METAPHOR IN ENGLISH MOTIVATIONAL DISCOURSE: IDENTIFICATION, FUNCTIONS AND TRANSLATION-ORIENTED IMPLICATIONS
Keywords:
metaphor; conceptual metaphor; motivational discourse; mipvu; corpus analysis; translation strategies; equivalence; pragmatics; cognitive linguistics; cultural adaptation.Abstract
This paper examines the types and functions of metaphor in english motivational discourse through cognitive and pragmatic lenses. The study aims to identify conceptual and lexical metaphors in motivational texts (book excerpts, blog posts, and speech fragments), classify them by source domains, and highlight translation-oriented challenges related to equivalence. A 50,000-word mini-corpus of contemporary motivational materials was compiled; metaphors were identified using the mipvu procedure and subsequently coded into domains such as journey, struggle, growth, light/darkness, and container. The findings show that metaphor in motivational discourse is not merely decorative: it simplifies abstract ideas, reinforces persuasion, mobilizes action, and fosters proximity between author and audience. From a translation perspective, some metaphors lose their rhetorical force when transferred literally, while others require cultural adaptation or re-metaphorization to preserve pragmatic impact. The paper concludes with practical recommendations for efl pedagogy and translation practice, emphasizing systematic metaphor analysis as a tool for improving comprehension and communicative effectiveness.
References
1. Lakoff, g., & johnson, m. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: university of chicago press.
2. Charteris-black, j. (2004). Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Basingstoke: palgrave macmillan.
3. Cameron, l. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. London: continuum.
4. Steen, g., dorst, a. G., herrmann, j. B., kaal, a., krennmayr, t., & pasma, t. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: from mip to mipvu. Amsterdam: john benjamins.
5. Newmark, p. (1988). A textbook of translation. New york: prentice hall.
6. Schäffner, c. (2004). Metaphor and translation: some implications of a cognitive approach. Journal of pragmatics, 36(7), 1253–1269.
7. Gibbs, r. W. (2008). The cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. Cambridge: cambridge university press.
8. Kövecses, z. (2010). Metaphor: a practical introduction (2nd ed.). Oxford: oxford university press.
9. Steen, g. (2011). The contemporary theory of metaphor—now new and improved! Review of cognitive linguistics, 9(1), 26–64.
10. Deignan, a. (2005). Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: john benjamins.
11. Pragglejaz group. (2007). Mip: a method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and symbol, 22(1), 1–39.
12. Forceville, c. (2008). Metaphor in pictures and multimodal representations. In r. W. Gibbs (ed.), the cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 462–482). Cambridge: cambridge university press.
13. Musolff, a. (2016). Political metaphor analysis: discourse and scenarios. London: bloomsbury.
14. Semino, e. (2008). Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: cambridge university press.
15. Toury, g. (1995). Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Amsterdam: john benjamins.
16. Venuti, l. (2012). The translator’s invisibility: a history of translation (2nd ed.). London: routledge.
