognitive English Grammar‏(Vol. 2). Amsterdam\Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. Dagut, M. (1976). Can metaphor be translated? Bebel. International Journal of Translation, 22(1), pp. 21-33. Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and Corpus Linguistics.Amersterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Dickins, J., Harvey, S., & Higgins, I. (2002). Thinking Arabic Translation: A Course in Translation Method: Arabic to English. London: Routledge.