Abstract

A STUDY OF PICTORIALMETAPHOR IN ADVERTISEMENTS

Huda Hussein Abdulla Asst.Prof.Manal Jasim Muhmmad (Ph.D)

Volume: 10 Issue: 3 2020

Abstract:

Pictorial metaphors are one of the non-verbal metaphors that commonly appear in advertisements. These metaphors include source and target domains. When both of these domains are visually represented, they are called monomodal. Whereas when verbal representation is used with visual one, they are called multimodal. Pictorial metaphors can be contextual when only one domain is visually represented and the other is contextually known. Pictorial metaphor can also besimile when both domains express the point of similarity between them, or hybrid when the source and target domains are mixed. This paper aims to identify the use of pictorial metaphor in American and British advertisements and show how they are similar or different. To achieve the aims of the study, an eclectic model of Forceville's (1996 ) and Evans and Green´s (2006) is used to analyze 10 selected American and British advertisement.The analysis of data revealsthat there are some similarities and differences in American and British pictorial metaphor advertisements. It also concludes that hybrid pictorial metaphor is the most repeatedly used in pictorial metaphor in both American and British advertisements

DOI: http://doi.org/10.37648/ijrssh.v10i03.012

Back Download

References

• Anaya, M. A. (2008). Changing appearances: magazine advertising layout and design, 1980 /2005 (Unpublished master‟s thesis). San Jose State University, US.
• Baker, S. (1988). The advertiser's manual. New York: Wiley.
• Bignell, J. (2002). Media Semiotic: An Introduction. NewYork: Manchester University Press
• Black, M. (1979). Models and Metaphors. Ithaca: Cornell UP.
• Cacciari, C. (1998). Why do we speak metaphorically? Reflections on the functions of metaphor indiscourse and reasoning.In A. Katz, C. Cacciari, R. W. Gibbs Jr. &M.Turner, Figurative Language and Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Carroll, N. (1996). “A Note of Film Metaphor”, In Theorizing The moving Image: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Clausner,T.& Croft, W. (1999). Domains and image schemas. Cognitive Linguistics, 10, 1-31
• Cook, G. (1992). The Discourse of Advertising, London: Routledge.
• Dąbrowski, J. (2000). ‘Metaphors in Advertising Texts: A Cognitive Grammar Analysis’. In Spånberg, S-J., H.Kardela& G. Porter (eds.), 295-313.
• Dyer,G.(1988).Advertising as Communication. London: Routledge.
• Evans, V. and Green, M. (2006).Cognitive Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Forceville, C. (1996). Pictorial Metaphor in Advertising. London: Routledge.
• (2009). Non-verbal and multimodal metaphor in a cognitivist framework: agendas for research. De Gruyter Mouton, 19-45.
• Gibbs, R. (1994). The cognitive psychological reality of image schemas and their transformations. In D. Geraerts (ed.): Cognitive Linguistics .Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Goatly, A. (1997).The Language of Metaphors. London: Routledge.
• Grady, J. (2007).Foundations of Meaning: Primary Metaphor and Primary Science .Ph.D Dissertation at the university of Bekerley
• Hermerén, L. (1999). English for Sale: A Study of the Language of Advertising. Lund: Lund University Press.
• Homer, P, M. (2008).“Perceived Quality and Image: When All Is Not Rosy“. Journal of Business Research, 61 (7),715– 723.
• Johnson, K. and Johnson, H. (1999).Encyclopedic Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
• Johnson, M. (1987).The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
• - (2005). 'The Philosophical Significance of Image Schmas' in From Perception to Meaning: Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. p.p. 15-33
• Kaplan, S.(1992) J. “A Conceptual Analysis of Form and Content in Visual Metaphors'. Communication 13\2 (1992) 187-209.
• Kittay, E. F. (1987). Metaphor: Its Cognitive Force and Linguistic Structure.Oxford:Clarendon press
• Kövecses,Z. (2005). Metaphor in Culture: Universality and Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• - (2010). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction (2nd Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. London: Routledge.
• Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980).Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Lakoff, G. & M. Turner. (1989). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
• MacCormac, E. R.(1985). A Cognitive Theory of Metaphor.Cambridge:MIT.
• Martin, J. and Harre, R. (1982): Metaphor in Science, in D. S. Miall (cd.), Metaphor,Sussex: The Harvcster Press.
• Morris, R. (1993). Visual rhetoric in political cartoons: A structuralist approach. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity.
• Nevett, T.1992. 'Differences Between American and British Advertising: Explanations and Implications.' Journal of Advertising.
• Oakley, T. (2007). 'Image Schemas' in The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics.Edited by: Geeraerts, Dirk and Cuyckens, Huberts. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p.p. 314-235
• Ortony, A., (ed.). (1979). Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Phillips, B., Edward F. and McQuarrie. (2004) Beyond visual metaphor: A new typology of visual rhetoric in advertising. Marketing Theory 4 (1-2): 113-136.
• Pieters, R., & Wedel, M. (2004). Attention capture and transfer in advertising: Brand, pictorial, and text-size effects. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 36-50
• Pollay, R. (1985) „The Subsidizing Sizzle: A Descriptive History of Print Advertising,1900–1980‟, Journal of Marketing 48 (Summer): 24–37.
• Stern, B. B. (1990). Beauty and joy in metaphorical advertising: The poetic dimension. Association for Consumer Research.
• Sullivan, L. (2008). Hey Whipple, squeeze this: A guide to creating great advertising (Third edition). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• Szwedek, Aleksander (2019) “The Image Schema: A Definition.” Styles of Communication.11(1); 9‒30.
• Tanaka, K. (1994). Advertising Language: A Pragmatic Approach to Advertisements in Britain and Japan. London: Routledge.
• Ungerer, F. (2000).Muted metaphors and the activation of metonymies in advertising. In Barcelona, A. (ed.) Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads:A Cognitive Perspective, 321-339. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Van Enschot, R., &Hoeken, H. (2015).The occurrence and effects of verbal and visual anchoring of tropes on the perceived comprehensibility and liking of TV commercials. Journal of Advertising, 44(1), 25-36.
• Vestergaard, T. & Schroder, K. (1985).The Language of Advertising. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
• Weisberg, L.F. (2012).More than Words:Metaphor in the Mind,Brain,and Literature. A Senior Honors Thesis.BrownUniversity.Rhode Island, United States of America.
• Werner, W. (1975).Selected Essays on Intermediality .Boston : DRILL RODOPI.
• Williamson, J. (1978). Decoding Advertisements. London and Boston, Massachusetts: Marion Boyars.