Metaphor, Action and Perspective

Setting priorities, goals and purposes determines the use of one linguistics form rather than another, and the choice made is by no means random. Every priority projects a certain perspective on an issue, and provides possible ways of categorizing experience. Categorization, on the other hand, also boils down to perspective since classifying A under C is a matter of looking at the properties, functions and purposes of using A as compatible with those of the general category C. Without conceptualizing experience from a certain point of view, categorization seems next to impossible. As such, to view Life as a race course, as a riding animal, or as a journey is a matter of perspective achieved via the use of metaphor, which "depends on the broader perspective and priorities of the participants in the debate" (Hellesten, www).


     Metaphor and perspective are interchangeably interwoven since "the essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another" (Chandler, www). The first element of the metaphoric structure, Topic, is the experienced thing, whereas Vehicle stands for the perspective through which that kind of thing is experienced. Grounds, in fact, is shared grounds for negotiating perspectives: it consists of mapping between mental spaces (Topic and Vehicle) onto each other to produce an "emergent structure" which basically the result of the projected blended mental spaces (Turner, www) (see the figure below).














     Fig. 1. Mapping of Topic and Vehicle


Nevertheless, metaphors are restrictive: they highlight while at the same hide some aspects of the phenomenon they are applied to. This feature is inherent to language in general as is shown on the syntagmatic level, where the use of one syntagm means the exclusion of others. Further, language allows partial understanding of experience given that "metaphors […] offer only one perspective on an issue at a time" to the exclusion of others (Hellesten, www). To adopt a Whorfian stance, language plays a role in shaping and structuring one's thinking; yet metaphors play still a greater role in shaping one's thought (Goatly, 1997). In other words, "the unique metaphoricity of humans entails in fact a potential to enlighten and blind, to nourish and poison. With this outlook, then, metaphor can function as an explicit psychological act intended to shape or shatter mental reality" (Fiumara, 1995).



The metaphors of life used by Imam Ali in his NahjulBalaghah (NB) are no exception. They present Life from different perspectives and highlight different features of it while hiding others. However, these metaphors are purposefully intended to "strengthen certain views on life" and are "grounded on background knowledge that is culturally shared by some group of people" (Hellesten,www). The immediate effect of these metaphors is the cultivation of intimacy as they work as "a means of activating assumptions" shared between the speaker and his audience (Goatly, 1997). They have a far-reaching effect of inducing people to act in terms of them when a new metaphor "enters the conceptual system that we base our actions on", and will have the power to "alter that conceptual system and the perceptions and actions it gives rise to" (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980). Having permeated the conceptual system of the people, these metaphors might be used "as a means of maintaining or challenging power relations in society" (Goatly, 1997) through their constitutive power of reality. Metaphors of Life in NB are counter-metaphors (not anti-metaphors) intended to bring about permanent changes in the way people view Life, contrary to the pre-Islam view of valorizing Life. At that time, Life is seen as ending in death, and nothing there to suffer from or enjoy thereafter. With the advent of Islam, this view is challenged by the Quran, and Prophetic sayings, and Life has been seen as no more than a conduit to the Afterlife, a field or farm whose crops to be yielded in the hereafter.