Image-scheme “space” as a semantic foundation in term formation (on the russian legal terminology material)
DOI: 10.23951/1609-624X-2023-4-35-42
The specifics of conceptual metaphors of the Russian legal terminology structured with SPACE image-schema is being investigated and analyzed. The aim of the article is to establish spatial configurations (trajectories) involved in the conceptual modeling of the Russian legal metaphorical terms and to identify the structures of spatial image-schemas involved in the conceptualization of the abstract concepts (domains) of the conceptual legal metaphorical terms. Spatial metaphorical projections (cognitive mapping) involved in the metaphoric modeling of Russian legal terminology are established. The specificity of the Russian legal metaphorical terms conceptualization is determined. The most frequently involved spatial structures are: SPACE ARRANGEMENT, MOVEMENT IN SPACE, POSITION IN SPACE. The detected image-schemes structure: path and trajectory (SOURCE – PATH – GOAL), the size of an object with dynamic transformation (SCALE), obstacles when moving in space (RESTRAINT), identity (LOCALIZATION), state (CONTAINER), scale (DISTANCE), awareness (LOCATION in RELATION to OBJECT). The specificity of spatial conceptualization of legal metaphorical terms is revealed through the aspect of content and structure. In terms of the content aspect, legal metaphorical terms describe legal events. Actions in legal discourse are conceptualized metaphorically through movements in space and structured via image schemes. This fact explains the variety of trajectories highlighted in spatial configurations. Abstract concepts of the legal sphere on which spatial configurations are projected are: ASSIGNMENTS/ OBLIGATIONS/POWERS and their LIMITS, INSTITUTIONAL COMMUNICATION, the SUBJECT OF MATERIAL RELATIONS and LAW FULFILLMENT in TIME The investigated configurations of spatial conceptualization with the help of image schemes in metaphorical modeling of the terminology of the legal sphere structure the sphere of law in a diverse way, highlighting different aspects of SPACE within metaphorization. The active structures are path, trajectory, size of the object, dynamics of transformation, obstacles to movement, identity, state, scale, awareness in space, vertical orientation. Spatial image – schemes are involved in the conceptualization of events, objects, processes of the institutional professional discourse of the legal sphere and may be found in all branches of law.
Keywords: space, legal metaphor term, image schema
References:
1. Skrebtsova T. G. Kognitivnaya lingvistika: kurs lektsiy [Cognitive lingustics. Course of lectures]. Saint Petersburg, Philology Faculty, Saint Petersburg State University Publ., 2011. 256 p. (in Russian).
2. Lakoff D., Dzhonson M. Metafory, kotorymi my zhivem [Metaphors We Live by: translation from English]. Edited and prefaced by A. N. Baranov. Moscow, Editorial URSS Publ., 2004. 256 p. (in Russian).
3. Langacker R. W. The Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1987. 516 p.
4. Talmy L. How language structures space. Spatial orientation. Theory, Research, and Application. New York, London, Plenum press, 1983. P. 225–282.
5. Karasik V. I. Yazykovoy krug: lichnost’, kontsepty, diskurs [Language Circle: Person, concepts, discourse]. Volgograd, Peremena Publ., 2002. 477 p. (in Russian).
6. Boldyrev N. N. Otrazheniye prostranstva deyatelya i prostranstva nablyudatelya v vyskazyvanii [The depiction of the active actor space and observer space in the utterance interaction]. In: Arutyunova N. D., Levontina I. B. (eds) Logicheskiy analiz yazyka. Yazyki prostranstv [Logical analysis of language.]. Moscow, Yazyki russkoy kul’tury Publ., 2000. Pp. 212–217 (in Russian).
7. Mishankina N. A. Mental’noye prostranstvo nauchnogo teksta: metaforicheskiye modeli [Mental space of scientific text: metaphor models]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal, 2007, no. 297, pp. 7–11 (in Russian).
8. Mishankina N. A. Metafora v nauke: paradoks ili norma? [Metaphor in science; is it paradox or norm?]. Tomsk, Tomsk University Publ., 2010. 282 p. (in Russian).
9. Antle A. N., Corness G., Bevans A. Springboard: Designing Image Schemas Based Embodied Interaction for an Abstract Domain. In: England D. (ed.) Whole Body Interaction, Human-Computer Interaction Series. Springer-Verlag London Limited, 2011. Pp. 7–18.
10. Rakhimova A. R. Metaforicheskoye modelirovaniye sotsializatsii cheloveka v akademicheskom diskurse sotsial’noy psikhologii (na osnove predstavleniya o mestopolozhenii v prostranstve) [Metaphor modeling of a human socialization in the academic discourse of social psychology, based on space orientation]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal, 2017, no. 423, pp. 41–49 (in Russian).
11. Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos A. Flesh of the Law: Material Legal Metaphors. Journal of Law and Society, 2016, vol. 43, no. 1. Law’s Metaphors: Interrogation Languages of Law, Justice, and Legitimacy. P. 45–65.
12. Larrson S. Conceptions in the code. The Embodied Law. Oxford University Press, 2017. Pp. 55–78.
13. Meier B. P., Robinson M. D. Why the sunny side is up. Associations be-tween affect and vertical position. Psychological Science, 2004, no. 15, pp. 243–247.
14. Enfield N. F. The body as a cognitive artifact in kinship representations. Current Anthropology, 2005, no. 46 (1), pp. 51–81.
15. Rusconi E., Kwan B., Giordano B., Umilta C., Butterworth B. Spatial representation of pitch height: The SMARC effect. Cognition, 2006, no. 99, pp. 113–129.
16. Grady J. Edward. Foundation of Meaning: Primary Metaphors and Primary Scenes. Berkley, UC Berkley, 1997. Pp. 55–78.
17. Casasanto D. Similarity and proximity: When does close in space mean close in mind? Memory & Cognition, 2008, no. 36 (6), pp. 1047–1056.
18. Casasanto D. Embodiment of abstract concepts: Good and bad in right- and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2009, no. 138 (3), pp. 351–367.
19. Williams L. E., Bargh J. A. Keeping one’s distance: The influence of spatial distance cues on affect and evaluation. Psychological Science, 2008, no. 19, pp. 302–308.
20. Schubert T. Your highness: Vertical positions as perceptual symbol of power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2005, no. 89 (1), pp. 1–21.
21. Kövecses Z. Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Cambridge university press, 2020. 210 p.
22. Lakoff G. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1987. 632 p.
23. Johnson M. The body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago, University Chicago Press, 1987. 272 p.
24. Chenki A. Semantika v kognitivnoy lingvistike [Semantics in cognitive linguistics]. In: Kibrik A. A., Kobozeva I. M., Sekerina I. A. (eds.) Sovremennaya amerikanskaya lingvistika: Fundamental’nye napravleniya [Modern American linguistics: Fundamental approaches]. Moscow, 2002. P. 340–369 (in Russian).
25. Beate Hampe, Grady J. E. From Perception to Meaning: Image Schemas. In: Driven R., Langacker R. W., Taylor J. R. Cognitive Linguistics, Mouton de Gruyter. Berlin, New York, 2005. 501 p.
26. Lakoff G. The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. In: A. Ortony (ed.). Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press, 1992. P. 202–251.
27. Clausner T. C., Croft W. Domains and image schemas. Cognitive Linguistics, 1999, vol. 10-1, pp. 1–31.
28. Mishankina N. A. Predstavleniya o peremeshchenii v prostranstve kak iskhodnaya ponyatijnaya oblast’ v russkom metaforicheskom terminoobrazovanii [Issues on spatial movements as source domain in Russian term formation]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya – Tomsk State University Journal of Philology, 2019, no. 61, pp. 70–97 (in Russian).
( 407.6 kB ) 
( 399.06 kB )
Issue: 4, 2023
Series of issue: Issue 4
Rubric: APPLIED LINGUISTICS
Pages: 35 — 42
Downloads: 305