Figurative language and ‘doing interculturality’ in a lingua franca
-
Esko Johnson
Abstract
Research has shown how, in a narrative event, people give meanings to and conceptualise their experience in figurative language. The aim of this case study was to explore the figurative language which emerged in the flow of mobile students’ narrative accounts of interculturality. Pragmatic features of talk, including those specific to the lingua franca, were analysed in the participants’ use of figurative language. The data of the exploratory study derived from mobility project interviews conducted with South Korean student teachers at the beginning and end of their short-term stays in Finland. The results revealed, among other things, that metaphors of movement and force were used for ‘doing interculturality’, when the interviewees constructed themselves, others and events in figurative language in the context of the mobility project interview. Using oppositional metaphor (e.g., free-strict) as well as metonymy and hyperbole, the participants presented their views on school education, society and people in the two contexts. By exploring the narrators’ strategies for telling and their discursive construction of roles and positions, it was possible to analyse in more detail the interplay of figurative language and the narrative construction of interculturality.
Tiivistelmä
Tutkimus on osoittanut, kuinka kerronnan tapahtumassa käytämme kielikuvia merkityksellistämään ja käsitteistämään kokemuksiamme. Tämän tapaustutkimuksen kohteena ovat vaihto-opiskelijoiden kulttuurienvälisen kokemuksen kerronnassa esiin nousevat metaforat, metonyymit ja hyberbolat sekä niiden lingua franca -englannille ominaiset pragmatiikan piirteet. Aihepiirin on paneuduttu vain harvoissa soveltavan kielitieteen ja kulttuurienvälisen viestinnän tutkimuksissa. Tutkimusaineisto koostui aineenopettajiksi valmistuvien eteläkorealaisten vaihto-opiskelijoiden haastatteluista, jotka tehtiin heidän lyhytkestoisen vaihtojaksonsa alkaessa ja päättyessä Suomessa. Englanti oli näissä haastateltaville ja haastattelijalle yhteinen lingua franca. Tutkimustulokset osoittavat, että tutkittavat käyttivät muun muassa liikkeen ja voiman metaforia kokemuksensa merkityksellistämiseen ja käsitteistämiseen, kun he haastattelutilanteessa konstruoivat itseään, muita ihmisiä ja tapahtumia kielikuvien avulla. Tutkittavat käyttivät vastakkaisia metaforia kuten free-strict ja metonyymejä sekä jossain määrin myös hyperbolaa kertoessaan vaihto- ja kotimaansa koulujen opetuksesta, yhteiskunnasta ja ihmisistä. Tutkimalla haastateltavien kerrontastrategioita sekä roolien ja positioiden diskursiivista rakentumista voitiin analysoida lähemmin kielikuvien osuutta kulttuurienvälisyyden kerronnassa. Analyysi osoitti, että vaihto- ja kotimaan vertailussa käytetyt kielikuvat rakentuivat vaihtomaan kannalta myönteisesti ja suotuisasti.
Abstrakt
Forskningen har visat hur vi använder figurativt språk i berättandets stund för att tolka och konceptualisera våra upplevelser. Syftet med denna fallstudie var att utforska metaforer, metonymer och hyperboler som växte fram i flödet av utbytesstuderandes skildringar av interkulturella upplevelser. Pragmatiska drag i talet, inklusive de som är specifika för lingua franca, analyserades i deltagarnas användning av figurativt språk. Forskningsmaterialet bestod av intervjuer med sydkoreanska utbytesstuderanden som studerade till ämneslärare. Dessa intervjuer gjordes i början och slutet av deras kortvariga utbytesperiod i Finland. I interjuerna var engelskan det gemensamma lingua franca för de intervjuade och intervjuaren. Resultatet av studien visar att de intervjuade bland annat använde rörelse och kraft för att tolka och konceptualisera sin upplevelse, då de i intervjusituationen konstruerade sig själva, andra människor och händelser med hjälp av figurativt språk. Deltagarna använde motsatta metaforer som free-strict och metonymer samt i viss mån hyperbol då de berättade om undervisningen i skolorna, samhället och människorna i utbytes- och hemlandet. Genom att studera deltagarnas berättarstrategier och den diskursiva konstruktionen av roller och positioner var det möjligt att mera i detalj analysera rollen av figurativt språk i berättandet av interkulturella upplevelser. Analysen visade att figurativt språk som användes i jämförelse mellan utbyteslandet och hemlandet var positivt och gynnsamt till utbyteslandets fördel.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to the exchange students who took part in this study. I also thank my supervisors Tarja Nikula-Jäntti and Nettie Boivin in University of Jyväskylä, and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback.
References
Alhasnawi, Sami. 2021. English as an Academic Lingua Franca: discourse hybridity and meaning multiplicity in an international Anglophone HE institution. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 10(1). 31–58. 10.1515/jelf-2021-2054Suche in Google Scholar
Bamberg, Michael. 2011. Who am I? Narration and its contribution to self and identity. Theory & Psychology 21(1). 3–24. 10.1177/0959354309355852Suche in Google Scholar
Beaven, Ana & Claudia Borghetti. 2016. Interculturality in study abroad. Language and Intercultural Communication 16(3). 313–317.10.1080/14708477.2016.1173893Suche in Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan. 2005. Discourse: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511610295Suche in Google Scholar
Burgers, Christian, Britta Brugman, Kiki Renardel de Lavalette & Gerald Steen. 2016. HIP: A method for hyperbole identification in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 31(3). 163–178. 10.1080/10926488.2016.1187041Suche in Google Scholar
Bäckman, Linda. 2017. ‘Second Generation?’ Language and identity among adults whose parents were migrants. PhD dissertation. Åbo: Åbo Akademi Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne. 2007. Patterns of metaphor use in reconciliation talk. Discourse and Society 18(2). 197–222. 10.1177/0957926507073376Suche in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne. 2008. Metaphor and talk. In Raymond Gibbs (ed.) The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 197–211. Cambridge: Cambridge University. 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.013Suche in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne. 2012. Metaphor in spoken discourse. In James Paul Gee & Michael Handford (eds.) The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis, 342–355. Abingdon: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne & Alice Deignan. 2003. Combining large and small corpora to investigate tuning devices around metaphor in spoken discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 18(3). 149–160.10.1207/S15327868MS1803_02Suche in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne, Robert Maslen & Graham Low. 2010. Finding systematicity in metaphor use. In Lynne Cameron & Robert Maslen (eds.) Metaphor analysis, 116–146. London: Equinox.Suche in Google Scholar
De Fina, Anna & Alexandra Georgakopoulou. 2012. Analyzing narrative: discourse and sociolinguistic perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139051255Suche in Google Scholar
Deignan, Alice, Jeannette Littlemore & Elena Semino. 2013. Figurative language, genre and register. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Dervin, Fred 2016. Interculturality in education: a theoretical and methodological toolbox. London: Palgrave.10.1057/978-1-137-54544-2Suche in Google Scholar
Duranti, Alessandro. 1997. Linguistic anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511810190Suche in Google Scholar
Fuoli, Matteo, Jeannette Littlemore & Sarah Turner. 2021. Sunken ships and screaming banshees: metaphor and evaluation in film reviews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/S1360674321000046Suche in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond & Lynne Cameron. 2008. The social-cognitive dynamics of metaphor performance. Cognitive Systems Research 9(1–2). 64–75.10.1016/j.cogsys.2007.06.008Suche in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond & Herbert Colston. 2012. Interpreting figurative meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139168779Suche in Google Scholar
Gumperz, John & Jenny Cook-Gumperz. 2007. Discourse, cultural diversity and communication: A linguistic anthropological perspective. In Helga Kotthoff & Helen Spencer-Oatey (eds.) Handbook of intercultural communication, 13–29. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110198584.1.13Suche in Google Scholar
Holliday, Adrian. 2017. PhD students, interculturality, reflexivity, community and internationalisation. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 38(3). 206–218.10.1080/01434632.2015.1134554Suche in Google Scholar
Hua, Zhu. 2015. Reconceptualising cultural membership and identities through translanguaging practice. In Fred Dervin & Karen Risager (eds.) Researching identity and interculturality, 109–124. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.Suche in Google Scholar
Jackson, Jane 2013. The transformation of “a frog in the well”: A path to a more intercultural, global mindset. In Celeste Kinginger (ed.) Social and cultural aspects of language learning in study abroad, 179–204. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.37.08jacSuche in Google Scholar
Johnson, Esko. 2021. ‘They are not very open to people’: How mobile students construct inter-culturality through metaphor and narrative. Language and Intercultural Communication 21(5). 588–601. 10.1080/14708477.2021.1931874Suche in Google Scholar
Johnson, Esko & Nina Hynynen. 2018. Student portfolios as windows into intercultural knowledge and knowing: A metaphor study. Intercultural Education 29(1). 89–102.10.1080/14675986.2017.1403834Suche in Google Scholar
Johnson, Esko, Heeok Heo, Klaus Reich, Irma Leppisaari & Okhwa Lee. 2015. Exploring Exchange Students’ Global Minds in a Study Abroad Project. Journal of Intercultural Communication 38. Available: https://immi.se/oldwebsite/nr38/heo.html (accessed 3 March 2023). Suche in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred. 2011. Figures of speech. In Jef Verschuren, Jan-Ola Östman & Jan Zienkowski (eds.) Discursive pragmatics, 102–118. Berlin: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hoph.8.06kieSuche in Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2007. Formulaic language in English lingua franca. In Istvan Kecskes & Laurence Horn (eds.) Explorations in pragmatics: Linguistic, cognitive and intercultural aspects, 191–219. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110198843.3.191Suche in Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltan. 2010. Metaphor. A practical introduction (2ndedn.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Suche in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Linell, Per. 2009. Rethinking language, mind, and world dialogically: Interactional and contextual theories of human sense-making. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Suche in Google Scholar
Littlemore, Jeannette. 2019. Metaphors in the mind: Sources of variation in embodied metaphor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108241441Suche in Google Scholar
Low, Graham. 1999. Validating Metaphor Research Projects. In Lynne Cameron & Graham Low (eds.) Researching and applying metaphor, 48–66. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524704.006Suche in Google Scholar
MacArthur, Fiona & Jeannette Littlemore. 2011. On the repetition of words with the potential for metaphoric extension in conversations between native and non-native speakers of English. Metaphor and the Social World 1(2). 201–238.10.1075/msw.1.2.05macSuche in Google Scholar
Martin, Judith, Thomas Nakayama & Donal Carbaugh. 2014. The history and development of the study of intercultural communication and applied linguistics. In Jane Jackson (ed.) The Routledge handbook of language and intercultural communication, 17–36. Abingdon: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar
Miyahara, Masuko. 2020. Sampling: problematizing the issue. In: Jim McKinley & Heath Rose (eds.) The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics, 52–63. Abingdon: Routledge.10.4324/9780367824471-5Suche in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia. 2008. Metaphors dead and alive, sleeping and waking. A dynamic view. London: University of Chigago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226548265.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal. 2001. Discourse and semantics. In Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen & Heidi Hamilton (eds.) The handbook of discourse analysis, 76–99. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470753460.ch5Suche in Google Scholar
Patton, Michael. 2002. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. 3rd ed. London: Sage.Suche in Google Scholar
Pitzl, Marie-Luise. 2012. Creativity meets convention: idiom variation and re‑metaphorization in ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 1(1). 27–55.10.1515/jelf-2012-0003Suche in Google Scholar
Piller, Ingrid. 2012. Intercultural Communication: An Overview. In: Christina Paulston, Scott Kiesling, & Elizabeth Rangel (eds.) The handbook of intercultural discourse and communication, 3–18. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118247273.ch1Suche in Google Scholar
Pragglejaz Group. 2007. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22(1). 1–40.10.1080/10926480709336752Suche in Google Scholar
Risager, Karen & Fred Dervin. 2015. Introduction. In Fred Dervin & Karen Risager (eds.) Researching identity and interculturality, 1–24. New York, NY: Routledge. Suche in Google Scholar
Sarangi, Srikant. 1994. Intercultural or not? Beyond celebration of cultural differences in miscommunication analysis. Pragmatics 4(3). 409–427.10.1075/prag.4.3.05sarSuche in Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrike. 2015. Society and culture as CONTAINER: (Re)drawing borders and their metaphorical foundation from a communicative and extracommunicative point of view. International Journal of Language & Culture 2(1). 38–61.10.1075/ijolc.2.1.02schSuche in Google Scholar
Semino, Elena. 2008. Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511816802.015Suche in Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 2009. Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse (2nd edn.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun. 2016. Discourse and knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Appendix 1
Transcription conventions
italics figurative expressioncomma (,) continuing intonation contour; a slight rise[ ] overlapping talk“@” laughter“-” truncated word“?” rising intonation contour; an appeal i. e. the speaker seeks validation from the listenerpauses: “..” a micro pause“(- -) ” back-channelling omittedunderlining_____________: emphasis
Appendix 2
Examples of themes addressed and questions asked in the mobility interviews
What emotions and images do you have about things, people and yourself, now that you are starting the exchange? (first interview)
In what way do you think (you will) interact and communicate with the locals, international students and your own people/countrymen? (first interview)
What do you want to study in the host country? (first interview)
Who did you interact and communicate with in your study and during your free time? (second interview)
How do you describe your own beliefs about culture, the host context and different academic cultures? (second interview)
How have your views about education changed? (second interview)
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Frontmatter
- Problems of children’s involvement in interpreter-mediated meetings between their teachers and their parents
- A lexical-cognitive approach to the consequences of the coronavirus crisis for the emotions and perceptions of the Spanish population aged 65 and over
- Family language policy in Swedish-English families: Rhizomatic conceptualisations
- A case study examining the Turkish language skills of bilingual children according to adverse teaching conditions
- L2 Polish developmental sequences in an intercomprehension context
- Figurative language and ‘doing interculturality’ in a lingua franca
- School Trajectory of Elementary Newcomer Students: Early Tracking System and Norm Accommodation
- How I live [participate] now: Re-negotiating social belonging and linguistic participation in book-group discussions
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Frontmatter
- Problems of children’s involvement in interpreter-mediated meetings between their teachers and their parents
- A lexical-cognitive approach to the consequences of the coronavirus crisis for the emotions and perceptions of the Spanish population aged 65 and over
- Family language policy in Swedish-English families: Rhizomatic conceptualisations
- A case study examining the Turkish language skills of bilingual children according to adverse teaching conditions
- L2 Polish developmental sequences in an intercomprehension context
- Figurative language and ‘doing interculturality’ in a lingua franca
- School Trajectory of Elementary Newcomer Students: Early Tracking System and Norm Accommodation
- How I live [participate] now: Re-negotiating social belonging and linguistic participation in book-group discussions
