The physiognomic and the geometrical apprehensions of metaphor

Carlos Hugo Cornejo Quesada, Himmbler Olivares, Pablo Rojas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

16 Scopus citations

Abstract

This article presents the evolution of Heinz Werner's thought on metaphor from 1919 until Symbol Formation (1963). Early on, he distinguished between the logical and the psychological approach to metaphor, where the former analyzes the conceptual conflation produced by metaphor and the latter centers on the subjective experience of this incongruence. Starting with an inquiry into direct experience, he initially develops the notion of pneuma and later that of physiognomy. In Symbol Formation, Werner and Kaplan (1963) expand this distinction by introducing the concept of physiognomic and geometric properties of language in general. We argue that the holistic-developmental approach is deeply related to the vitalist and romantic traditions of the 19th century. We analyze three theories of metaphor after 1963: conceptual metaphor, semiotic anthropology, and contextual approaches to metaphor. We argue that while the first of these follows the traditional logical-geometrical approach to language, the latter two may better reflect the spirit of Werner and Kaplan.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)484-505
Number of pages22
JournalCulture and Psychology
Volume19
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2013
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This work was supported in part by grants from National Commission for Scientific and Technological Research of Chile (CONICYT) to Carlos Cornejo (grant number 74130019), Himmbler Olivares (grant numbers 21090851, 81120117), and Pablo Rojas (grant number 72090620). Acknowledgement

Keywords

  • conceptual metaphor
  • contextual approaches
  • Heinz Werner
  • physiognomy
  • semiotic anthropology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The physiognomic and the geometrical apprehensions of metaphor'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this