Journal of Poetry Studies (boostan Adab)

(boostan Adab)

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Internal Structure of Mental Spaces in Metaphors of the Story of “Rostam and Sohrab” Based on Fauconnier’s Theory

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Prof of Linguistic of Jahrom University, Jahrom, Iran

2 Associate Prof of Persian Language and Literature of Jahrom Univeristy, Jahrom, Iran

Abstract

 
Metaphor is one of the topics that has always been discussed in literature and has been looked at from different perspectives. Among the new approaches is the cognitive view of metaphor, which can be found in Fauconnier's theory (Fauconnier, 1994). From Fauconnier's point of view, metaphor can be analyzed in terms of mental spaces. Mental space is defined as going from one space to another.
The characteristic of the approach of mental spaces and the general cognitive view of metaphor is that metaphor is considered to be a wider and more flexible phenomenon compared to its conception in traditional view, including in literature. The metaphors of the text of “Rostam and Sohrab” are not uniform and are significant from different dimensions. The common feature of all metaphors is that the power frame controls them from above. Metaphors differ in their abstraction. The metaphors attributed to Rostam and Sohrab are on the way of becoming abstract, but a group of metaphors of Makniyeh go from abstract to concrete. Another subcategory of Makniyeh metaphors can be analyzed in terms of the relationship between the components of a frame
 

Keywords

Main Subjects

References
 
Afrashi, A., Asi, S. M., & Joulaei, K. (2015). Conceptual metaphors in the Persian language: A cognitive and corpus-based analysis. Journal of Linguistics, 6(12), 39–61.
https://languagestudy.ihcs.ac.ir/article_2184.html [in Persian]
Afrashi, A., Hassami, T., & Salas, C. B. (2012). A contrastive study of orientational conceptual metaphors in Spanish and Persian. Language Related Research, 3(4).
https://lrr.modares.ac.ir/browse.php?a_id=8042 [in Persian]
Crisp, P. (1996). Imagism’s metaphors: A test case. Language and Literature, 5(2), 79–92.
https://doi.org/10.1177/096394709600500201
Farzanfar, A. (2019). A linguistic analysis of the conceptual metaphor of “love” in the ghazals of Amir Khusrow Dehlavi. Journal of Stylistics of Persian Poetry and Prose (Bahar-e Adab), 12(44), 349–396. [in Persian]
Fauconnier, G. (1994). Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511624582
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. Basic Books.
Gandomkar, R. (2020). Unidirectionality of conceptual metaphors: A critical analysis based on the Persian language. Journal of Language Science, 6(10), 179–206.
https://ls.atu.ac.ir/article_10071.html [in Persian]
Ghaderi Najafabadi, S., Amouzadeh, M., & Tavangar, M. (2016). Cognitive linguistics: The cognitive model of the eye in Saʿdi’s Bustan. Journal of Persian Language and Iranian Dialects, 1(1), 71–95. https://zaban.guilan.ac.ir/article_1841.html [in Persian]
Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (Ed.). (2008). The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802
Hiraga, M. K. (1999). Blending and the interpretation of haiku: A cognitive approach. Poetics Today, 20(3), 461–481.
Holtgraves, T. (1994). Communication in context: Effects of speaker status on the comprehension of indirect requests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(5), 1205–1218. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.5.1205
Katz, A. N. (1992). Psychological studies in metaphor processing: Extensions to the placement of terms in semantic space. Poetics Today, 13(4), 607–632. https://doi.org/10.2307/1773291
Katz, A. N., & Pexman, P. M. (1997). Interpreting figurative statements: Speaker occupation can change metaphor to irony. Metaphor and Symbol, 12(1), 19–41. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1201_3
Keysar, B. (1989). On the functional equivalence of literal and metaphorical interpretations in discourse. Journal of Memory and Language, 28(4), 375–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90017-X
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 202–251). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173865
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2008). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (2009). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. University of Chicago Press.
Lodge, D. (1977). The modes of modern writing: Metaphor, metonymy, and the typology of modern literature. Edward Arnold.
Malgady, R., & Johnson, M. (1980). Measurement of figurative language: Semantic feature models of comprehension and appreciation. In R. Honeck & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 239–258). Erlbaum.
Mukařovský, J. (1970). Standard language and poetic language. In D. C. Freeman (Ed.), Linguistics and literary style. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Nowottny, W. (1965). The language poets use. Athlone Press.
Ortony, A. (1975). Why metaphors are necessary and not just nice. Educational Theory, 25, 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.1975.tb00666.x
Parsa, S. A., & Hossein-panahi, F. (2011). Compound metaphors: A newly identified type of metaphor in the poetry of Khaqani Shirvani. Bustan-e Adab Quarterly of Poetry Research, 3(2), 25–50. https://jba.shirazu.ac.ir/article_279.html. [in Persian]
Pilkington, A. (2000). Poetic effects: A relevance theory perspective. John Benjamins.
Safavi, K. (2004). The death of metaphor. Journal of New Literary Studies, 37(1), 1–16. [in Persian]
Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1993). Metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 83–111). Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173865
Short, M. (1996). Exploring the language of poems, plays and prose. Longman.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315842080
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Harvard University Press.
Titone, D., & Connine, C. (1994). Talking on semantic commitment: Processing semantically non-decomposable and decomposable idioms. Poster presented at the Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing.
Tsur, R. (1992). Toward a theory of cognitive poetics. Elsevier.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00045-9
Zakari, E., & Mollaki, Z. (2018). Investigating innovation in Salman Harati’s poetry in the light of conceptual metaphor theory. Poetry Research Quarterly (Bustan-e Adab), 10(4), 89–112.
https://jba.shirazu.ac.ir/article_4723.html
 
 
 
 
Journal of Poetry Studies (boostan Adab)
Volume 17, Issue 4 - Serial Number 66
Journal of Poetry Studies, Vol 17, Issue 4, Ser 66, 2026‎
February 2026
Pages 95-108
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics