Aristotle’s mimesis metaphorike: between semantic universality and ontological determinateness

Graziella Travaglini

Graziella Travaglini

Parole chiave: Metaphor, Aristotle, Mimesis, Form of Sensibility, Unity by analogy

Abstract

Aristotle’s theory of metaphor is still considered one of the most relevant points of reference in the study of this particular kind of language. In this article the definitions of metaphor which are contained in his treaties on Rhetoric and Poetics are analysed and interpreted epistemologically and ontologically with reference to Aristotle’s theory of the soul.
In the Rhetoric Aristotle defines the metaphor as «putting things before the eyes» (pro ommaton poiein), since a property of metaphors is to link the production of meaning to a sensible, pictorial or iconic quality. To account for the meaning of the exhibition of a sensible or iconic component, I will make reference to the doctrines of koine aisthesis and phantasia, as defined in the De Anima. Here the philosopher highlights a primary perceptive and pre-linguistic recognition of the object, which organises the formation of concepts. This means that the formation of a unitary condition is still fluid, “undetermined” (in epistemological rather than ontological sense) and approximate, and precedes the categories of language. The unitary condition emerges from the sensible forms, which the soul receives adhering to the worldly order, and which the soul will employ in the formation of certain meanings.
What matters is that a precondition for linguistic conceptualisation is a predisposition to meaning-production, which belongs to the sphere of sensibility. Through the activities of articulation, determination and dissection, language expresses the primary unitary conditions of experience.
Insofar as the categories are fundamental modes of predication, they are ruled by these primary perceptive configurations. Scientific language builds a system of axioms and definitions that determine how ordinary language can articulate this objectification. However, the pre-categorial unity of soul and sensible nature still persists inside scientific language and reveals its presence if the procedures of definition and objectification are considered from different linguistic perspectives.

Riferimenti bibliografici

ARISTOTLE’s works

De Anima, transl. by R. D. Hicks (1907), Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Generation of animals, transl. by A. L. Peck (1949), Harvard Univeristy Press, Cambridge.

Poetica, transl. by P. Donini (1996), Einaudi, Torino.

Poetics, transl. by S. Halliwell (1995), Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Posterior Analytics, transl. by H. Tredennick (1960), Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Metaphysics, transl. by W. D. Ross (1924), Clarendon Press, Oxford.

On Interpretation, transl. by A. P. Cooke (1938), Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

The “art” of Rhethoric, transl. by J. H. Freese (1926), Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Topics, transl. by E. S. Forster (1960), Harward University Press, Cambridge.

Other works

ARBIB, Michael Anthony; HESSE, Mary B. (1986), The construction of Reality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

AUBENQUE, Pierre (1962), Le problème de l’être chez Aristote, PUF, Paris.

CALBOLI, Gualtiero (2005), La metafora tra Aristotele e Cicerone, e oltre, in A. M. Lorusso [ed. by], Metafora e conoscenza, Bompiani, Milano, pp. 87-118.

CALBOLI-MONTEFUSCO, Lucia (2004), Le fondament logique de la métaphore selon Aristote, in M. S. Celentano, P. Chiron, M. P. Noël [ed. by] Skhèma/Figura. Formes et figures chez les Anciens, Edizioni Rue d’Ulm, Paris, p. 115-27.

CARIATI, Salvatore; CICERO, Vincenzo (1992), To metaphorikon, Corbo Editore, Ferrara.

CAZZULLO, Anna (1987), La verità della parola, Jaca Book, Milano.

DALIMIER, Catherine (2004), L’usage scientifique de la métaphore chez Aristote, in Skhéma/Figura. Formes et figures chez les Anciens, pp. 127-41.

DERRIDA, Jacques (1972), Marges – de la philosophie, Minuit, Paris.

GUASTINI, Daniele (2003), Prima dell’estetica. Poetica e filosofia nell’antichità, Laterza, Roma-Bari.

GUASTINI, Daniele (2005), «Aristotele e la metafora: ovvero un elogio dell’approssimazione», in Isonomia. http://www.uniurb.it/Filosofia/isonomia/guastini/guastini2004.pdf

HAMLYN, David Walter (1968), Aristotle’s De Anima Book II and III, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

HEIDEGGER, Martin (1957), Der Satz vom Grund, Verlag Gunther Neske, Pfullingen.

LO PIPARO, Franco (2003), Aristotele e il linguaggio, Laterza, Roma-Bari.

LUCCHETTA, Giulio Abelardo (1990), Scienza e retorica in Aristotele, Il Mulino, Bologna.

MANETTI, Giovanni (2005), Aristotele e la metafora, in A. M. Lorusso [ed. by], Metafora e conoscenza, Bompiani, Milano, pp. 27-68.

MELANDRI, Enzo (1968), La linea e il circolo, il Mulino, Bologna.

MONOD, Jean-Claude. (2007), «La mise en question contemporaine du paradigme aristotélicien – et ses limites», in Archives de Philosophie, IV, n. 70, pp. 535-58.

MORPURGO-TAGLIABUE, Guido (1967), Linguistica e stilistica di Aristotele, Edizioni dell’Ateneo, Roma.

ORTONY, Andrew (1993), Metaphor, language, and thought, in id. Metaphor and thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

PIANA, Giovanni (1966), I problemi della fenomenologia, Mondadori, Milano.

RICHARDS, Ivor Armstrong, (1936), The Philosophy of Rhetoric, Oxford University Press, New York.

RICŒUR, Paul (1975), La métaphore vive, Ed. du Seuil, Paris.

RICŒUR, Paul (1978), «The Metaphorical Process as Cognition, Imagination and Feeling», in Critical Inquiry, V, n.1, pp. 144-59.

RICŒUR, Paul (2002), Cinque lezioni. Dal linguaggio all’immagine, Centro Internazionale Studi di Estetica, Palermo.

SORABJI, Richard (1992), Intentionality and Physiological Processes: Aristotle’s Theory of a Sense-Perception, in M. C. Nussbaum; A. OKSENBERG RORTY [ed. by], Essais on Aristotle’s «De Anima», Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 195-27.

TRAVAGLINI, Graziella (2009), Vedere il simile. La metafora l’anima e le cose in Aristotele, ETS, Pisa.

WIELAND, Wolfgang (1962), Die Aristotelische Physik. Untersuchungen über die Grundlegung der Naturwissenschaft und die sprachlichen Bedingungen der Prinzipienforschung bei Aristoteles, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen.