Relying on linguistic components in its conceptual/visual nature, a metaphor is a fundamental mechanism for thinking and a novel method for meaning transfer. A conceptual metaphor represents a subjective process in which abstract concepts are perceived through more objective/experiential dimensions. As a more tangible reflection, a visual metaphor transforms an image into an independent, interpretable medium within a linguistic context with diverse references, e.g., Shahnameh commentaries, playing a pivotal role in representing people’s lived emotional experiences, including feasts, battles, and grief. However, these concepts are not merely extrinsic, narrative events in vast epic contexts known as a rich treasure of symbols and actions. Rather, they represent people’s emotional manifestation and intrinsic, cognitive experiences, acting as semantic-visual structures that convey rich metaphorical layers. Within tragic events, a feast apparently reflects intrinsic peace and joy as extrinsic happiness, whereas a battle is a metaphor of people’s intrinsic struggles, manifesting an extrinsic fight. Furthermore, grief indicates an emotional, cognitive perception of life’s absence and impermanence. Therefore, the analysis of these concepts based on the theoretical frameworks of conceptual and visual metaphors, along with the analysis of their cognitive functions, seeks the quality of their representation in literature and Shahnameh commentaries through metaphorical dimensions and semantic oppositions. The aim is to identify different types of semantic oppositions, provide processing solutions, and match them with metaphorical cognitive functions in proportion to the concepts of feast, battle, and grief. Hence, a comparative content analysis was conducted qualitatively through a desk method to describe the intended dimensions. As per findings, the visual/narrative analysis of the three concepts in Shahnameh included explicating different types of semantic oppositions (absolute, gradable, directional, and complementary) at metaphorical levels. It also included observing the relationships between conceptual metaphors (structural, ontological, and directional) and visual metaphors (path, container, and force schemas). |
