This paper aims to seek to compare the views of the metaphoric conceptualization, which can be classified into two models, i.e. two-domain model and many-space model.
Metaphor has been regarded as one of the cognitive mechanisms whereby one experient...
This paper aims to seek to compare the views of the metaphoric conceptualization, which can be classified into two models, i.e. two-domain model and many-space model.
Metaphor has been regarded as one of the cognitive mechanisms whereby one experiential domain is partially mapped(i.e. projected) onto a different experiential domain, so that the second domain is partially understood in terms of the first one. The domain that is mapped is called the source domain, and the domain onto which source is mapped is called the target domain. Both domains have to belong to different superordinate domains.
This is called two-domain model, which is basically the cognitive concept of metaphor propounded by George Lakoff, Mark Johnson, and Mark Turner and by other cognitive linguists who have been investigating the field. This model claims that the projection is unidirectional from the source to the target.
The other model, which is an extension of Gill Fauconnier's earlier work on mental spaces and has been developed by Fauconnier and Turner, subsumes metaphor as a special case of more general mental mapping mechanisms. This new model basically claims that in conceptual mapping, as it proceeds in discourse, the source and target domains(or input spaces) are mapped onto a blended space or blend, whose conceptual structure is not wholly derivable from both input spaces. There is also a fourth "generic space", which contains skeletal conceptual structure taken to apply to both source and target. This model is a network model consisting of two input spaces, a blended space, and a generic space, and points to the existence of multiple projections, that is, projections from both inputs to the blend, and projections of the principal inferences from the blend to the target.
In conclusion, the many-space model seeks to explain how speakers and hearers build new inferences throughout discourse by constructing provisional conceptual domains or "blends". However, it is not compatible with the two-domain model, because it presupposes it.