Methodology for analysis of the pentateuch metaphorics (english bible)

So, the carried out MC analysis demonstrated the capacity of the metaphorical concepts to model the reality as they incorporate relevant for ethnos knowledge, value characteristics, and experiences. To demonstrate the seven-step technique of research of metaphorical concepts, the metaphorical concept CHARACTER was used. It allowed discovering the peculiarity of figurative-associative mentality of ethnos as it is objectified in usual and occasional figurative meanings (verbal level), and fixed as cognitive features / associates (non-verbal level).

Thus understood, the demonstrated technique allows the MC analysis at verbal and non-verbal levels. The verbal level is nothing but the level of linguistic metaphors, that is to say metaphorics. Under this perspective, the metaphorics and the MC emerge as “two sides of the same coin”. Consequently, the analysis of the one presupposes the analysis of another one; this perfectly serves the aim of our research.

The third stage of the study.

At the third stage of the research a questionnaire is conducted. The survey is done in order to obtain necessary information for semantic-cognitive reconstruction of the conceptual metaphors of the Pentateuch (from the standpoint of recipients' doxic presupposition) as well as making general conclusions.

The fourth stage of the study.

At the fourth stage of the study, drawing on the theory of conceptual metaphor and the theory of embodied cognition as methodologies of scientific research, we conduct semantic and cognitive reconstruction of the conceptual metaphors of the Pentateuch on the basis of material collected by using the method of questionnaires. It is done to obtain additional senses of the Biblical metaphors presented from the standpoint of the doxic presupposition of recipients.

The preliminary semantic and cognitive reconstruction of conceptual metaphors on the basis of a questionnaire has shown that recipients' comprehension of Biblical metaphors is realized by metaphorical expansion from the source sphere: 1) three-dimensional space (verticality, centre-periphery, distance, objects, etc.); 2) the man (his physical, physiological, mental and spiritual properties); 3) interpersonal relationships (family relationships, social roles, etc.) on the sphere-goal of metaphysical reality. Thus, as preliminary examination allows us to suggest that the recipients' comprehension of the Pentateuch metaphorics is led and structured by such conceptual metaphors as:

Orientational conceptual metaphors: GOD'S STATUS IS UP, GOOD IS UP, CENTRAL IS IMPORTANT, SIN IS DOWN, HEAVENS IS UP, and other.

Ontological metaphors: GOD IS CREATOR, GOD IS HELPER, GOD IS FATHER, GOD IS KING, GOD IS HELPER, CLEANLINESS IS MORALITY, GOD IS OBJECT, WORD IS OBJECT, and other.

Structural conceptual metaphors: LEADING A MORAL LIFE IS MAKING A JOURNEY ON GOD'S WAY, LEARNING IS EATING and other.

However, the final conclusions can be made only after processing all data collected from the recipients. Overall, the preliminary results of the semantic and cognitive reconstruction of conceptual metaphors (from standpoint of doxic presupposition) support the significance of going beyond the structural and semantic formation of texts and the studying the Pentateuch metaphors on the basis of data gathered with the help of questionnaires.

Discussion

The suggested methodology shows the logic of our reasoning as far as the semantic and cognitive approach to the Pentateuch metaphorics research, and as it is determined by two vectors of investigation (substantiated in section 4.1.). Although at this stage of research is it too early to make conclusions regarding the metaphorics sense “scope”, it may be regarded as certain that described methodology allows revealing the metaphorics senses in their verbal and mental integrity.

Importantly, that within the framework of examination of metaphorical conceptual sphere of Russian literature of the first part of the XX century (poetry and prose of Z. Hippius, A. Bielyi, and A. Akhmatova), among other basic metaphorical concepts, a metaphorical concept CHARACTER is found (Kravtsova 2014: 253). However, in terms of their content, the Russian literature metaphorical concept CHARACTER and the Biblical one are totally different. The core of the Biblical metaphorical concept CHARACTER is constituted by the only character trait `mercy' (56%). It absolutely dominates over other traits; therefore, it is the main feature of human character in the perspective of individual author-specific worldview of the Pentateuch. Unlike the Biblical concept, Russian literature metaphorical concept is mostly represented by metaphors `mean', `gentle', `lazy', and `timid'.

Interesting enough is that the analysis of the results of the pilot survey shows that, in general, the conceptual metaphors reconstructed from the standpoint of doxic presupposition (based on questionnaires) basically coincide with the conceptual metaphors reconstructed as a result of semantic-cognitive analysis of the metaphor based on the Pentateuch texts, namely: GOD IS CREATOR, GOD IS HELPER, GOD IS FATHER, GOD IS KING, LEADING A MORAL LIFE IS MAKING A JOURNEY ON GOD'S WAY, CLEANLINESS IS MORALITY, CENTRAL IS IMPORTANT, GOOD IS UP and others. However, as we have already stated, the final conclusions can be made only after gathering optimum information from the recipients, and conducting a complete semantic-cognitive analysis of metaphors.

Thus, at this stage, it is safe to say that the metaphorical picture of the world, the metaphorical concept, and the conceptual metaphor are sense-inseparable; therefore, consideration of one involves consideration of another. These constructions intertwine to form a whole image of senses. They embody and at the same time interpret metaphorics; thus, allowing us to penetrate into the depths of consciousness and grasp the essence of the author's intention. Which, given the specifics of the studied texts, is extremely interesting.

Conclusions

In the article we have argued that the comprehensive study of the Pentateuch metaphorics requires the semantic and cognitive approach. Furthermore, we substantiated the need to go beyond the structural and semantic formation of the Pentateuch texts to involve in the analysis of their metaphors additional metaphorical meanings refracted through the prism of doxic presupposition and available in the reflective reality of recipients.

Under such perspective the vectors of the metaphorics research were characterized from the standpoint: 1) the author's doxa; 2) doxic presupposition of recipients.

Mental and verbal dimensions of metaphor (metaphorical picture of the world, metaphorical concepts; conceptual metaphors) were established, which determined the research methodology.

Described complex methodology of metaphorics analysis includes: 1) the technique of semantic and cognitive metaphorical modeling aimed at reconstruction of the metaphorical picture of the world (the first stage); 2) the technique of the metaphorical concepts analysis (the second stage); 3) the questionnaire technique (the third stage); 4) the technique of semantic and cognitive reconstruction of conceptual metaphors from the standpoint of doxic presupposition (the fourth stage). It is established that the proposed method implements the idea of a comprehensive study of the Pentateuch metaphorics.

Abbreviations

Gn. - Genesis

Dt. - Deuteronomy

Ex. - Exodus

Lev. - Leviticus

MC - metaphorical concept

Nm. - Numbers

References

1. Admoni, V. G. (1994). Sistema form rechevogo vyskazyvaniya [The system of forms of speech utterances]. Nauka.

2. Alefirenko, N. F. (2016). Lingvokul'turologija: cennostno-smyslovoe prostranstvo jazyka: ucheb. posobie [Linguoculturology: value and sense space of language: manual]. 5-e izd., ster. FLINTA.

3. Belyanin, V. P. (2000). Osnovy psikholingvisticheskoy diagnostiki. Modeli mira v literature: monografiya [Basics of psycholinguistic diagnostics. World models in literature: monograph]. Trivola.

4. Cherkhava, O. O. (2017). Rekonstruktsiia teolinhvistychnoi matrytsi relihiino-populiarnoho dyskursu (na materiali anhliiskoi, nimetskoi ta ukrainskoi mov) [Reconstruction of Theolinguistic Matrix of Religious Popular Discourse (Based on the English, German and Ukrainian Languages)]: Thesis Abstract.

5. DeCesaris, J., & Aslina, V. (2002). The Representation of Figurative Senses in Learners' Dictionaries. In Gottlieb, Henrik; Jens Erik Mogensen; Arne Zettersten (eds.), Symposium on Lexicography X. Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium on Lexicography May 4-6, 2000 at the University of Copenhagen, Max Niemeyer, Tubingen.77-90. (Lexicographica).

6. Zernetskaya, A. A. (2014). Funktsional'naya sistema verbal'no-kommunikativnoy deyatel'nosti (kompetentnostnyy aspekt): monografiya [Functional system of verbal-communicative activity (competence aspect): monograph]. Izd-vo OOO “Shchedraya usadba plyus”.

7. Karasik, V. I. (2000). O tipah diskursa [On discurse types]. Jazykovaja lichnost': institucional'nyj і personal'nyj diskurs: Sb. nauch. tr. Peremena. 5-20.

8. Izyumtseva, G. (2020, January 12). Conceptual Metaphors in the Pentateuch Texts of English Bible (New King James Version). Scientific Journal of National Pedagogical Dragomanov University. Series 9. Current Trends in Language Development, 19, 47-73.

9. Kachanov, Ju. L. (2000). Teoreticheskie predposylki jempiricheskogo issledovanija sociologicheskoj teorii [Theoretical premises of sociological theory empirical investigation]. SOCIS, 3-10.

10. Kolesov, V. V. (2004) Jazyk i mental'nost [Language and mentality]. SPb.: Peterburgskoe Vostokovedenie, 2004.

11. Kravtsova, Yu. V. (2013). Metaforicheskaya kontseptualizatsiya mira v khudozhestvennom tekste [Metaphorical conceptualization of the world in artistic text]. Naukovyi chasopys Natsionalnohopedahohichnoho universytetu imeniM. P. Drahomanova. Seriia 9. Suchasni tendentsii rozvytku mov, 10. 149-159.

12. Kravtsova, Yu. V. (2014). Metaforicheskoe modelirovanie mira v khudozhestvennom tekste: semantiko-kognitivnyy analiz: monografyja [Metaphorical modeling of the world in artistic text: semantic and cognitive analysis: monograph]. Izd-vo NPU im. M. P. Dragomanova.

13. Kravtsova, Yu. V. (2011). Semantyko-kohnityvne modeliuvannia metaforyzatsii [The semantic and cognitive modelling of metaphorization]. Movoznavstvo: nauk.-teor. Zhurn, 1. 43-54.

14. Korolyova, A. V. (2011). Diakhronichnyi vektor doslidzhennia struktur svidomosti y myslennia [Diachronic vector of investigating the consciousness and cognition structures]. Visnyk KNLU. Seriia Filolohiia, 4 (1). 52-58.

15. Pocheptsov, O. G. (1990). Yazykovaya mentalnost: sposob predstavleniya mira [Language mentality: Mode of the universe presentation]. Voprosyyazykoznaniya, 6. 110-122.

16. Selivanova, O. O. (2008). Suchasna linghvistyka: naprjamy ta problemy: pidruchnyk [Modern linguistics: tendencies and problems: textbook]. Dovkillja-K.

17. Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to a Poetic Metaphor. The University of Chicago Press.

18. Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. Metaphor and thought [A. Ortony Ed.]. Cambridge University Press.

19. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors We Live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

20. Lakoff, G. (1990). Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. The University of Chicago Press.

21. Lovejoy, A. O. (2001). The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea. Harvard University Press. Twenty-second reprinting.

22. Stienstra, N. (1993). YHVH is the Husband of His People: Analysis of a Biblical Metaphor with Special Reference to Translation. Kok Pharos Publishing House.

23. Wilber, K. (2000). One Taste: Daily Reflections on Integral Spirituality. SHAMBHALA.

24. Sources of Illustrative Material: The Orthodox Study Bible (2008). The St. Athanasius Academy of Orthodox Theology. Thomas Nelson.

Размещено на Allbest.ru