چکیده:
Extended Abstract Introduction The conceptual blending/integration theory originates from research programs by Gilles Fauconnier and Mark Turner. This theory is the result of expanding the theoretical framework of mental spaces. The core point put forth by Fauconnier and Turner involves how the construction of meaning does not take place solely through combining former meanings or creating mappings among them; yet, meaning construction has an emergent structure shaped by the combination and integration of a set of elements that cannot specifically be observed within any inputs. Accordingly, the purpose of the present inquiry is to demonstrate how the blending theory is capable of introducing accuracy into conceptual metonymy analysis, particularly the intellectual type, whilst explaining the contrast between conventional and cognitive interpreters’ understandings of metonymy. This study seeks to provide answers to the following questions: What is the role of conceptual metonymy’s cognitive mechanisms in explaining and comprehending abstract notions in Quranic verses? What is the contrast between conventional and cognitive interpreters’ understandings of Quranic metonymy? What is the most important function and implication of the conceptual blending principle in intellectual metonymy? Theoretical Framework As a modern approach in linguistics, cognitive linguistics has created a number of effective tools and methods to analyze a variety of texts. Today, the conceptual blending principle is a well-established idea which is derived from expanding the theory of mental spaces. This principle represents the mechanisms behind the formation of newly-emerged meanings; one of its most important functions involves offering an all-inclusive, general view. If said principle is placed into contrast within the area of semantics in Quran, then the conceptualizations present across verses would be examined rather than the very situations pointed out by the verses. According to this principle, the interpreter should refrain from referring any interpretation to other; the interpreter must find the conceptualization hidden within any interpretations as it is. The conceptual metonymy theory is a prevalent view in cognitive linguistics which can be investigated and analyzed based upon the conceptual blending theory. In the old rhetoric, metonymy in general is referred to as using a word instead of another, while both point out to a single, mutual elements. Unquestionably, closeness between the meanings of words is a necessity in this replacement. In such a view, intellectual metonymy is a type of metonymy which is predicated to a real non-agent in the form of verb predication or what is present in the meaning of the verb. Metonymical predication, predicated metonymy, or ordered metonymy are terms that denote this type of metonymy as they refer to a relation, relativity or order among words which provoke man’s intellect to determine their judgment of the subject. Shamisa (1997) believes that metonymical predication creates a type of conflict in language combinational axis or collocation; this type of predication to the subject involves an unconventional form. In the cognitive view, metonymies act in a systematic manner; they create a set of patterns that are applicable to an extensive set of lexicon rather than a single word. In other words, this is the very meaning formation procedure that is constructed by man’s experience of the world, i.e. naming things. Naming is to create reality that has found its way into man’s sphere of comprehension. Additionally, Lakoff and Johnson (2009) believe that metonymical concepts and their constructs are not exclusively limited to language; they are closely related to the thoughts, language, behaviors, and actions of language users. They are metonymical concepts based upon experience. It means that metonymical concepts are created by natural forms offered to mankind in his environment. Method The present inquiry was conducted using the descriptive-analytical method, via referring to the conceptual blending/integration theory in order to analyze the intellectual metonymy used in Quran verses. The study is also an attempt to explain the difference between the two views of the old rhetoric and cognitive semantics with respect to metonymy. Results and Discussion The following are the most important findings of the study: - Each Quranic blending has taken place proportionate to style. Blending highlights a set of stylistic elements which are of particular importance to the speaker. This points to the importance of the examination of blending in discovering the spotlight. - As a prominent cognitive mechanism, conceptual metonymy helps produce and understand abstract, non-objective notions such as day and night conspiracies, losses in trades between the hypocrites, strong day, etc. based on objective, tangible affairs. Conclusion The study showed that conventional interpreters have changed Quran’s metonymical expressions in many instances, replacing them with their own conceptualizations; conversely, by introducing originality into Quranic conceptualization, cognitive interpreters have expressed the accurate points hidden across intellectual metonymies; as the most important function of blending is to provide a general, all-inclusive view which is considered as a type of imaginary processing and results from reducing complex subjects to a human scale.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Based on this, the aim of the present essay is to use a descriptive-analytical method and rely on the cognitive linguistics approach to show how blending theory can provide precision to the analysis of conceptual metaphor, especially its intellectual type, and explain the contrast between the interpretations of traditional and cognitive scholars regarding metaphor.
Based on what has been said, the present research aims to use the principle of conceptual blending, as one of the relatively emerging approaches of cognitive linguistics, and relying on the descriptive-analytical method, to examine a portion of intellectual metaphors in Quranic discourse and to answer the following questions: 1.
2. Conceptual blending in the attribution of an action to a location In the view of traditionalists regarding intellectual metaphor, only the issue of attributing an action or quasi-action to an unreal subject and its linguistic aesthetics has been raised, and no reference has been made to the semantic load of mental spatialization; it is worth mentioning that paying attention to emergent meanings in such imaginary structures can move the text analyst away from the traditional view of intellectual metaphor and align them with the view of cognitive linguists, because attention to the theory of conceptual blending and multi-space networks among contemporary cognitivists points to new results in the application of intellectual metaphor, just as another example of conceptual blending can be observed in similar verses from Surahs Al-Baqarah, At-Tawbah, and Al-An'am: ﴿وَعَدَ اللَّهُ اْلمُؤْمنینَ وَ اْلمُؤْمنات جََّناتَ تجْری منَْ تحْتهَا اْلأَْنهارُ خالدینَ فیهـا وَمَسـاکنَ طّیبۀ فی جََّنات عَدْن وَرضْوان منَ اللَّه أَکَْber ذلکَ هُوَ اْلفَوْزُ اْلعَظیم ُ﴾; "God has promised believing men and women gardens under which rivers flow, and they will abide therein forever, and pure dwellings in everlasting Gardens, and the pleasure of Allah is greater; that is the great success.
(
, 
, 
)
