A Comparative Study of Kangavari Kurdish and Persian Animal Proverbs from Cognitive Semantic Approach

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 MA in Linguistics, Alzahra University, Tehran. Iran.

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Linguistics, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran.

10.34785/J013.2022.878

Abstract

Proverbs are among linguistic chains that are metaphoric in nature which should be studied cognitively. In this research, 41 Kermanshahi Kurdish (Kangavari variant) proverbs containing animal names were collected in a field study. They were then compared with their modern Persian counterparts extracted from Dehkhoda’s (1995) Amsal va Hekam and analyzed based on Lakoff and Turner’s (1989) Great Chain Metaphor model and Mendoza and Diéz (2002) conceptual interactional patterns between metaphor and metonymy framework. According to the findings, Kurdish proverbs make use of animal names more than Persian counterparts because of the geographic conditions, Kurds lifestyle, and their general profession that is farming. According to Great Chain Metaphor model, when animals play the main role in proverbs, the conceptual metaphor “PEOPLE ARE ANIMAL” is applied to conceive human behaviors by animal traits. As to the findings, although there are cultural differences between language speakers in creating proverbs, the same cognitive mechanisms are used in proverb perceptions and this confirms the linguistic universalities among all languages.

Keywords: cognitive semantics, conceptual metaphor, metonymy, proverb, Kermanshahi Kudish (Kangavari dialect), new Persian.

Keywords

References

دهخدا، ع. (١٣٧٤). امثال و حکم. جلد٤-١. تهران: امیرکبیر.
رضایی، محمد و نرجس مقیمی (١٣٩٢). «بررسی استعاره­های مفهومی در ضرب­المثل­های فارسی». مطالعات زبانی بلاغی. سال٤. شمارة ٨. صص ١١٦-٩١.
روشن، بلقیس، فاطمه یوسفی­راد و فاطمه شعبانیان (١٣٩٢). «مبنای طرحواره­ای استعاره­های موجود در ضرب­المثل­های شرق گیلان». زبان­شناخت. پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی. سال ٤. شمارة ٢. صص٩٤-٧٥.
شریفی­مقدم، آزاد و نرجس ندیمی (١٣٩٢). «تحلیل معنی­شناختی از کاربرد نام حیوانات در ضرب­المثل­های گویش لار (با تکیه بر دلالت، موضوع و کارکرد اجتماعی)». زبان­ها و گویش­های ایرانی. ٢. صص ١٥٩-١٣٧.
فضائلی، سیده مریم و شهلا شریفی (١٣٩٢). «بررسی طرحواره­های قدرتی در برخی از ضرب­المثل­های زبان فارسی». مجلة زبانشناسی و گویش­های خراسان. دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد (علمی-پژوهشی). شمارة ١. صص ١٤٤-١٣١.
نخاولی، ف. (١٣٩٠). «بررسی کاربرد مجازی نام حیوانات در ضرب­المثل­های فارسی و تطبیق برخی ویژگی­های نحوی آنها»، پایان­نامة کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد.
هاشمی، ز. (1389). «نظریة استعارة مفهومی از دیدگاه لیکاف و جانسون». ادب­پژوهی، شمارة١٢. صص ١٤٠-١١٩.
 
Anjomanshoa, L. & F. Sadighi (2015). “The comparison of connotative meaning in animal words between English and Persian expressions and their translations”. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, Vol. 3. Issue 2. pp 65-77.
Buljan, G. & T. Gradečak- Erdeljič. (2013). "Where Cognitive Linguistics Meets Paremiology: A Cognitive-contrasive View of Selected English and Croatian Proverbs". (ExELL) Explorations in English Language and Linguistics, 1.1: 63-83.
Estaji, A. & F. Nakhavali (2011). “Semantic derogation in Persian animal proverbs”. Theory and Practice in Language Studie. Vol. 1. No. 9. pp.1213-1217.
Faghih, E. (2001). "A Contrastive Analysis of Interpretations of Animal Metaphor in Persian and English". The Journal of Humanities of Islamic Republic of Iran, Vol. 8. No. 2. pp. 1-15.
Fatemi, M. A., R. Tahmasebi, & H. Aghabeigi. (2013). "Contrastive Analysis of  English and Persian Proverbs Related to Animals”. Greener Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 3(5): 72-87.
Kovecses, Z. & G. Radden. (1999). "Towards a Theory of Metonymy". K. Panter and G. Radden (ed.).  Metonymy in Language and Thought, Philadelphia: John Benjamin: 6-17.
Lakoff, G & M. Johnson. (1989). Metaphors we Live by, University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. & M. Turner. (1989). More than Cool Reasons: A field guide to poetic metaphor, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. (1989). Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind, Chicago: University of Chicago press.
Masegosa, A. G. (2010). "Metaphoric Complexes: A Spanish-English Contrastive Analysis of Metaphor and Metonymy in Interaction". RESLA. 23: 175-193.
Md Rashid, S., P. Hajimaming & N. N.  Muhammad. (2012). "Farm Animal Metaphors in Malay and Arabic Figurative Expressions: Implications for Language Learning". International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, Vol. 1. No. 7: 33-39.
Moreno, A. I.(2005). "An Analysis of the Cognitive Dimension of Proverbs in English and Spanish: The Conceptual Power of Language Reflecting Popular Believes". (SKASE) Journal of  Theoretical Linguistic (2),1: 42-54.
Nabifar, N. (2013). "A Comparative Study of  English and Persian Proverbs on Bases of Cognitive". (TJEAS) Technical Journal of Engineering and Applied Linguistics, 3(12): 2287-2302.
Liu, J. (2013). "A Comparative Study of English and Chinese Animal Proverbs- From the Perspective of Metaphors". Theory and Practice in Language studies, Vol. 3. No. 10: 1844-1849.
Paknejad, M. & Naghizadeh, M. (2016). «The analysis of the image schemata in Persian and Arabic proverbs with a cognitive semantic approach». Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Reaserch, Vol. 3. Issue 2. pp. 272-283.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. & O. Diez. (2002). "Patterns of conceptual interaction". Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast. Divven and R. Poring (eds.). Berlin/ New York: Moutonde gruyter: 489-532.
Ruiz de Mendoza, I. F. J. (1999). "From semantic undetermination via metaphor and metonymy to conceptual interaction". LAUD Essen Series A: General and Theoretical Papers; T Appear in  Theoric et Historic Scientiarum: An International Journal for Interdisciplinary Studies, Tomas komendzinski(ed.). Institute of Philosophy, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun. Poland. ]http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Abstracts/Ruiz_de_Mendoza.html[

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 17 June 2021
  • Revise Date: 23 November 2021
  • Accept Date: 14 February 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics