Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Corpus Approaches to Metaphor Analysis (Criticism (corpus approach does…
Corpus Approaches to Metaphor Analysis
Advantages
reveal particular and repeated patterns in the corpus
uncover the changing discourses: diachronic studies
reduce researcher's bias
conventional metaphor identification: identify a word or expression as metaphorical versus literal not rely on personal expertise/ unsupported intuition
more likely to reveal “overall patterns and trends”
allows the triangulation of qualitative data
identify candidate sample texts involving a high density of metaphorical expressions (Koller, 2006)
facilitate the identification of candidate metaphorical expressions for qualitative analysis (Koller, 2006; Stefanowitsch, 2006).
large size data, detect more frequent patterns
more effective and time saving
Criticism
corpus approach does not contribute much to the understanding of metaphorical systems; it only provides empirical evidence for existing theoretical linguistic systems.
metaphor identification
will always depend on ‘informed intuition’ at least to some extent
no effective computer tool to identify metaphors
Metaphor Identification
bottom-up & top-down
identify metaphor manually from a sample
then search for in the complete corpus
e.g.: Charteris-Black, 2004; Cameron & Deignan, 2003
top-down
identify in the corpus
metaphor from literature
wordlist generation
concordance
whether the given word is more/less frequent in the beginning, middle or end;
help the interpretation of the results;
reveal the trends;
notice patterns
: a number of words to the left and to the right can be seen
Frequency patterns
whether the word instances are spread throughout the corpus or occur in a given text
compare grammar forms/word forms
enable the comparison of different words within the same corpus
This reveals important information especially when comparing corpora across registers, genres or cultures.
keywords
concordance
collocations
metaphors tend to occur in clusters and chains (Charteris-Black, 2004; Koller, 2003).
collocates may help us to distinguish the intended meaning of a word/ metaphorical meaning or not
Manually identify; check frequency
highlight the frequency of occurrence of metaphorical vs literal meaning by using concordance
identify the source domain by look at the frequency of words that realise that source domain
in the same source domain, check the different words, may show different types of evaluation
Problems
large quantity of data is generated,not practical for close qualitative analysis
solution
Hunston, 2002, identify pattern, then check it in a wider scale
Stefanowitsch (2006): The analyst selects one or more lexical items (claim, criticism, argument) from the target domain in focus (ARGUMENT) and retrieves their occurrences from the corpus; then she identifies metaphorical patterns - metaphorical expressions from a source domain occurring with or including a lexical item from that target domain