Re: Difficult language ideas
|From:||Lars Finsen <lars.finsen@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, September 27, 2006, 10:22|
Den 27. sep. 2006 kl. 11.49 skrev Christopher Bates:
> I don't believe that a language without Metaphor is even possible.
> The very basis of language is metaphor, because the world is (from
> our point of view, at least, even if not in absolute terms)
> infinite in the number of objects that exist and the number of
> possible kinds of actions that can take place. All languages have
> metaphorical extentions of terms and constructions from their core
> meaning on the basis of percieved similarity, otherwise they could
> not function.
> If you've written a lot in your conlang, I'd suggest that it's not
> the fact that metaphors are not present, but rather that you've
> been using your default metaphors from your own culture and
> language and not noticed.
I guess you would. But I was not thinking of metaphor in the sense
used in modern linguistic theory, rather in the sense used in common
speech - words or phrases distinctly separated from their dictionary
senses. I do have quite a few words with a wider or narrower sense
than the corresponding words in Norwegian or English, for example.
But I don't think this is enough in itself. Metaphoric usage is to
lift a word or phrase out of its usual perceived meaning or combine a
new phrase and give it a meaning that isn't immediately perceived
from its constituents. A very popular practice among poets from the
earliest times as it appears. So I do need to give it some thought.
Very best greetings,