Metaphor in American Sign Language

Introduction

Introduction Night threw a cloak of diamonds over the lake. Educated speakers of English will recognize the previous sentence as containing a metaphor. Some people may not understand what constitutes a metaphor, but they accept without much thought that a colorful line of prose can be metaphorical. In the past, metaphors were considered to be mysterious and poetic . Until recently, a metaphor was considered to be just a flowery bit of prose. People who studied metaphors once thought that they violated grammatical rules, therefore, they were considered to be deviant linguistic structures. Metaphors did not represent literal reality . Thus, metaphors were falsehoods that only added misleading little frills to the real purpose of our language. Metaphors have been set apart from the literal domain of language since Aristotle’s time. This exclusion was partly based on the pervasive hold that the classical theory of categorization had on philosophical thinkers and educators through the ages. People sought the “truth,” and metaphors were thought to lead them away from that goal. Because the issue of what constitutes a metaphor deals substantially with the comparison of categories, it is important to have a clear idea of what constitutes a category. Traditional theories of metaphor are based on the so-called classical set, which has as its criterion a membership of equality. A more recent theory of categorization is called prototype theory (Rosch 1973; Rosch and Lloyd 1978). The difference between these two theories is central to an understanding of experiential metaphorical meaning. According to the classical theory, membership in a certain category is determined by shared properties or characteristics. For example, to belong to 1 the “category of birds,” a creature must have feathers and a beak and must be able to fly. Anything that does not have those characteristics is simply not a bird. A category is considered to be fixed, uniform, and permanent; objects belong to a category according to a fixed definition of the set. In this classical viewpoint, reasoning is abstract and objective. Traditionally, the classical objectivists view meaning as a rulegoverned objective correspondence between abstract symbols in sentences and their counterparts in the literal world. Objects possess inherent properties that can be identified according to the classical sets in which they belong. These sets are thought to be inflexible categories based on shared properties that are independent of humans and their particular understanding of the sets. By this reasoning , metaphors are considered an intentional misuse of language because the classical theory presumes an absolute truth in the world. Traditional metaphors (figures of speech) are not experienced and are, therefore, literally false. In other words, objectivist meaning is based upon the “truth” of a statement. The classical categorical objectivist viewpoint on meaning includes the following views: 1. Categories, even biological sets, are defined by common essential properties. 2. The mind is seen as separate and independent of the body, with emotions having little conceptual importance. 3. Grammar is considered a matter of pure form only. 4. Reason transcends human cognition; there is a single correct way of understanding what is and is not true, and all people are governed by the same conceptual assumptions. (Lakoff 1987b, 8–9) The classical category has clear membership status, with every member equally sharing common properties or features or functions . But studies are now challenging the classical theory on categories . Instead of all members of a set being equally represented, with no one member having special status, Rosch (1973) proposes that membership is based on prototypes. In other words, there can 2 Introduction be a “best example” in a category set. The most representative members of a set are known as the prototypical members, and they best represent that particular category. Zadeh (1965) accords categories with graduations of membership. For example, instead of all men being equally defined members of the set representing males, graduated categories of membership are used in order to indicate varying degrees of shortness or richness. Sweetser extends graduated membership to word meaning and says that meaning is frequently “prototype-based rather than being composed of checklists of features” (1990, 16–17), as required by classical category membership . Therefore, according to prototype theory, there can be “bad birds and better birds” (Aitchison 1987, 51–62). Another argument challenging the objectivism of categories is “markedness,” as used in linguistic analysis. This represents what Lakoff describes as “a kind of prototype effect—an asymmetry...