Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....model has made its way into our engineering practices, but when the skin is peeled back, we find highly abstract codes and text. If the internals are to be made comprehensible (by anyone, most importantly the engineer) they must be surfaced into 3D using the powerful capabilities of metaphors (Lakoff and Johnson 1980; Lakoff 1987) This doesn t mean that we will not have a low level code base. Two dimensional metaphors and code constructs can be mixed within the 3D worlds, just as we find them in our everyday environments with the embedding of signs. At the University of Florida, we have started a Digital ....

Lakoff, G., and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press.

....relevant portion of any natural language without change, guides us toward the proper amount of innate bias too little, and learning will be too slow; too much, and we won t be able to represent some languages. A second constraint is the hypothesis that semantics are often grounded in the body (Lakoff Johnson 1980; Johnson 1987) Within the particular domain of hand actions, the hypothesis is that the semantics primarily involve aspects of intentional motor behavior, such as goals, primitive motor synergies, their parameters (such as amount of force) and their coordination. Our current model attempts to ....

Lakoff, George, & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By . University of Chicago Press.

....is to do it in a principled and systematic way. The standard non standard distinction must not be confused with productive uses of language. Consider the use of see to mean understand . There is a substantial literature on the productive or semi productive process underlying the meaning transfer (Lakoff and Johnson1980; Sweetser1990) yet there is nothing non standard about the use of see in I see what you 1 See also the close study of sense pairs in (Kilgarriff1993) 3. WHAT IS NON STANDARD USE iii mean . Conversely, productive implies a rule, so to assume that all nonstandard uses were productive would ....

Lakoff and Johnson1980 Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press.

....developed a correlation theory of brain function . This theory proposes the fundamental mechanisms of visual organisation are topographic mapping mechanisms, relating visual stimuli with structures stored in long term memory. At a psychological level, similarity and topographicality tie in with Lakoff and Johnson s (1980) work on metaphor as an all pervasive component of cognition. If similarity is defined in terms of directness of connection within schemas, topographic maps are metaphors linking schema so as to maximise the correspondence of structure. The fundamental place accorded to topographic maps in von der ....

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.

....In this paper, we have focused on inference and disambiguation with respect to only literal meanings, but the model we have described can easily be extended to metaphorical meanings as well. Decisions about which sense of a polysemous word is appropriate must sometimes be mediated by metaphors (Lakoff and Johnson 1980). In a simulation based model, an implausible literal simulation may give rise to the activation of a related metaphor, especially if the metaphor s target domain is also activated by contextual elements. Metaphorical mappings can then license a more plausible literal simulation in the source ....

Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

....K, and loses nothing by using kinematic geometry to resolve ambiguities that result from missing information in the sensory input. Metaphors of mind Confusing forms of expression with respect to topics in cognitive science could be due to the metaphorical nature of many abstract concepts, as Lakoff and Johnson (1990) showed persuasively in their book Metaphors We Live By. Lakoff and Johnson (1999, pp. 235 236) summarize the evidence that there is an extensive subsystem of metaphors for mind in which the mind is conceptualized as a body. When the MIND IS ABODY metaphor is applied to thinking, two metaphors ....

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1990). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press.

....activity, and to lend support to more specific claims about the obligations arguers have and the process by which their arguments can be reconstructed. 2. Argument is WHAT Many people, I suspect, would be surprised to be told that their arguments were really cooperative activities. As Lakoff and Johnson (1980) pointed out, in English at least ARGUMENT is metaphorically closely bound to WAR. Thus one wins or loses an argument; claims and evidence are attacked, after some maneuvering found indefensible, and then shot down. This adversarial conception finds confirmation in the attitudes we ordinarily ....

Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: U.

....over exclusively indexical and iconic representation. Symbolic representations derive their power because they provide a degree of independence from the symbolic, indexical and iconic references that generated the relationship represented. New symbols can be learnt using language metaphor (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980; Johnson, 1991) 2.4 Symbolic communication and its prerequisites Evolution does not have the luxury of being able to make simultaneous independent changes to the design of an organism and also ensure their mutual consistency (in terms of the viability of the organism) For this reason, once a ....

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors we Live By, Chicago: Chicago University Press.

....same as those used to interpret direct non metaphorical language. Under this view, the proper way to approach the study of metaphor is to study the underlying details of individual metaphors and systems of metaphors in the language. This approach follows on the metaphor work of Lakoff and Johnson (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980) and the computational approaches to metaphor described in (Jacobs, 1985; Martin, 1986; Martin, 1987; Martin, 1988; Norvig, 1987) It is useful here to consider an analogy between the study of metaphor and the study of syntax. Broadly speaking, the study of syntax is concerned with the ....

....EnterLisp metaphor presented above. Within the unix domain this is simply one instance of a more general metaphor that permits interactive programs to be viewed as enclosures or environments. At an even higher level of abstraction, this metaphor is an instance of the pervasive Container metaphor (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980) found throughout English. Consider the following examples. 7) How can I get into emacs (8) John got into Columbia. 9) Jackson entered the presidential race today. In each of these examples, the source concept of entering is used to structure a change of state of some person with respect to ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.

....applied to the problem of conventional metaphor. Under this knowledge based approach, the way to approach the study of metaphor is to study the underlying details of individual metaphors, and systems of metaphors in the language. This approach follows on the metaphor work of Lakoff and Johnson (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980) and builds directly on the knowledge based computational approaches to metaphor of Jacobs and Norvig (Jacobs, 1985; Norvig, 1987) Earlier work on metaphor by Wilks and Hobbs (Wilks, 1978; Hobbs, 1979) are the most relevant computational predecessors to this work. 2.1 MIDAS Since the remainder ....

....underlying conventional metaphors. The second pertains to how we go about hunting for metaphors in a large corpus. 4.2. 1 Conventional Metaphor Analysis We are interested in the kind of common place conventional metaphor introduced by Reddy (Reddy, 1979) and elaborated on by Lakoff and Johnson (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980) among many others. These are common place uses of words and phrases that depart from their literal meanings in ways that systematically indicate that one concept is being thought of and spoken about in terms of another concept of a different kind. Consider the following metaphor analysis of a ....

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.

....a discipline, but may be only a small part of the information necessary or sufficient to allow the creation process. We suggest that such partial knowledge may be represented as a metaphor, and, indeed, metaphors have been identified as one modality through which scientific ideas get transmitted (Lakoff Johnson, 1980; Bowker, 1993) We use the idea of metaphor here rather broadly. A metaphor need not be precisely mapped from one discipline to another in order to be useful in that second discipline. For example, linguistic metaphors have been extremely powerful in suggesting lines of research in unravelling ....

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

....of stairs. As we describe the user s cognitive resources and strategies, we are uncovering intrinsic metrics for higher level affordances of place. Previous work in user modeling covers a wide range of affordance levels. Some work has focused on low level affordances such as image schemata (Lakoff and Johnson 1980). Others have looked at the scale of space, from small scale to large scale (Kuipers 1978; Zubin 1989; Downs and Stea 1973) often in sizes relative to the human body. Research on wayfinding (Siegel and White 1975; Passini 1992) has described the cognitive models of large scale space under the ....

Lakoff G. and Johnson M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

....meant as a direction . Thus, it is possible to express relations between plans, like A happens after B or A starts at the same time as B (see Table 1) by simply laying the corresponding objects out along (or parallel to) the time axis. In this view, we make heavy use of graphical metaphors [15]. A metaphor supports comprehension of an unknown complex concept through a well known one. Instead of using an abstract diagram or object (e.g. rectangles, growing and shrinking circles) we use signs from (more or less) daily life to communicate the various components of Asbru. The central ....

G. Lakoff and M. Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980.

....structure of space, mostly without dividing large scale space into delimited objects. These are both fundamental experiences for human beings which are deeply embodied in our thinking and give rise to the object and field concept. Experiential realism also assumes that metaphorical mapping (Lakoff and Johnson 1980) can be used to conceive situations in terms of previous experiences in different circumstances. For example, the experience with small prototypical objects with well determined boundaries is metaphorically translated to conceive the large scale 1 to appear in: Burrough, P. A. and Frank, A. U. ....

Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.

....in the domains of Politics and Economics. The stories are taken from newspaper articles in these domains. When presented with a pre parsed version of these narratives as input, the system described is able to generate commonsense inferences consistent with the input. Work in Cognitive Semantics (Lakoff Johnson 1980; Talmy 1987; Sweetser 1990; Johnson 1987; Langacker 1987; Lakoff 1994) suggests that the structure of abstract actions (such as states, causes, purposes, means) are characterized cognitively in terms of image schemas which are schematized recurring patterns from the embodied domains of force, ....

....or more time slices of the temporally extended Belief net. Figure 4 shows the projection of stumbling onto the target domain. We will return to this example in the next section. Our model currently includes three different types of embodied maps. One type of map corresponds to ontological maps (Lakoff Johnson 1980) which map entities and objects between embodied and abstract domains. Such maps are called omaps. In general, one central function of omaps is to map the fillers of various case roles of an event phrase across domains. A second type of map projects events, actions, and processes from embodied to ....

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University Of Chicago Press.

....Fall Getup resumes Walk. Standing enables Walk Reach(x) terminates Walk(x) 4.1 Metaphoric Reasoning about Actions and Events We have seen how the structure of actions and events is grounded in fine grained, dynamic representations. Another ubiquitous phenomenon in language [ Lakoff, 1994; Lakoff Johnson, 1980 ] is the routine projection of such fine grained semantic distinctions across domains. Systematic metaphors project features of these representations (source) onto abstract domains such as economics (target) enabling linguistic devices to use embod ACTORS DIFFICULTIES ARE OBSTACLES IS ACT ....

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University Of Chicago Press.

....structure for a computational domain which may be abstract and amorphous or ill structured before. The view derives directly from an understanding of metaphors in language and thought in general that has been advanced by cognitive linguists over the past decade [Johnson, 1987; Lakoff, 1987; Lakoff Johnson, 1980]. Metaphors, in this perspective, are not an optional ornament of communication, but play a central role in our cognition, permeating not only language, but thought and action. If we understand interface metaphors in this way, they become an essential ingredient of any user interface and the ....

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

....can be applied. An object represents some real world object in the application domain. Object is a notion which is based on direct first hand and very extensive experience: human constantly interact with physical small objects (Lakoff 1987) From this experience we metaphorically transform (Lakoff and Johnson 1980) the notion of object to the non physical domain, including the legal: the mortgage right is construed as an object and has many of the properties (even legal properties) of physical objects (Frank 1996) The design of application is concerned with classes of objects which have the same behavior. ....

Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.

....people metaphorically extend the meanings of simple spatial motion verbs to describe mental states and social interactions. We pick up dates, put down colleagues, push people to do things, pull the wool over our eyes, drop the ball, tip people off, and tap people on the shoulder. Lakoff and Johnson (1980) have argued that, in fact, all human understanding is based on metaphorical extension of how we perceive our own bodies and their interaction with the physical world. Thus, while this work only attempts to describe simple spatial motion verbs in non metaphoric uses, the hope is that this will ....

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press.

....For example, in the IP pages (Figures 5 7) Action Item and IP objects are shown in different views on different pages. Up and down gestures are used to jump between them, sometimes scrolling within a page and sometimes switching between pages. Orientational Metaphor Principle Lakoff and Johnson [6] have shown the pervasiveness and consistency of orientational metaphors in language. We exploit this in another use of directional gestures: up positive action down negative action For example, in Figure 4, up down on a Vote object causes the Vote count to increment decrement, and up down on ....

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

....in language, rhetoric and poetry. In the past few decades, the interest in formal theories of metaphor, which established relationships between its structure, functionality and cognitive nature, has increased and given birth to the contemporary theory of metaphor (Yu, 1998) In the seminal work of Lakoff and Johnson (1980), metaphors are described as depicting incomplete parallels between dissimilar ideas or things, emphasising some qualities and suppressing others. For example, if chess is used as a metaphor for a battle, features such as casualties, relative power and mobility of fighters are highlighted while ....

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

....processing rules. During semantic processing, if an input sentence has a putative violation of a constraint in a slot, the system will check to see if a certain type of metonymy is involved. Below, we list several types of metonymy we treat in the DIONYSUS project (the types were selected from Lakoff and Johnson, 1980). One type of metonymy is part for whole: We need some good heads to solve this problem. After the system encounters a violation of constraints on the agent of solve, the metonymy treatment module will select HAS AS PART (or its inverse, PART OF) as a candidate for relaxation. Suppose that the ....

Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

....and are relatively few in number. In particular, his model learns static items such as above, below, to the left of, to the right of, inside, outside, on, and off, and dynamic items, such as through and iz pod (a Russian preposition meaning out from underneath ) George Lakoff (1987) and Lakoff and Johnson (1980) are, in many ways, the spiritual forebears of many of the ideas underlying Regier s model, in particular, the notion that space serves as a fundamental conceptual structuring device in language (p. 19) The brand of connectionism Regier chose to use to model closed class lexeme acquisition is ....

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

....pattern of effects. There is temporal priority between cause and effect causes always neatly precede effects and there is usually one cause and one effect (Grotzer, 1993) Andersson (1986) has argued that this simple linear arrangement fits with our most primitive notions of causality which Lakoff and Johnson (1980) first called the experiential gestalt of causation (ECG) At a very early age, children learn to expect this pattern. Andersson argues that as children act upon their environments, they learn that actions by an agent (themselves) can impact objects (such as toys, blankets, bottles, and ....

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

....We had to design an interactive application integrating new interaction techniques such as movable and specialised filters, according to the principles of the Magic Lenses TM. We used a metaphorical architecture framework for interactive application based on PAC model. Of course, as stated by (Lakoff Johnson 1980) metaphors do not imply a complete mapping of every concrete detail of one object or situation onto another . This section is thus devoted to present the metaphor and several aspects that can be found in making movies will be emphasised and other will be suppressed. 3.1 Context As a starting ....

Lakoff G. & Johnson M. Metaphors we live by. The University of Chicago Press.

....through intelligent user interfaces. In our approach, end user programming (EUP) mechanisms are cast as abductive processes [14] that operate on figures of speech. Metaphors and metonymies have been chosen because they mirror a natural way of thinking about things we know little or nothing about [15, 16, 17, 21]. Compared to alternative approaches that try to meet major EUP cognitive challenges by progressively disclosing commands and programming structures [6, 7] ours allows users to achieve changes without even knowing that what they want to do is innovative in any sense. This feature is also ....

....our system s models and reasoning processes, and provide examples of interpreting vanishing non literal expressions based on a toy application. 2. EXTENSIONS THROUGH ANALOGIES Many researchers in the field of Cognitive Science agree that we humans think and express ourselves in non literal ways [15, 17, 21]. In particular, we make use of metaphors and metonymies in order to understand or explain a concept in terms of others, by highlighting a concept s characteristics or relations, and hiding others. It is also known that, in order to effectively use this kind of figurative language in our ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago.

....of agency must focus on the concrete activity of embodied agents, with abstract reasoning derived from such activity rather than primitive or fundamental. Johnson Lakoff Johnson, Lakoff and their colleagues approach embodiment from a psycholinguistic perspective (Johnson 1987; Lakoff 1987; Lakoff and Johnson 1980). They argue that our ability to understand and reason abstractly derives from our concrete bodily experience rather than the other way around, and that therefore high level intelligence depends crucially on embodiment. We are rational animals, but we are also rational animals (Johnson 1987: ....

.... projection, such as the way one might refer to an argument as if it were a physical structure: an argument stands or falls on the basis of whether it has a solid foundation or weak support , one arguments might be shored up so that it carries more weight than another, and so forth (Lakoff and Johnson 1980). They observe first that human bodily movement, manipulation of objects, and perceptual interactions involve recurring patterns (Johnson 1987: xix) which they term image schemata . On this account, metaphorical projection involves transforming image schemata from the situations in which they ....

G. Lakoff and M. Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980.

.... explored the localist hypothesis that the child derives its abstract categories by generalising initially spatial concepts (cf. Anderson 1971, Clark and Carpenter 1989) Cognitive linguists have argued along related lines that our most abstract categories are derived from spatial archetypes (cf. Lakoff and Johnson 1980, Jackendoff 1983, Langacker 1987) they have further claimed that this leads inexorably to a non realist ontology for natural language semantics (cf. Lakoff 1987) What we evidently share with all these authors is the following intuition. Mechanisms developed for perceiving and reasoning about ....

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press.

....pattern recognition (Nygren et al. 1992) and smooth sensori motor performance. Although the skills are unconscious, their results are not. An experiential account of meaning suggests that cognitive reasoning makes sense to us because we relate mental concepts to essentially bodily experiences (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980; Johnson, 1987; Lakoff, 1987) Waterworth VR for Animals Page 2 In virtual reality (VR) HCI is everything, and in designing HCI we are often making solid the insubstantial, concretising the abstract. In VR, where everything is a thing, this is very clear, but VR is not fundamentally ....

Lakoff, G and Johnson, M (1980) - 'Metaphors We Live By'. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

....information and can therefore take up more information at once. Furthermore visual concepts are a very general concepts and are not constrainded by standard look and feel components. A metaphor oriented interaction environment is superbly suited for the purposes of a tool for learners. Metaphors [4, 5, 14, 15] work by explaining facts, which are completely new or rather unusual for the user, by means of some other facts, which are very well known to the user and which share the main features of the facts they shall explain. Empirical tests [21] have shown that for transporting new knowledge so called ....

G. Lakoff and M. Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, USA, 1980.

....elements. Apart from having been deeply studied along the ages, and notably being a very common process of association between domains, according to Eco (1984) and Veale and Keane (1993) Metaphor is deeply embodied in the core of our cognition, having a constant and vital role in communication (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980). In what concerns modelling Computational Creativity, metaphor may play a determinant role, since it can be used as a device for cross domain interrelation establishment. With such a device, a system could be able to search in domains different from the one directly related to the task at hand, ....

....and some kind of transference from an object or situation to the other. One object is referred to as the tenor or the target domain, and the other object as the vehicle or the source domain. For example, the expression Your claims are indefensible follows the metaphor Argument is War (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980), in which an argument (the tenor) is partially defined, understood, performed and talked about in terms of a war (the vehicle) Here, we can observe the Systematicity of Metaphor: it is not limited to a single, static, association between two concepts (Argument and War) Instead, other ....

G. Lakoff and M. Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chigaco, Illinois: University of Chicago Press. 1980.

....CASE HISTORY Re engineering Online Documentation Tomasi and Mehlenbacher 62 TechnicalCOMMUNICATION . First Quarter 1999 Print based metaphors may be too restrictive, and metaphor is not just a matter of language but how human thought processes are conceptualized, structured, and related (Lakoff and Johnson 1980). Metaphor frames any attempt to understand one element in terms of another and, in this way, using metaphor always produces a kind of one sided insight; that is, when we focus on particular interpretations, we tend to obscure others. Thus, limiting the online medium to the static, paperbased ....

Lakoff, G., and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by.

....pattern of effects. There is temporal priority between cause and effect causes always neatly precede effects and there is usually one cause and one effect (Grotzer, 1993) Andersson (1986) has argued that this simple linear arrangement fits with our most primitive notions of causality which Lakoff and Johnson (1980) first called the experiential gestalt of causation (ECG) At a very early age, children learn to expect this pattern. Andersson argues that as children act upon their environments, they learn that actions by an agent (themselves) can impact objects (such as toys, blankets, bottles, and ....

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

....them to bear in attempting to understand a variety of difficult science concepts. He focuses on core intuitions regarding how people attribute agency and how they assess responses to agency. He identified a number of types (initiating; initiated; reactive and so on. Andersson (1986) draws upon Lakoff and Johnson s (1980) notion of an experiential gestalt of causation as a possible underlying element in scientific misconceptions. He considered how students extend the primitive notion, learned in infancy of an agent that physically affects an object leads to a sense of the nearer, the greater the effect. ....

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

....Then properties such as its shape became apparent and helped explain why he liked the image and how he could use the picture for his design. Creative Process using Visual Images Many of the designers we interviewed stated that browsing image albums is a process of seeking for a metaphor [13]. Especially in the domain of industrial design, designed artifacts need to be creative: both innovative and useful [14] For example, in chair design, one needs to design a chair that has never existed; but at the same time, the produced artifact needs to function as a chair one needs to be ....

....the connotation of the chair abstract concepts that make objects function as chairs. When a designer finds a metaphor, then the designer analyzes what is common between the found metaphor and the connotation, namely, what is to be designed. A metaphor is an association between two concepts [13]. Two concepts are metaphorically related if there are properties that are common to both concepts. When people use a metaphor to describe a concept, they usually are not aware of which properties are in common. For instance, take an example of Argument is War metaphor used throughout in Lakoff ....

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press, 1980.

....(and possibly literal) readings can be derived. This viewpoint implies to assume a computational process and, hence, requires to be explicit about the representational foundations from which to proceed. Currently, two approaches prevail, which spell out this distinction. The first one, e.g. Lakoff Johnson (1980), simply regards deviation from literal reference as a sufficient condition for figurativeness. No formal criteria for the nature of such a deviation are given so that the discrimination of literal and figurative meaning rests on subjective ascription. The second approach (Fass, 1991; ....

....extent at least. Figurativeness and Reference One might argue that the problem just discussed, the dependence of the distinction between literal and figurative usage on knowledge base structures, follows from the dependence of StandsF or on syntactic context. Accordingly, some researchers, e.g. Lakoff Johnson (1980), have proposed to build the definition of figurative speech upon the notion of reference. The assumption being made is that w uniquely refers to a knowledge base item w.ref inst of w.CON ref and that figurativeness results from the deviation of this reference from literal meaning. Although their ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

.... rose] b) La lancetta si sollevata = The needle lifted itself] c) It can be explained why, despite the fact that in by far most of the fields of application of both predicates the object shifts upward, only alzare (to raise) yields cases of cognitive metaphor of the concept upward (see Lakoff and Johnsonn 1980 for the notion of cognitive metaphor) as in 23) and 24) 23a) Il mio morale alto [My morale is high] b) Il mio morale sollevato [My morale has lifted] 24a) Mario ha alzato la temperatura [Mario raised the temperature] b) Mario ha sollevato la temperature [Mario lifted the temperature] 10 ....

Lakoff G. & Johnson M. 1980, Metaphors We Live By, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

....disuse. They hypothesize . that the presence or absence of particular use metaphors may have an impact on the successful development of particular information systems. Traditionally, metaphors have been treated as a device of poetry or rhetoric. In their influential book Metaphors We Live By, Lakhoff Johnson (1980) give metaphors a much larger domain, arguing that metaphors are pervasive in everyday life due to the fact that our language and conceptual systems are fundamentally metaphorical in nature. Norman (1988, 1992, 1993) echoes Lakhoff Johnson, maintaining that much of our human intelligence results ....

....from a machine centered point of view, which confuses us and alters normal human relations. As evidence, he points to the difficulty people often have using appliances such as fax machines and microwave ovens, and the heavy incidence of human error in industry. Gozzi (1999) brings the arguments of Lakhoff Johnson (1980) and Norman (1988, 1992, 1993) home to the information professions in a series of key points: t New media (e.g. groupware) need to be described and conceptualized in new ways, thus new language (metaphors) is created for the new objects. t Because we encounter media (e.g. groupware) and ....

Lakhoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

.... users are . constructing a mental model of the virtual space and responding to and attending to cues in the virtual mediated environment. sect. 6.1. 2) The combination of both ideas, the emphasis on the body and the concept of mental models, is possible in the embodied cognition framework [9 11]. The main focus of this approach is memory and its function. To approach this goal, a theory of situational conceptualisation and meaning grounded in embodied cognition has been developed. We will focus on this aspect of the proposal, ignoring the aspect of memory for the moment. 3 Glenberg s ....

Lakoff G, Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980

....mental representations of cities contain overlapping elements. These hierarchical and overlapping structures are useful for sub metaphors that describe not only a hierarchical structure but also more complex relationships of containment. Many of the city elements can serve as container metaphors [34]. Examples are the district, the neighborhood, the block, the building and so forth. Several of these elements have strong boundaries (for example the building or the room) They are ideal sources for metaphors that describe strong encapsulation and access control. 9 People are used to navigate ....

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. Metaphors we live by, Univ. of Chicago Press, 1980.

No context found.

Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

No context found.

G. Lakoff and M. Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago, IL, 1980.

No context found.

Lakoff G., Johnson M.: "Metaphors we live by", The University of Chicago Press, 1980

No context found.

Lakoff, George,&Mark Johnson.1980.Metaphors We Live By . Universityof Chicago Press.

No context found.

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.

No context found.

G. Lakoff, Metaphors we live by, U. of Chicago Press, 1980.

No context found.

Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

No context found.

G. Lakoff and M. Johnson (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, University Of Chicago Press.

No context found.

G. Lakoff and M. Johnson (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, University Of Chicago Press.

No context found.

Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University Press, 1980.

Documents 51 to 100  Previous 50  Next 50

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC