Fauna Metaphorization in Dental Medicine and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery Terminology
Abstract
Objectives: to identify and excerpt English zoomorphic metaphorical terminological units from DM and CMS scientific field.; to outline the constituents of each concept’s semantic field; to follow up the correlation of source domain and target domain in mapping, the transition to generic and blending space; to illustrate the overall algorithm of blending; to increase the terminological metaphorical awareness of medical students. Materials and research methods. Seventy-two one-word and compound English zoomorphic metaphorical terminological units from DM and CMS scientific field served as material for the study. Methods of semantic dictionary analysis, definition analysis, conceptual integration (cognitive analysis), component analysis, statistical method have been applied. Discussion and results of the study. A brief description of Fauconnier and Turner’s Theory of Blending has been made and the significance of zoomorphic metaphors for a better understanding of clinical phenomena has been pointed out. The stages of formation of three exemplary zoomorphic metaphors (Bird face, Canine tooth, Rat tail rasp) have been followed up: making associative links between terms and real-world objects, rationalizing and extracting information, mapping, blending and generating a new terminological unit. Conclusions. The following conclusions have been made: 1. Interaction between both input mental spaces (source-input space 1, target-input space 2) and sharing common information in generic space. 2. Selectivity in blending with an emphasis on nominative features: shape, size, function, position, sensation and behaviour. 3. Terminologization of lexemes in blending and formation of a new zoomorphic metaphorical term. 4. Zoomorphic terminological metaphor denominates pathologies or deformities affecting human’s identity and psyche; anatomical objects; dental instrumentarium. 5. Associative links between fauna and human beings prove to be inevitable and strong enough to serve as prerequisite for clarifying the clinical picture of a disease, nominating a novel clinical finding or diagnosis.
Downloads
References
Fauconnier, G. Mental spaces. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M. Conceptual blending, form and meaning. In: Sémiotique cognitive - Cognitive semiotics, vol. 19,01.03. 2003. https://ojs.uclouvain.be/index.php/rec/article/view/48413.
Hupp J. R., Ellis E. III & Tucker M.R. Contemporary oral and maxillofacial surgery. USA: Elsevier, Inc. Philadelphia PA 19103 – 2899, 2019.
Lakoff,, G. The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. A. Ortony (ed.) Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. pр. 202–251.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. Metaphors we live by / G. Lakoff, M. Johnson. Chicago: 1980. L., 242p.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. Philosophy in the Flesh. The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books, 1999.
Merriam - Webster’s medical dictionary. Masachusetts: Merriam - Webster, Incorporated Springfield, 2016.
Mohammadi Z. et al. Postoperative pain following treatment of teeth with irreversible pulpitis. A review. N Y State: Dent J. vol. 83, №1, 2017, pp. 44 - 53.
Qualtrough, A. J. E., Satterthwaite J. D., Morrow L. A., Brunton P. A. Principles of Operative Dentistry. Oxford: Blackwell Munksgaard, 2005.
Stedman, Th. L. Stedman’s concise medical dictionary for the health professions: illustrated. 4-th ed. Ohio: Lipponcott Williams & Wilkins, University of Dayton, 2001.
Stevao, E.L.L & Bath M.S. Are Impacted Third Molars Always Necessary to be Removed? Part I - A Literature Review. Adv Dent & 008 Oral Health. vol. 2, issue 3, 2016. pp. 1 – 9.
Copyright (c) 2024 Health, physical culture and sports
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
An author should not normally publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in multiple journals or publication venues. Such redundant publication is generally considered to constitute unethical publishing behavior, and if discovered may result in a manuscript under consideration being rejected, or a published article being retracted.
Authors of manuscripts reporting on original research should present an accurate account of the work performed, accompanied by an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. The fabrication of results and the making of fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and may be cause for rejection or retraction of a manuscript or published article.
