ANALYSIS OF VISUAL METAPHOR: THE PERSPECTIVE OF CONFORMITY TO THE PRINCIPLES OF OPTIMALITY OF THE CONCEPTUAL NETWORK

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32782/2412-933X/2025-XXIII-8

Keywords:

conceptual integration, optimality principles, visual metaphor, topology, relevance, network, metonymic compression

Abstract

The article analyzes a visual metaphor with a focus on the correspondence of conceptual processing to the optimality principles proposed by Fauconnier and Turner. The criteria of optimality in the conceptual network are identified at the stages of composition, completion, and elaboration of the blend. It is determined that the visual metaphor, by the type of conceptual network, belongs to a Single-Scope network, with the dominance of one input space, the elements of which are projected onto the structure of the input data from the other input space: the domain of Planet Earth is described through the elements and connections of the domain of a Garbage Bag. The study shows that the analyzed visual metaphor adheres to optimization principles that support cognitive integration. Structural correspondences between the source and target domains are built according to the topological principle, maintaining the relational structure throughout the conceptual network – the conceptual and visual analogy between the globe-Planet Earth and the garbage bag as container for waste. Conceptual integration relies on metonymic compression to simplify cognitive processing and provide the viewer with a more enriched meaning without the need to explain the idea through numerous visual details. The compression involves the metonymic identification of the Planet with the globe, the garbage bag with its contents, and the substitution of the garbage bag (part) for the entire spectrum of ecological pollution (whole). In accordance with the principle of relevance, only elements essential for achieving emergent properties are involved in the blend, including those meanings that are absent in the input spaces but are relevant for the purposes of integration, such as humanity’s loss of control over its waste, the use of the planet as a disposable container, and the global nature of pollution. Thanks to the visual metaphor, the viewer-interpreter can operate with a holistic image of Planet Earth as a garbage container, which satisfies the integration principle. It is evident from the projections in the blend from which input spaces they originate, corresponding to the unpacking principle. The blend retains a complex network of interconnections and relationships present in the input spaces, adhering to the network principle. Future research prospects include the analysis of visual metaphors based on the integration of conceptual and visual blending methods.

References

Кравченко Н.К., Жихарєва О.О. Візуальна реклама у рекламному дискурсі: до проблеми інтеракції підходів концептуального блендингу, візуальної граматики і теорії релевантності. Philological education and science: transformation and modern development vectors: Scientific monograph. Riga, Latvia: “Baltija Publishing”. 2023. С. 238–258.

Bünzli F., Dillard J.P. The persuasive effects of verbal anchoring and visual complexity. Journal of Visual Literacy. 2022. Vol. 41 (1). P. 46–64.

El Refaie E. Understanding visual metaphor: The example of newspaper cartoons. Visual Communication. 2003. Vol. 2 (1). P. 75–95.

Fauconnier G., Turner M. Mental spaces: conceptual integration networks. In Dirk Geeraerts (ed.). Cognitive linguistics: basic readings. Berlin, New York : Mouton de Gruyter. 2006. 371 р.

Fauconnier G., Turner M. The Way We Think. Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York : Basic Books. 2002. 464 р.

Fauconnier G., Turner M. Compression and global insight. Cognitive linguistics. 2000. Vol. 11 (3/4). P. 283–304.

Fauconnier G., Turner M. Metonymy and Conceptual Integration. In Klaus-Uwe Panther and Günter Radden (eds.). Metonymy in Language and Thought. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1999. P. 77–90.

Fauconnier G., Turner M. Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science. 1998. Vol. 22 (2). P. 133–187.

Fauconnier G., Turner M. Blending as a Central Process of Grammar. In A. Goldberg (ed.). Conceptual Structure, Discourse, and Language. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information. 1996. P. 113–129.

Jeong S. Visual metaphor in advertising: Is the persuasive effect to visual argumentation or metaphorical rhetoric? Journal of Marketing Communications. 2008. Vol. 14 (1). P. 59–73.

Joy A., Sherry Jr. J.F., Deschenes J. Conceptual blending in advertising. Journal of business research. 2009. Vol. 62 (1). P. 39–49.

Visual metaphor analysis: a relevance theory approach / N. Kravchenko, M. Prokopchuk, O. Muntian, M. Zvereva, A. Kozachuk. Amazonia Investiga. 2024. Vol. 13 (80). P. 233–241.

Kravchenko N., Shanaieva-Tsymbal L. Multimodal Ukrainian Brand Narrative: Semiotics, Structure, Archetypes. Bulletin of Alfred Nobel University. Series “Philological Sciences”. 2024. Vol. 2 (26/2). P. 27–44.

Kravchenko N., Yudenko O. Multimodal Advertising: Semiotic and Cognitive-Pragmatic Aspects. International Journal of Philology. 2023. Vol. 14 (4). P. 6–15.

Kravchenko N., Yudenko O. Visual metaphor in commercial ad: effectiveness or failure? Cognition, Communication, Discourse. 2021. Vol. 23. P. 62–71.

Lagerwerf L., Van Mulken M., Lagerwerf J.B. Conceptual similarity and visual metaphor: Effects on viewing times, appreciation, and recall. Frontiers in Communication. 2023. Vol. 8. P. 1–13.

Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago : Chicago University Press. 1980. 193 p.

Lakoff G. The Invariance Hypothesis: Is Abstract Reason Based on Image Schemas? Cognitive Linguistics. 1990. Vol. 1. P. 39–74.

McElhanon K.A. From Simple Metaphors to Conceptual Blending: The Mapping of Analogical Concepts and the Praxis of Translation. Journal of Translation. 2006. Vol. 2 (1). P. 31–81.

Oakley T., Pascual E. Conceptual Blending Theory. In B. Dancygier (ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. 2017. P. 423–448.

Serig D. A Conceptual Structure of Visual Metaphor. Studies in Art Education. 2006. Vol. 47 (3). P. 229–247.

Yemets N. Visual metaphors in advertising: A cognitive pragmatic interface. International Journal of Philology. 2024. Vol. 28 (2). P. 24–31.

Published

2025-02-27