1.2 Need for the study

As is stated in the above section, relatively little empirical research into metaphor has been conducted from the perspective of foreign language teaching and learning.However, with the rise and spread of cognitive linguistics, recently some researchers come to realize the importance of metaphor in language learning.In a sense, the realization of the importance mainly derives from some researchers'awareness of the pervasiveness of metaphor in everyday language.For example, it is found that about six metaphors turn up every minute in ordinary conversations（Kellerman 1998:1）and most English speakers utter about 10 million novel metaphors per lifetime（Cooper 1999:233）.Realization of this high frequency makes understanding and utilization of metaphor an essential part of language learning.Consequently, researchers, as Johnson（1994:455）implies, very likely enlightened by Chomsky's linguistic competence（1965）and Hymes' communicative competence （1971）, advanced another similar term, metaphorical competence （Danesi 1986,1994; Johnson 1994; Low 1988; Littlemore 2001b;Deignan et al 1997:523）, aiming to stress the importance of metaphor in language teaching and learning. Metaphorical competence is believed to be a competence both for native speakers and foreign language learners.It is regarded to be more important for advanced learners if they are to attain a level of language proficiency in, for example, English, that will equip them for professional lives that require a high level of language awareness, knowledge, understanding and resourcefulness（Bailey 2003:6）. Danesi（1994:462）, in studying metaphor research and the teaching of Italian（native language）, emphasizes the importance of metaphor learning for native Italians, saying that“to ignore metaphor is to ignore a large segment of the（Italian）nativespeaker's competence”.And he（1986:9）also points out that“the ability to‘metaphorize'in a second language is the true sign that the learner has developed L2 communicative competence”, because if people were limited to strictly literal language, communication would be severely curtailed, if not terminated（Johnson 1994:456）. Ponterotto（1994）holds a similar view that“one of the many problems in the teaching and learning of a foreign language is the acquisition of competence in the area of figurative language”, believing that the ability to grasp metaphorical expressions is considered to be characteristic of advanced stages of language competence.

However, metaphor is omnipresent in language and metaphorical language is hard not only for native speakers but also for foreign language learners（Cooper 1999; Bennett 1994；Buchwald 2000; Wu 2003; Boers 2003）.In exploring foreign language learners'problems in understanding English university lectures, Littlemore（2001c:338）shows that over 90% of areas of difficulty could be described as metaphorical.Danesi（1994:453-458）points out that learners, even after several years of study, have not mastered metaphorical language, which results in unnaturalness in their speech.Danesi suggests that the main reason is not that learners are incapable of learning metaphor, but more likely that they have never been exposed in formal ways to the conceptual system of the target language and culture.Difficult as it is, teachers and learners must be prepared to meet the challenge. Rare but not come singly, Johnson（1996:237）, a prominent figure in cognitive linguistics, considerably strengthens the previous idea, claiming that figurative language1should be the primary focus of L2 learning, and that teachers and materials should not avoid metaphor in early learning.

Nevertheless, in practice, metaphor has not been given sufficient attention in the field of language teaching and learning, FLTL field in particular, for some reasons or other.One of the reasons the present research comes to be aware of is concerned with most language teaching practitioners'inadequate understanding of the nature of metaphor2.This is because metaphor has long been viewed, along the traditional line, as a purely linguistic phenomenon, which is regarded as j ust being nice and ornamental in nature, with its cognitive orientation and foundation unknown or neglected.Possibly for this reason and the difficulty of summarizing the connotative meanings of words, “Most textbooks skirt the issue of figurativeness and concentrate on the denotative aspects of language.Although some idiomatic phrases are usually included in first-level coursebooks, they are usually presented as exceptions to the rule, things to be learned very often as fixed expressions and to be used in specific contextual situations.In later phases, work on figurativeness is suggested through reading and vocabulary building exercises, and students are often referred to specialized learner dictionaries of idioms, phrasal verbs, etc..It is common that intensive work on the figurative use of language is left to courses on literature, and metaphor especially is tackled through the presentation of literary texts”（Ponterotto 1994）.This is the general situation of metaphor teaching and learning worldwide.

The previously discussed phenomenon, i.e., lack of knowledge of relevant theory on the part of language teachers, is not uncommon for foreign language teaching and learning and it is even more difficult and challenging to avert its direction in Chinese context, due to its unique features and the status quo of the practitioners （Yang 1999:420-427）.To fully clarify it, we will delineate briefly the current situation of Chinese foreign language teachers.More specifically, and generally, there are three sorts of attitude among Chinese teaching practitioners towards importance and utilization of relevant theories in classroom teaching.Firstly, influenced by traditional views, many, if not all, Chinese teaching practitioners are neglectful and oblivious of the role and necessity of the relevant theories in language teaching practice.Foreign language teaching is often seen as an activity only involving“mouth and ear”, a technique requiring no theoretical guidance.Rather it is a craftsmanship which needs only artistic skills.Opposite to this fact is a dogged and relentless pursuit of any new breakthroughs in theory and a timely and blind adoption of them.In fact, this characterizes language teaching worldwide, because“The field of language teaching is always keen on developing the pedagogical implications of theoretical linguistics”（White 2003: 147）. Admittedly, however, many, if not all, of these followers are deficient in distinguishing the merits and demerits of different schools of theories and the applicability of them in language teaching context.They blindly believe in and adhere to paradigm shifts and scientific revolutions in the field（Yang 1999）.These blind followers, as American scientist Kuhn describes with a metaphor, tend to use the new paradigm like a foreigner in an unfamiliar land, forever struggling with the new categories, new terms, materials, theories and shifts in significance, since they find that a new model seems simpler, more elegant, or more attractive than the old（Willis & Willis 2002:8）3.Thirdly, there are also some practitioners who, for some known reasons of their working reality, on the one hand, believe in the usefulness of relevant theories, and on the other, feel at loss as to how to specifically operationalize them in classroom teaching practice.In other words, what they lack is the concrete and effective techniques that can be used in classroom teaching.This general situation is even truer of metaphor teaching in foreign languages.

Consequently, the central, perhaps thorny problems for foreign language teaching research, particularly metaphor research, for the time being are correspondingly three-folded.Firstly, practitioners should arrive at an adequate and deep understanding of the relevant theories, thus making an appropriate use of them in classroom teaching. Specifically, for metaphor teaching in particular, they should broaden their knowledge about the different kinds of metaphor theory, at least acquire some knowledge about Aristotle and Lakoff's metaphor theories since the two, as will be discussed in the next chapter, are the most influential.Secondly, practitioners should be well aware of the real nature of foreign language teaching（FLT）.As a discipline with special features, FLT is currently considered to be strongly influenced by eclecticism （Yang 1999）.Therefore, it is suggested that contributions from other fields such as philosophy, psychology, linguistics and possibly cognitive sciences as well can be eclectically and integratively adopted to facilitate teaching instead of favoring one at the cost of another（Block 2001; Cook & Seidlhofer 2000:7）.In addition, foreign language teaching is contemporarily believed to be more like a theory consumer rather than a theory creator, and no dramatic and paradigm shifts or revolutions are unlikely to take place（ibid.）, so researchers and practitioners are not expected to spare no efforts to create absolutely new theory as a guidance.To sum up, the selection and application of theories should, to the present researcher, be conducted to cater for the philosophy and the intrinsic features of foreign language teaching. Thirdly, practitioners are currently expected to devote time and energy to generating effective techniques for classroom teaching rather than developing theories.

Therefore, it seems urgent currently for metaphor practitioners to be well equipped with a theoretical knowledge of metaphor, which can suitably guide real teaching practice effectively.The present research ventures to take it as one of its principal tasks.In other words, it will first try, based on a review of the two most influential theories by Aristotle and Lakoff & Johnson, to give a working definition of metaphor for applied linguistic study, hoping it will benefit metaphor teaching and learning with English as a foreign language.A caveat of the theoretical framework adopted in this research seems quite necessary before the actual analysis.