Current research on the metaphor can be classified according to the epistemological standpoint from which the object "metaphor" is built by the metaphorologist.

Approximately, there are three manners of planning the development of the object "metaphor":

(1) the first epistemological attitude is an attitude of mistrust: in this case, the metaphorologist challenges any project of metaphorology. To lead to its ends, it can use two types of arguments:

- logical argument: It would not be possible to define what is the metaphor without including metaphors there. Consequently any definition of the metaphor would be tautological. Derrida, after having analyzed the traditional definitions of the metaphor, affirms that "the definite one is thus implied in defining definition" (Derrida, 1971,274). Ricoeur will give a name to this problem: "the paradox of the car-implication of the metaphor": "there is no speech on the metaphor which does not say in a conceptual network itself generated métaphoriquement. There is no nonmetaphorical from where one sees the order and the fence of the metaphorical field. The metaphor is said métaphoriquement "(Ricoeur, 1975, 213). Derrida, contrary to Ricoeur in addition, will conclude from it that "instead of risking here prolegomenes with some metaphorical future, rather try to recognize in its principle the condition of impossibility of such a project" (Derrida, 261).

- metaphysical argument: The metaphor here comprises the Unnamable one, the Unspecified one. Let us take for Castoriadis example, with its metaphysics of the imaginary radical. This last will consider the metaphor as "something" of which one cannot, by definition, anything to know: "by definition, its ' mode of être' is a mode of non-being" (Castoriadis, 1975, 213). The consequence of this attitude of mistrust is that the object of knowing "metaphor" disaggregates; The metaphor here is a wet soap not ceasing slipping with the hands of the metaphorologist: no scientific research is thus possible on the matter.

(2) the second epistemological, more positive attitude in its most frequent step and at the present time, consists in affirming that a definition (or a finished whole of definitions) of the metaphor worked out by oneself or a third must be privileged with depend on all the other definitions existing on the market. This epistemological positioning involves (a) a disciplinary bulk-heading and (b) intra-disciplinary: (A) Let us take for example the little of discussions, exchanges or partnership between stylistics and epistemology about the metaphor. (b) For example, little of contacts within psychology between holding of a cognitive design of the metaphor and holding them of a psychoanalytical design.

(3) the last epistemological attitude consists in affirming that it is as useless to prohibit scientific research about the metaphor as to isolate one or more definitions and to generalize them (vain operation bus taking the part for the whole). The attitude of Prandi (2002,7) is from this exemplary point of view: "it proves to be impossible to give a definition of the metaphor which is at the same time general and exhaustive - which applies to all the metaphors and clarifies at the same time the properties describing as each one. What arrives in fact, they is that several definitions of the metaphor, enough heterogeneous to be incompatible, each one are supported by some of the data, while at the same time any is not adequate for the general information of the metaphors ". From where its daring idea to work out a typology. The major difference between the second attitude (définitionnelle) and the typological attitude which will be mine is that the first has an ambition of generalization while the second has an ambition of characterization.

The objective of the typological step is double: (1) to work out a kind of chart of possible distinctive features between metaphors, (2) to trace singular courses on the elaborate chart. A kind of passport of each metaphorical occurrence will be thus worked out.

Summary of the three epistemologic attitudes:

(1) Attitude of mistrust: the contents of the metaphorology hold in a negative sentence: "there is no acceptable theoretical metaphorology, and, consequently, there is no metaphorology applied acceptable either". The adopted point of view is a negativist.

(2) definitional Attitude: the contents of the theoretical metaphorology correspond to a definition (or a finished whole of definitions) isolée(s) of the others. The contents of the metaphorology applied correspond to a research on the presence of the metaphors (only those which correspond to the definition given) in a speech. The adopted point of view is disciplinary or interdisciplinary.

(3) typological Attitude: the contents of the theoretical metaphorology are a grid (not enclosed) made up of questions and possible answers to these questions. The adopted point of view is transdisciplinary. Some metaphorologists estimate that a word ("metaphor") and its definition can be used to label the diversity of the metaphorical occurrences. These metaphorologists carry out an elimination of all the essential distinctive characteristics of each metaphorical occurrence.

TYPOLOGICAL GRID:

(click on the elements of the grid that you want to deepen)

RETURN TO THE TOP OF THE PAGE

RETURN TO THE FRENCH VERSION OF THIS WEBSITE

The metaphor in question - Copyright Cédric Detienne 2004- Plan of the site - Vg-webdesign: referencing of Internet sites