ارزیابی کاربرد استعاری اسامی حیوانات در زبان ترکی (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
بر اساس دیدگاه شناختی لیکاف و جانسون، استعاره مفهومی یکی از مجاری اصلی درک انسان از مفاهیم عالم هستی است. هدف از پژوهش حاضر، بررسی تأثیر اسامی حیوانات بر گفتار گویشوران زبان ترکی و ارزیابی معانی ضمنی این واژه ها بوده است. گویشوران زبان ترکی با تشبیه انسان و رفتارهای او، نیز رویدادهای پیرامونی به حیوانات، آنها را در معانی استعاری به کار می برند. در پژوهش حاضر که به صورت میدانی و انجام مصاحبه با 30 گویشور زبان ترکی گویش شهر زنجان انجام گرفت، تعداد 93 واژه گردآوری شده که 22 واژه و معانی استعاری آنها بین کاربران زبان ترکی مشترک بوده است. ابتدا، معانی ضمنی هرکدام از این 22 واژه که دیدگاه فرهنگی گویشوران زبان ترکی را نشان می دهند، استخراج و در جدولی مقابل هرکدام از اسامی حیوانات نوشته شده است. سپس، برای هر واژه با ذکر اشعار یا امثال و حکم از کتاب ها و منابع معتبر زبان ترکی توضیحاتی ارائه گردیده است. همچنین، موضوع جنسیت، فراوانی و درصد این واژه ها بررسی شده است. یافته های پژوهش بیانگر آن است که نام های این حیوانات بر گفتار گویشوران زبان ترکی تأثیر می گذارد به طوری که متناسب با موقعیت های مختلف بافتی، از این نام ها به صورت استعاری بهره می گیرند و در گفتار از آنها استفاده می کنند.Evaluating the Metaphorical Use of Animal Names in Turkish
Based on Lakoff and Johnson’s cognitive framework, metaphor is considered is a key way humans perceive concepts in the universe. The aim of the present research was to study the effects of animal names on native Turkish speakers and the implicational meanings of the words. Turkish speakers derive metaphoric meanings by comparing humans and surrounding events to these entities. Based on interviews with 30 native speakers, 93 words were collected, 22 of which were common and reflected Turkish cultural views. First, the implicational meanings of these 22 words were extracted and listed in a table alongside each animal’s name. Then for each word, the explanation was given according to some examples and poems from Turkish reference books. In addition, the study examined the subjects of gender, frequency, and percentage in these metaphors. The results indicated that animal names influence the speech of native Turkish speakers, who use these metaphoric words daily in appropriate contexts.
Keywords: metaphor, conceptual metaphor, animals’ names, implicational meaning, Turkish language, cultural linguistics, gender.
Introduction
Metaphor, from a cognitive perspective, serves as a fundamental means through which humans comprehend their environment and the phenomena of the world. Contrary to the traditional viewpoint, metaphor extends beyond mere poetic and literary allusions; it constitutes the very fabric of human understanding of the universe. Cultural conditions, specific to an individual’s place of living, shape metaphor, rendering it a reflection of personal experiences.
Within the cognitive linguistic framework, metaphor transcends linguistic boundaries. It permeates thought processes, imbuing concepts with tangible form. The human mind, influenced by natural elements in its environment, channels these phenomena into words, thereby constructing metaphorical expressions.
Each metaphorical word becomes an exquisite vessel for conveying complex concepts and thoughts. Metaphor is not confined to specialized discourse; rather, it permeates everyday conversations. Beyond linguistic utility, it represents a mode of thinking—one that bridges the gap between experiential and realms of creation. This cognitive process extends beyond literary expression; it encapsulates the collective consciousness of speakers across nations.
One intriguing manifestation of metaphor lies in the ontological realm. Through ontological metaphors, we transform concepts into concrete entities. Lifeless phenomena gain vitality, assuming distinct roles within our mental landscape. We can envision nature, and its creatures and even converse in their language.
This article explored animal-related metaphors within the Turkish language. Drawing upon cognitive linguistics, we present a comprehensive categorization, shedding light on how Turkish speakers conceptualize these animals.
Literature Review
Ghatre et al. (2014) have evaluated adjectives related to animals in the Lori dialect in the field of environmental linguistics. Ahmadipour (2013) has explained the effect of the environment on the worldview of speakers. Bang and Dur (1996) have introduced social factors, individual knowledge, collective knowledge, and the mental system of speakers as effective factors in creating a word. Baranine Kezi (2018) believes that cultural conceptualizations of forest, river, water, and weather are the main causes of Hungarian folk poems. Zimmerman and Coddington (2007) have concluded that nature is part of normal indigenous beliefs. Sharifian (2008) concluded that language and culture interact with each other. Sunwork and Alvin (2014) have introduced some concepts of symbolic environment, natural environment, social-cultural environment, and cognitive environment. Sharifian et al. (2008) considered the role of the names of body parts in word formation and the creation of linguistic metaphors.
Methodology
Data collection involved interviews with 30 speakers aged between 40 to 60 from Zanjan city, randomly selected. Participants were asked to imagine an attribute for each animal and whether their perception matched literary meanings. In total, 93 words were collected, with 22 common to all participants. Another part of words and information was obtained from Turkish dictionaries.
Conclusion
The results from 22 metaphorical animal names show that speakers use these words in everyday conversations to refer to each other or other phenomena. The research innovatively collected and evaluated these words using a field method in terms of conceptual metaphors. The significance of these results lies in how each metaphorical word reflects the thinking and taste of Azerbaijani Turkish speakers. Through conceptual metaphors, an domain (destination domain) is represented with the help of a concrete domain (origin domain).
تبلیغات
