1.3 The theoretical framework:A caveat

It is widely acceptable that a scientific research is more likely to bear fruit if it is well supported by a proper theory.It is also true of a metaphor study from a perspective of teaching with English as a foreign language （EFL）.Unfortunately, however, it is a widespread belief that to do a theoretical work on metaphor is by no means an easy job（Searle 1998:101; Murphy 1996:175）.When one gets ready, as comprehensively and thoroughly as possible, to reveal the ins and outs of this initially seemingly simple and oftentaken-for-granted linguistic phenomenon, he might well be lost in a maze and consequently feels at a loss as to where to get started and which theory about it he should follow.This is because what he faces now is a kaleidoscope of metaphor theories generated in the fields such as philosophy, psychology, linguistics, sociology, to name just a few.As Gibbs（2001:29-30）points out, the voluminous publications will intimate scholars from taking the plunge into the murky waters of metaphor research.

Precisely knowing the difficulty of doing research in metaphor from a theoretical approach, the present study, to divorce from the possible pitfalls, intends to address the issue from a practical and pedagogical perspective.In other words, its interest lies in finding out which theory, or theories, among others can be effectively used to guide metaphor study in EFL field, since such a theory is urgently needed after a close examination of the relevant literature about FLTL study.

As is demonstrated in the previous sections, a plethora of metaphor theories have to date been presented from different perspectives.It is impossible and inadvisable for the present researcher to make a meticulous analysis of each theory and then to come up with one that is effective at studying metaphor in FLTL research.Therefore, this research will confine itself to the two most influential theories in history:the classical metaphor theory represented by Aristotle and the contemporary one by Lakoff &Johnson（henceforth Lakoff for convenience）, leaving the others untouched as far as possible unless they will have to be mentioned in passing.Aristotle and Lakoff are chosen mainly for two reasons.One is concerned with their prominent and unique, and more importantly, hardly comparable positions they two have occupied in the history of metaphor research.Their views are considered to be more powerful and representative than others.Their respective unparalleled contributions to metaphor study are expressly laid bare in the forthcoming statement.

“In the beginning there was Aristotle.Then there were the Dark Ages, which lasted until 1980.And then there was Lakoff.There was a Johnson too.But the historian who is after sweeping statements has to be selective.So first it's Aristotle, then Lakoff”.

（Steen 2000:261）

The other is that metaphor teaching in both native and foreign languages so far have followed mainly the theoretical lines established by them, as is discussed in the reviews of many researches.