Conceptual Metaphor: a Pragmatic Argumentative Approach

Abstract

Objectives: This study seeks to trace the pragmatic component of conceptual metaphor and its argumentative effect. It focuses on sources of experience and their impact in forming perceptions of the target domain (the abstract domain) through the conceptual structure of the source domain (the literal domain).  It also sheds light on the structural and contextual factors that affect the argumentative energy of conceptual metaphor; to reveal its persuasive role and the sources it draws its argumentative strength from.

 Methods: The study relies on pragmatic argumentative theory that investigates persuasion strategies in discourse, based on Toulmin’s argumentative model.  It relies on previous studies to benefit from them in studying the persuasive aspect of conceptual metaphor and its impact on argumentative repertoire.

 Results: The argumentative-pragmatic component of the conceptual metaphor is manifested in two factors: an internal factor represented by the methaphor’s structural composition, its conceptual structure, and their effect in enhancing the persuasive impact, and an external factor demonstrated by the harmony among various metaphors in the text.  The conceptual metaphor has contextual factors that affect its production and contribute to determining its functions in order to persuade the recipient. 

Conclusions: The different cultural values ​​and opinions of societies are worthy of research due to their consistency with the adopted conceptual metaphorical structures, as argued by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. Such research contributes to facilitating communication and developing perceptions that unveil cultural similiaries and differences among various communities.