2 Masculinity and Metaphor: An Approach to Analysis 31
CHAPTER TWO Masculinity and Metaphor An Approach to Analysis There may even be reason for believing, if we can learn from frogs in this regard, that what our ears, eyes, mouths are really telling our brains—or what the brain finally understands from what it is told— about the bloom and buzz of experience is the essential qualitative pat- tern of potency, activity, and goodness (edibility) of the things which catch our attention. James W. Fernandez, Persuasions and Performances Masculinity Theory n this chapter I will introduce some of the basic ideas of masculinity theory and propose a model of social space developed in the field of cognitive anthropology as helpful ways to analyze the function of the figurative language in Hosea. Masculinity theory is useful for analyzing both the imagery that is obviously related to gender and that which is not, because the majority of figurative language in Hosea reflects an un- derstanding of masculinity similar to the language directly addressing gender. Both types of imagery rhetorically move the audience in the same directions. In order to analyze both the gender and non-gender imagery and their relation to the construction of masculinity in the text, I will uti- lize the model of anthropologist James Fernandez. His studies explore how societies use metaphorical language to establish, maintain, and change identities and relationships within a particular social setting.1 Us- ing information from computational linguistics, he has developed a mod- el that can evaluate the movements metaphors cause along the axes of...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.