In a radical departure from theories based on digital, amodal accounts of cognition and language, Lakoff and Johnson (1980) proposed an account of metaphor as fundamentally conceptual, arguing that familiar linguistic metaphors are but surface manifestations of underlying conceptual relationships. They claimed that most conceptual thought is metaphorical, and conceptual domains are instantiated and expressed in families of conceptual metaphors, such as ‘MORE IS U’, ‘EMOTIONALLYINTIMATE IS PHYSICALLY CLOSE’, ‘ARGUMENT IS WAR’, ‘LOVE IS A JOURNEY’, and ‘THEORIES ARE BUILDINGS’. These conceptual metaphors number in the hundreds (Gibbs, 1994b; Lakoff and Johnson, 1999), and they combine to serve as the foundation for new metaphors. For many of these families of metaphors Lakoff and Johnson trace the underlying metaphor to a literal concept based on embodied physical experience.
- Abstract Concept
- Conceptual Metaphor
- Intellectual Integrity
- Conceptual Metaphor Theory
- Metaphor System
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.
Parts of this chapter were adapted with permission from Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers from L. David Ritchie (2003a), ‘ “ARGUMENT IS WAR”—or is it a game of chess? Multiple meanings in the analysis of implicit metaphors’, Metaphor and Symbol, 18: 125–46.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
© 2006 L. David Ritchie
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ritchie, L.D. (2006). Conceptual Metaphor Theory. In: Context and Connection in Metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230286825_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-54649-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-28682-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Language & Linguistics CollectionEducation (R0)