Lakoff and Johnson write right at the beginning of his book „Metaphors we live by“, that metaphors are more than just figures of speech, poetic figures of imagination and language, that they are

„pervasive in everyday life, not just in language, but in thought and action. Our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act is fundamentally metaphorical in nature.“ (p. 3)

Even more, those concepts „govern our everyday functioning, down to the most mundane details.“ (ibid.) So where does this basic concept originate from? The authors point out the spatial concepts and speculate that this must be the origin of comprehension: Our experience as beings in three-dimensional space (p. 56).

It seems that metaphors, which are basically comparisons, shape our understanding of the world. It seems that we take known concepts to describe something else which functions similarly.

We use metaphors that are culturally known and common, and I think that’s the secret of metaphorical language, figures of speech: We immediately understand, often unconsciously. It is sometimes easier to use a metaphor to describe a complex phenomenon, just to point out the intended meaning of it. Thus, if we had to describe with language, there would be an analytical process to be gone through. The metaphor could be described as a shortcut.

With our computers we use a bunch of metaphors. For instance, a ‚desktop‘ is not only some kind of a table  you can use to work on, but the interface with your computer operating system. ‚Home‘ is not only your brick-and-mortar-house where you live but also the starting point of a website. A browser is a software you use to browse the internet, like browsing the pages of a book before the internet. We use icons, like an alternative representation of those metaphors to depict the meaning. So the ‚letter‘-icon is used for an email.

At work, I often use metaphors to describe our LMS and portfolio platforms. I compare the LMS to a classroom, imagine your class in your room, it’s like a moodle course, where your students of that specific class have access. Imagine moodle as a school, a building with several classrooms, which represent  the courses in the LMS. I think that it helps the teachers to imagine the virtual space and to furnish their virtual room, occupy it and design their own rooms. It’s interesting that we imagine the virtual as a space, and therefor it makes sense that we use spatial metaphors. As Lakoff and Johnson state: „Most of our fundamental concepts are organized in terms of one or more spatialization metaphors.“ (p. 17) So it makes sense to understand the virtual as a space you can design and inhabit.

Lakoff’s metaphorical concept makes sense. We often use metaphors to describe but also to understand. To say it with Adams (1997, p. 156) „(…) metaphors, like myths, build shared worldview.“

Good and bad, up and down

What struck me is the almost laconic statement that ‚above‘ is ‚good‘ and ‚below‘ is ‚bad‘. Imagine the consequence of this equation in our society, culturally. If this is true, and if it originates from our experience, our culture, doesn’t it describe implicitly an unequal society? In the drawing of the castle rises on the hill, while the small houses of the castle lie at its feet. Those up there, and those down there. Is this really one of our spacial experiences that shape the use of metaphorical concepts? The good (life) up the hill,  and the bad, low life down in the town. Consequently, these metaphorical concepts are also used for evaluation; rejecting and accepting attitudes deem to be implicitly provided.

Is this not a prejudice? Is this not bias, a valuation that is unjust? Where do notions like „upper class“ and „lower class“ come from? Is it really based on experience or am I totally wrong in bringing together a concept with its (possible?) societal and political implications? Why is it not the other way round? When did it start? What do we know about metaphorical concepts in ancient times with ancient languages? Was it already the case in Latin? Is the origin basically linguistic or is it culturally? What was first: language or concept? Chicken or egg? So my question is: Are Lakoff&Johnson’s metaphorical concepts shaping the world or does ‚the world‘ bring out those metaphors?  The authors write that those metaphorical concepts are based on experience, but at the same time they state that they „do not know very much about the experiential bases of metaphors. (…)“ and that they are „adding speculative notes on their possible experiential bases.“ (p. 19)

What about white and black, light and dark? White or light is good, black or dark is bad. Imagine the consequences! If it is a concept in our unconscious, like one of those psychological archetypes, is there a way to escape those concepts? How can we overcome such perceptions and fight racism and social injustice?

—

Literature

Adams, P. (1997). Cyberspace and Virtual Places. Geographical Review, 87(2), 155-171. doi:10.2307/216003

Lakoff, G, Johnson, M. (1980), The metaphors we live by. Chicago.