Advertisement

Interpreting Metaphors in a New Semantic Theory of Concept

  • Yi Mao
  • Beihai Zhou
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4384)

Abstract

We present a formalism of metaphor that is based on a newly developed semantic interpretation of concept in the line of Montague’s type theory, and exposit the role that metaphoric expressions play in linking two concepts together. We argue that metaphors have to be understood intensionally. We show that a metaphoric expression states the inclusion relation between the intensions of two concepts in a certain context. A formal intensional semantics that defines the truth condition of metaphor is established. This semantics accounts for a number of important features of metaphors such as intensionality, nonreversibility, partial systematicity and context-sensitivity.

Keywords

Truth Condition Semantic Theory Literal Meaning Inclusion Relation Polysemous Word 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Camp, E.: Josef Stern, Metaphor in Context (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000) (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000). Noûs 39(4), 715–731 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Church, A.: Carnap’s introduction to semantics. The Philosophical Review 52, 298–304 (1943)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Church, A.: A formulation of the logic of sense and denotation. In: Henle, P., et al. (eds.) Structure, Method and Meaning, Liberal Arts Press, New York (1951)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Frege, G.: Function and Concept. In: Frege, Collected Papers on Mathematics, Logic and Philosophy (ed. McGuinness), pp. 137-56Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frege, G.: On Sense and Reference. JSTOR: Phil. Review (May 1948)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Glucksberg, S., McGlone, M.S., Manfredi, D.: Property attribution in metaphor comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 36, 50–67 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lakoff, G., Johnson, M.: Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1980)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Montague, R.: Universal Grammar. In: Richmond, H.T. (ed.) Formal Philosophy, Yale University Press, New Haven (1974)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ohkura, C.: The Semantics of Metaphor in the Game Theoretic Semantics with at Least Two Coordination Equilibria. In: ACL, Workshop on The Lexicon and Figurative Language (2003), http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/W/W03/W03-1408.pdf
  10. 10.
    Stern, J.: Metaphor in Context, Cambridge, Mass (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thomas, M.S.C., Mareschal, D.: Metaphors as Categorization: A Connectionist Implementation. Metaphor and Symbol 16(1-2), 5–27 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Van Genabith, J.: Metaphors, Logic, and Type Theory. Metaphor and Symbol 16(1-2), 43–57 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vogel, C.: Dynamic Semantics for Metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol 16(1-2), 59–74 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhou, B., Mao, Y.: Four Semantic Layers of a Common Noun. In: reviewGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yi Mao
    • 1
    • 2
  • Beihai Zhou
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Logic, Language and Cognition Peking University 
  2. 2.Gemalto Inc.U.S.A.
  3. 3.Department of Philosophy, Peking UniversityChina

Personalised recommendations