MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

BÙI THỊ PHƯỢNG

CONCEPTUAL METARPHORS USING PLANTS AS
SOURCE DOMAIN IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE
INTERNET NEWSPAPERS
(ẨN DỤ Ý NIỆM SỬ DỤNG THỰC VẬT NHƯ LÀ MIỀN
NGUỒN TRÊN CÁC BÁO ĐIỆN TỬ TIẾNG ANH VÀ
TIẾNG VIỆT)

M.A THESIS
Field: English Language
Code: 8220201

Hanoi, 2018


MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

BÙI THỊ PHƯỢNG

CONCEPTUAL METARPHORS USING PLANTS AS
SOURCE DOMAIN IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE
INTERNET NEWSPAPERS
(ẨN DỤ Ý NIỆM SỬ DỤNG THỰC VẬT NHƯ LÀ MIỀN
NGUỒN TRÊN CÁC BÁO ĐIỆN TỬ TIẾNG ANH VÀ
TIẾNG VIỆT)


went through the process of completion of my thesis. His encouragement and
comments had significantly enriched and improved my work. Without his
motivation and instructions, the thesis would have been impossible to be done
effectively.
I am also indebted to all my lecturers at Hanoi Open University for their
precious knowledge, useful lectures in linguistics, which laid the foundation for this
study.
Next, my thanks also go to my friends, who gave me documents and
encouraged me much while the work was in process.
Especially, I would like to express how thankful I am to my beloved
families, who always stand by me and help me overcome all the difficulties in
studying and completing this thesis.
Last but not least, I personally wish to thank all my readers for their
attention, and I would highly appreciate any comments to my study.

ii


ABSTRACT
Among the many issues of research within the perspective of cognitive
linguistics, metaphor has been considered as a specific mental mapping that
provides a foundation for human thought and conceptualization. In the study, the
author has chosen Lakoff and Johnson‟s Conceptual Metaphor Theory as the
analytical framework, tried to find out the conceptual metaphors using plants as
source domain in English and Vietnamese internet newspapers and locate whether
there are any similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese in terms
of conceptual metaphor usage. It aims to help the reader have a deeper sight into
theoretical knowledge on metaphors and enhance the effectiveness of teaching,
learning and understanding conceptual metaphors in English and Vietnamese.
Within the limitation of this study, the researcher expects that the two languages


1.4. Methods of the study
1.5. Scope of the study
1.6. Significance of the study
1.7. Organization of the study
Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

3
3
4
4
6

2.1. Previous studies
2.2. Theoretical background

6
7

2.2.1. Cognitive linguistics
2.2.2. Cognitive semantics
2.1.2.2.1. Definition of cognitive semantics
2.1.2.2.2. Main tenets of cognitive semantics
2.2.3. Conceptual metaphor Theory
2.2.3.1. Metaphor
2.2.3.1.1. Traditional view on metaphor
2.2.3.1.2. Metaphor in the light of cognitive linguistics
2.2.3.2. Conceptual metaphor
2.2.3.3. Classification of conceptual metaphor
2.2.3.3.1. Structural metaphor

Chapter 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

19

3.1. Data

19

3.2. Instruments
3.3. Procedures
3.4. Statistical analysis

19
19
20

3.5. Analytical framework
Chapter 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Conceptual metaphors using plants as source domain in English

20
24
24

internet newspapers
4.1.1. Economy is a plant

24

4.1.1.1. Stages of economy are stages of plant growth

36
36
37

4.1.4. Social organization is a plant
4.1.4.1. The entire organization is the whole plant
4.1.4.2. A part of the organization is a part of the plant
4.1.4.3. The development of the organization is the growth of the plant
4.1.4.4. Reducing the organization is removing a part of the plant
4.1.4.5. The origin of the organization is the root of the plant
4.1.4.6. The best stage, the most successful stage is the flowering

37
38
38
39
39
40
40

v


4.1.4.7. The beneficial consequences is the fruit of crops
4.1.5. Idea is a plant

40
40

4.1.5.1. The origin of an idea is the parts of plants

44
44
46
48
48
49

4.2.2.3. Sadness is a plant
4.2.2.4. Anger is a plant
4.2.2.5. Fear is a plant
4.2.3. Human being is a plant
4.2.3.1. Human being is a part of the plant
4.2.3.2. Human beings‟ development is the plant‟s growth
4.2.3.3. Disposing of unwanted human beings is weeding
4.2.3.4. Losing physical strength is freshness of a plant
4.2.3.5. Human beings‟ activities are common activities in agriculture

50
50
50
51
51
53
53
53
54

4.2.3.6. Human being is a specific plant
4.2.4. Social organization is a plant
4.2.4.1. The entire organization is the whole plant

57
57
58

4.2.5.6. Getting rid of problems is destroying plants
58
4.2.5.7. Conveying ideas is sowing /planting
58
4.3. Similarities and differences between conceptual metaphors using plants as 58
source domain in English and Vietnamese internet newspapers
4.3.1. Similarities
.

4.3.2. Differences
Chapter 5: CONCLUSION
5.1. Concluding remarks
5.2. Implications
5.2.1. Implications for teachers

58
60
63
63
64
64

5.2.2. Implications for learners
5.2.3. Implications for translators

65

processes are highly metaphorical. In other words, metaphor constitutes and
constructs human thoughts. In this field of study, cognitive linguists argue that
meaning construction is derived from embodied experience which is organized in
terms of image schemas, or experiential gestalts. It is believed that the work
conducted by Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 2003) is a pioneer work in this field. In
their work, Conceptual Metaphor Theory, they argue that metaphor is the cross
domain mapping between the source domains and the target domains. Moreover,
there is a systematic network of metaphors that human beings utilize to construct
their thoughts. With this definition, metaphor is seen as a key to discover the
foundation of thinking and the perception of spiritual symbols about the world.
The grounding of metaphors is our basic experiences and one of the most
fundamental human experiences is that of agriculture, especially about plants.
Although this is an interesting topic, it has not been paid much attention. For a long
time, plants have become a cultural symbol of human beings with many meanings.
When used in languages, plants are reformed and reorganized in the relation with
many factors of a special communication process as a creative activity which
creates a unique metaphor. In English and Vietnamese newspaper texts, a variety of
metaphors are motivated by this experience. For this reason, I decide to make some
exploration into this profound and fascinating topic entitled “Conceptual metaphors
using plants as source domain in English and Vietnamese internet newspapers”.
The aim of the thesis is to apply the theory in cognitive linguistics to discover the

1


top target domains from the source domain “plants” in the English internet
newspaper in comparison with Vietnamese internet newspaper, mapping system
among the conceptual domains. Considering the limited size of the material, the
results of the research may probably not be generalized, but it is hoped that this
investigation will lead to a brief perception in conceptual metaphors about “plants”.



2. What are the similarities and differences between conceptual metaphors
using plants as source domain in the eminent English and Vietnamese
internet newspapers?
3. What are the recommendations for teaching, learning and translating
conceptual metaphors using plants as source domain to Vietnamese
learners of English effectively?
1.4. Methods of the study
First, the examples of metaphorical expressions of plant terms will be
identified. Second, the selected examples with war metaphors will be classified into
categories or subcategories according to different target domain and then underlying
major themes and mappings will be discussed.
The research is mainly carried out through the documentary analysis and
descriptive study with the support and qualitative and quantitative approach. The
data is quantitatively analyzed in terms of the percentage of the occurrence of the
metaphorical images in all the articles in both English and Vietnamese internet
newspapers from cognitive linguistic perspective to see the preference for which
sets of expressions. Through qualitative approach, the metaphor, after being divided
into categories according to the procedure of transferring meaning from the vehicles
to the tenors guided by a theoretical lens, will be analyzed in details, synthesized
and evaluated, then find out the similarities and differences in expressions of
metaphor using plants as source domain.
1.5. Scope of the study
Due to time constraints and within the framework of an M.A thesis, it is impossible
for a study to deal with all the features of language theory and practice in depth.
This study, therefore, only focuses on some typical target domains which used
plants as source domain found in the internet newspapers of English and
Vietnamese to see how they are different.
The thesis is limited to 259 expressions of conceptual metaphors using plants as

expressions, and enhance learners valuable skills in interpreting and translating
newspapers as well.
1.7. Organization of the study
This study includes 5 chapters:
Chapter 1 – Introduction introduces the rationale, the aims and objectives, the
research questions, the methods of the study, the scope, the significance and the
organization of the study.
Chapter 2 – Literature review focuses on introducing important theoretical
matters relevant to the topic of the study such as definition of cognitive linguistics,
definition of cognitive semantics, the theories of metaphor, the conceptual
metaphors, the classification of conceptual metaphor, the metaphoric mappings, the
source domain and target domain. Besides, it presents some related studies reviewed

4


in order to provide the context for the research that is significant to the work that the
author is carrying out.
Chapter 3 – Research methodology discusses the methods and the procedures of
the research. It also deals with the description of samples and how the data are
collected, described and analyzed.
Chapter 4 – Findings and discussion involves describing and analyzing
conceptual metaphors using plants as source domain in the two prestigious agencies
in English including the nytimes.com and the telegraph.co.uk and two oriented
websites in Vietnamese namely, the vnexpress.net and the vietnamnet.vn. Besides,
it deals with metaphorical expressions which are compared and contrasted so as to
find out the similarities and differences in metaphorical expressions using plants as
source domain in both languages.
Chapter 5 – Conclusion will summarize the study‟s results and presents the
suggested implications for learning, teaching and translating conceptual metaphors

embodiment, cognitive frames, conceptual metaphor, mapping, conceptual domain,
metal space, conceptual blending.
The practical application of the conceptual metaphor in term of the cognitive
objects like emotion, the relationship between space and time, thought, etc. obtained
the results on the different fields such as the poetry, education, economy, articles,
cinema, politics and especially in everyday language. In addition, the researchers
have found a closed relationship between conceptual metaphor and culture, in the
binds among human - language – social. The conceptual metaphor is regarded a door
to understand the mind, human thinking and social characteristics.
In Vietnam, Cognitive linguistics was officially named in Vietnam in “Ngôn ngữ

6


học tri nhận nhìn từ lý thuyết đại cương đến thực tiễn tiếng Việt” (cognitive
linguistics from general theories to Vietnamese practices) of Lý Toàn Thắng (2005).
The author not only draws out the historical background and typical works of
cognitive linguistics but also applies cognitive semantics theory into Vietnamese
language and focused on such issues such cognitive models, figure/ground
relationships, prototypes, and categorization. The great contribution of his book lies
under the result of detailed examination about the model of spatial cognition used
in Vietnam determined by many scholars Trần Văn Cơ (2007), Nguyễn Đức Tồn
(2008), Nguyễn Lai (2009), etc.
Besides, the subfield plant metaphor has been explored with some journals of
science by Phạm Thị Hương Quỳnh (2014), Sylwia Filipczuk-Rosińska (2016), etc.
In those studies, the authors make a brief account of metaphorical expressions
using plants as human being. Of all previous studies I have read, there has hardly
been any one conducting on plants as a source domain with a contrast between
English and Vietnamese under the analyzed source of data as newspapers. That
inspired me to pay a particular attention to metaphorical expressions of plants in

ascertained as the study of the relationship between experience, embodied cognition
and language whereas the latter is explained as the study of the symbolic linguistic
units that comprise language (Ibid.). As cognitive linguistics is a very wide
academic discipline that also relates to conceptual system and as it was stated before
it is divided into two main areas, it is essentially to discuss it in greater detail.
2.2.2. Cognitive semantics
2.2.2.1. Definition of cognitive semantics
Cognitive semantics which is part of cognitive linguistics stated to develop in the
1980s. For Evans (2006), cognitive semantics is concerned with the investigating
the relationship between human experience, the conceptual system in human mind,
and the semantic structure encoded by language. To put it simply, scholars studying
in cognitive semantics investigate knowledge representation (conceptual structure),
and meaning construction (conceptualization). Besides, meaning conventionally
associated with words and other linguistic units as semantic structure.
2.2.2.2. Main tenets of cognitive semantics
According to Evans and Green (2006: 157), there are four following main
principles of cognitive semantics.
a. Conceptual structure is embodied
In the view of Evans and Green (2006), we are aware of the world from our
independent perspectives. Every human being has his or her own ways of looking
at the world, which is elementally based on his or her own bodily experience. In
this respect, conceptual is a result of the nature of our embodiment and any theory
of conceptual structure should be accordant with the ways which we experience the
external world.
b. Semantic structure is conceptual structure
8


The second principle affirms that language refers to concepts in the mind of the
speaker about the real world rather than entities which inhere in an external world.

metaphors, there are two main approaches. On one hand, the traditional approach
includes many different theories but shares some fundamental presumptions, and on
9


the other hand metaphor on the light of cognitive linguistics, despite being very
recent, has become the most influential theory of metaphor.
2.2.3.1.1. Traditional view on metaphor
In traditional metaphor theory, metaphors are just „adorning‟ of language because it
has been seen as a stylistic tool used only in literature.
For Aristotle (1992:49) who was first to provide a scholarly treatment of metaphors,
metaphor is giving something a name that belongs to another thing. This
substitution theory describes metaphor as an expression, which can be paraphrased
by a literal expression.
Lakoff has a brief discussion of the traditional view towards metaphor, in which
metaphors had been regarded as decorations in language, and people had conceived
of such a viewpoint as the truth over the centuries (Lakoff, 1993: 202).
As it is stated by Đỗ Hữu Châu (1966:54), metaphor is a way of naming an object in
terms of the name of another, based on the similar relationship between them.
This point of view is shared by Nguyễn Hòa (2001: 106) who confirmed that
“metaphor is the transference of meaning (name) from one object to another based
on similar relationship between these two objects, i.e. we call one object by the
name of another because we compare these objects and find some common features
between them.”
To sum up, from classical theory, metaphor indicates a certain kind of comparison
and the transference of names of one thing to another basing on similar relationship
between them. In addition, it is understood as the matter of language but not
thought and used for artistic or rhetorical purposes and not accidentally.
2.2.3.1.2. Metaphor in the light of cognitive linguistics
Cognitive linguistics which stems from cognitive science and is regarded to start in

usage and relation with other studies. New terms such as conceptual metaphor
theory and conceptual metaphor emerged.
In the cognitive linguistic view, metaphor is a conceptual phenomenon which
basically relates to what happens in the mind. The theory of conceptual metaphors
was flourished by Lakoff and Johnson in the1980's, and their collaboration resulted
in the book Metaphors We Live By where they defined and made a list of various
linguistic examples that their theory was based on. They argue that “The essence of
metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another.”
(Lakoff & Johnson, 1980:5), and that conceptual metaphors are mostly utilized to
describe rather abstract conceptual domains with conceptual domains that are
somewhat uncomplicated to comprehend.
The concept of metaphor is further explained by Kövecses. Conceptual metaphor
means that conceptual domain (A) is conceptual domain (B) (Kövecses, 2002: 4).
The two domains involve in conceptual metaphor are called source domain and
target domain respectively. Source domain refers to the conceptual domain used to
help understand another conceptual domain. Target domain refers to the conceptual
domain which we try to grasp it via source domain (Kövecses 2002: 12). Generally
11


speaking, an abstract concept is used as target, while a more concrete concept is
employed as its source.
People refer target domains like life, argument, love, ideas, social organization by
means of using journey, war, building, food and plants as their source domain. For
instance, the conceptual domain ARGUMENT can be described in terms of WAR;
as in “I won that argument” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980: 4), or TIME can be
described in terms of MONEY; in for example “You're wasting my time” (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1980: 5). Another conceptual domain which is commonly depicted by
another is LOVE, and like the other conceptual domains mentioned the domain of
LOVE is not too difficult for people to understand when described in the terms of

simple and specific experiences. Following Kovecses (2010:37), in this type of
metaphor, “the source domain provides a relatively rich knowledge structure for the
target concept”. In other words, the cognitive function of these metaphors is to
enable speakers to understand target A by means of the structure of source B. This
understanding occurs by means of conceptual mappings between elements of A and
elements of B.
An example often used to demonstrate this kind is the conceptual metaphor
“ARGUMENT IS WAR” which is expressed through a series of the following
expressions in English:
 Your claims are indefensible.
 He attacked every weak point in my argument.
 I‟ve never won an argument with him.
 He shot down all of my arguments. (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980:4)

The above examples state that many actions that we perform when debating are
structured from the concept of war. We can win or lose in a debate. During the
dispute, we consider the one we argue with as the opponent. As a result, we “attack”
the opponent‟s point of view and “protect” our viewpoint. We can win or lose and
also use strategy to win. When we see the unfavorable situation making it difficult
to protect our opinions, we often “retreat” and “open the new attack route”. In this
case, even without a fight, causing casualties, obviously we have a war of words
through the words of war that we use.
Through these examples, Lakoff and Johnson explained that an abstract conceptual
domain “debate” is understood through a specific conceptual domain of “war”.
Therefore, the concepts used in the sample expressions above come conceptual
domain of “war”. This is the basic characteristics of the structural conceptual
metaphor.
2.2.3.3.2. Ontological Metaphor
Ontological metaphor is a type of metaphor in which something abstract, such as
activity, emotion or idea, is represented in something concrete. Ontological

this group the orientational metaphor because they relate to the orientation in space.
The origin of this metaphor group is explained as follows by researcher Trần Văn
Cơ (2007):
“We are the physical entity limited in a certain space and separated from the rest
of the world by our skin; we perceive the rest of the world as the world outside us.
Each of us is contained in a limited space by the surface of the body, which is a
potentially orientation type of “inside-out”. This orientation makes us imagine
other physical objects also limited by the surface. At the same time we also see
them as containers with inner space and separated from the world outside.”
An example often cited to illustrate the orientational conceptual metaphor group is
“HAPPY IS UP, SAD IS DOWN” (Lakoff & Johnson 1980) illustrated in these

14


examples:
 I‟m feeling up.
 That boosted my spirits.
 My spirits rose.
 You„re in high spirits.
 I‟m feeling down.
 My spirits sank.

Conceptual metaphor “HAPPY IS UP, SAD IS DOWN” is derived from the
human body posture while they are happy or sad. Normally, when people are
depressed or sad they often bow down and when they are happy they raise up their
head and straight up their back. Thus, we see that the orientational conceptual
metaphors are not arbitrary but based on culture and experiences.
2.2.3.4. Metaphorical mapping
2.2.3.4.1. Mapping principles

schemas are derived from perceptual and motor processes, they are not themselves
sensorimotor processes”. In fact, as Johnson (1987: 30) put it, image schemas are
“primary means by which we construct or constitute order and are not mere passive
receptacles into which experience is poured”
Some of the most prominent and universal examples of image schemas, as proposed
by Johnson (1987:126), are: container, blockage, balance, counterforce, restraint,
removal, enablement, path, center-periphery, cycle, near-far, part-whole, merging,
splitting, full-empty.
2.2.3.5. Source domain and target domain
To intensify the apprehension of the role of conceptual metaphor in cognitive
linguistics, it is of primary importance to get acquainted with cognitive models, that
is, source and target domains which conceptual mapping is the key in understanding
conceptual metaphor.
Lakoff and Johnson (1980:265) put stress on the structure of each conceptual
domain and explained that the target domain is constituted by the immediate subject
matter, and the source domain, in which significant metaphorical reasoning takes
place and that provides the source concepts used in that reasoning. Peter Stockwell
(2002:107) shows that “Cognitive linguistics models the process of metaphor as a
mapping of properties between the two spaces or domains”. These two conceptual
domains are the essence of conceptual metaphor. In cognitive linguistics, target
domains are also explained as having an abstract meaning that is, something not
concrete or related to particular human experience. Source domains on the contrary,
are related with sensory experience and reality. For example, in conceptual
metaphors AN ARGUMENT IS WAR and LOVE IS A JOURNEY, argument and
love are the target domains while war and journey represent source domains.
Kövecses (2010:4) gives such a definition for source and target domains, “The
conceptual domain from which we draw metaphorical expressions to understand

16