CC BY
2фнЛОЛОГНА,ЛННГБНСТНКЛ
104
Мороз Ю.А.
Кандидат философских наук, доцент. Севастопольский государственный университет.
Гакало А.А.
Преподаватель. Севастопольский государственный университет.
Шувалова А.А.
Студент. Севастопольский государственный университет.
О (не)переводимости метафоры с точки зрения некоторых испанских, французских и каталонских выражений и фразеологизмов*
Yiri A.M.
Associate Professor. Sevastopol State University.
Aleksei A.G.
Teacher. Sevastopol State University.
Anastasia A.S.
Student. Sevastopol State University.
About the (un)translatability of metaphor in the perspective of some Spanish, French and Catalan locutions and Phraseological units
1. AIMS
In a globalized world, both second language learning and translation are gaining in importance. On the other hand, the difficulty of translation does not diminish, especially the translation of figurative meanings, since metaphor reflects a conception of the world and metaphorical uses of grammatical categories occur at the syntagmatic level. Consequently, the translator's task is to ensure
© Мороз Ю.А., Гакало А.А., Шувалова А.А., 2023.
that the figurative meaning of a word in the source language corresponds to its equivalent in the target language.
As a consequence, our aim is to demonstrate, firstly, that the (un)translatabil-ity of metaphor lies in the fact that the source language and the target language conceptualize the surrounding world differently, as evidenced by metaphysical phraseological units; secondly, that translation is a process, not a linguistic substitution, so that the dichotomy of literality vs. iliterality has to be overcome. To prove this, after outlining the theoretical model of metaphor in cognitive semantics, we study a corpus composed of locutions and metaphorical phraseological units around the human body (nose and ear).
2. APPROACH TO THE TRANSLATABILITY OF METAPHOR
It is as a result of the monograph by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson that the belief that metaphor was restricted to formal registers was discarded, while it gained relevance in the nascent cognitive linguistics, a discipline in which metaphor is understood as a mental process of conceptualization by means of which a concept is projected from one conceptual domain (the source domain) to another (the target domain), so that we apprehend one reality in terms of another.
Since metaphors are facts of thought, they shape the common language, and hence the conceptual system of natural languages will be basically metaphorical. In this respect, the words of George Lakoff and Mark Turner are instructive: "Great poets can speak to us because they use the modes of thought we all possess to understand the nature and value of poetic creativity requires us to understand the ordinary ways we think".
In addition to the fact that the projection of information from one domain to another is partial, the unidirectionality of the metaphor from the concrete to the abstract should be noted. Similarly, the projection from one domain to another is conditioned by the fact that metaphor relates analogically similar - and not identical - entities, and that the subclass of conceptual images that Mark Johnson called 'schematic images' result from bodily interaction with the environment and from the abstraction of underlying patterns in the human conceptual system. Related to schematic imagery, the invariance hypothesis postulates that metaphorical projection respects schematic imagery between the two domains.
In turn, as Lakoff pointed out, the concept of projection is manifested in a series of correspondences between the two domains subdivided into ontologi-cal correspondences, whose task is to highlight the analogical links between the source and target domains; and epistemic correspondences, which represent the knowledge imported from the source domain to the target domain. Metaphor has been classified into conceptual metaphor and image metaphor. The former is a cognitive template that provides the linguistic system with a series of metaphorical expressions belonging to different semantic fields; the latter projects the
external structure of one image onto another.
Another precision concerns metaphorical expression and conceptual metaphor. The former registers abstract schemas ("people are animals"); the latter concretizes a conceptual metaphor ("the very pig does not wash"). As for the image metaphor, for George Lakoff it must not belong to a metaphorical system, which would not explain the computer voice mouse.
After the preceding exposition, we will now consider the main contributions of the authors who have studied the translation of metaphors. Firstly, Menachem Dagut rejects the untranslatability (or inequivalence) of metaphor and word-forword translation, since metaphor is translatable insofar as the translator questions the function of the metaphor in the source language and looks for another equivalent metaphor in the target language -if it does not exist, it would be plausible to invent it. For his part, Peter Newmark proposes a classification of metaphors and solutions to the problems they pose, without rejecting literal translation.
Secondly, in the opinion of K. Mason, it is sometimes not possible to produce an effect on the target reader similar to that generated in the original reader. He agrees with Dagut that, on the one hand, the context in which the metaphor is inserted and, on the other, the purpose of the translation are essential. For Mason, based on the criterion of untranslatability, based not on the metaphor but on cultural differentiation, metaphors can be classified into directly translatable metaphors (notions of space and time); directly translatable metaphors whose effect in the target language differs from that of the source language; and directly untranslatable metaphors.
Menachem Dagut again stresses the linguistic uniqueness of metaphor, so that it would not be feasible to translate metaphor word for word because metaphor does not enjoy the same acceptance in all languages. Unlike Mason, he rejects annotated translation, since annotation would give the translation an ethnographic character, and advocates a translation theory of metaphor.
Thirdly, Mosche Azar's classification of metaphor rests not on the trait of untranslatability, but on the type of metaphor, which he describes as pure and impure. A supporter of literal translation, he considers that it is possible to be pure metaphor, not 'contaminated' by the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural context. However, impure metaphors are more frequent.
Fourthly, according to Rosa Rabadán, "the concept of equivalence is the defining property of translation". However, inequivalence is not synonymous with untranslatability, since "translation understood as intercultural communication is always possible, but not everything is translatable". Regarding inequivalence, he divides it into that derived from linguistic issues (linguistic variation, polysemy, homonymy, ambiguity and metaphor) and extra-linguistic ones (subordinate translation, areas of knowledge) and that which results from the limits of knowledge: languages are not translated, but cultures.
Rabadán takes up Dagut's classification of metaphor and considers novel meta-
phors, which respond to the idiosyncrasy of the author and to cultural issues, and traditional metaphors, some of which have a marked cultural background. In Spanish, bullfighting is applied figuratively to other fields, as in the phraseological units "estar hecho un toro", "soltarle a uno el toro", "hay toros y cañas", "coger el toro por los cuernos"....In French, the expansion of this semantic field is more limited, although the phraseological unit "prendre le taureau par les cornes" is a difficult one.
Also important is the discourse of Gideon Toury, who stresses how the problem of metaphor merges into a source-oriented perspective. Moreover, in traditional procedures, each metaphor is taken as an isolated example rather than as part of an organized whole concerning certain types of behavior in certain circumstances. This often leads to considering the metaphor problem in terms of segments to be replaced. It should be added that in a source-oriented perspective it is not always possible to be sure that the metaphor can be considered as a unit, since the substitution of the item in the target text may occur with some added elements. The perspective changes if a 'target-oriented' orientation is adopted, which makes it possible to arrive at explanatory hypotheses.
To conclude this section, other metaphysical concepts do not structure one concept in terms of another, but organize a system of concepts in terms of another. These are the structural or orientation metaphors linked to space, such as «lo bueno está arriba; lo malo, abajo» (esp. «bajar alguien las orejas»; fr. «baisser, les yeux, o le nez»; cat. «abaixar, el cap, o la cresta»), "lo consciente está delante; lo inconsciente, detrás" (esp. "saltar a los ojos una cosa"; fr. "sauter aux yeux o taper dans l'oeil o être, o se voir, comme le nez au milieu de la figure"; and cat. "saltar als ulls").
Orientation metaphors cross cultural domains in the sense that they belong partly to the source domain and partly to the target domain. In this way, each metaphorical structure identifies correspondences between elements of both domains, which is in line with the principle that "metaphorical mappings preserve the cognitive topology (that is, the image-schema structure) of the source domain, in a way consistent with the inherent structure of the target domain" (Lakoff 1993: 215).
3. CORPUS ANALYSIS
3.1. The nose
3.1.1. Idea of curiosity
In the three languages studied, due to the similar apprehension of the surrounding world, the nose connotes the idea that "the nose is a prominent object" with which we intrude into what is not ours with the verbs "asomar" and "meter" (Spanish); "pointer" or "fourrer" (French); and "ficar" and "treure" in the meaning "Fer sortir (una part del seu cos) per una obertura". (Catalan). The latter language alternates the voice nas with cap in "treure, el nas, o el cap, per algun lloc", while expressing the idea of 'dissimulation' in "treure el nas per un forat" 'to look without letting oneself be seen'. For its part, French suggests 'dissimulation' with
the word "bout": "montrer (le bout de) son nez".
3.1.2. Idea of clash
Because of its prominence, the nose can be the motor of metaphorical creations around 'clash' ("la nariz es un objeto prominente que choca"). This idea is found in the phraseological units of esp. "dar, o darse, de narices" and cat. "topar, o anar a petar, de morros". In French, the idea of 'collision' is expressed in the phraseological unit "se trouver nez à nez avec qqn" (cf. cat. "topar nas a nas"). Note the lexical plurality of the French equivalent of "da, o darse, de narices", fr. "se casser, la figure, o les dents, o la gueule" (cf. cat. "trencarse el nas"). Underlying all this is the metaphor "the nose is a prominent fragile object that clashes with the risk of breaking". Another French phraseological unit equivalent to "dar, o darse, de narices" is "rester le bec dans l'eau", which expresses the fact of not getting anything.
Finally, the idea of 'confrontation' can lead to the domination of someone: esp. "tener a alguien agarrado por las narices"; and fr. "mener qqn par le bout du nez". Unlike the aforementioned languages, Catalan uses the words puny and baldufa: "tenir algú dins del puny" and "fer ballar algú com una baldufa".
3.1.3. Idea of perception
As the nose is a sensory organ, some phraseological units express the idea of 'knowledge' and 'perception'.
As the nose is a sensory organ, some phraseological units express the idea of 'knowledge' and 'perception'. Let us take a look at "to give a person a thing in the nose" and "to have, long noses, or retriever's noses". If we look at their equivalents in French and Catalan, both languages use a term from the semantic field of 'smell'. Indeed, "le flair" (cat. "flaire" 'smell') designates the sense of smell of an animal (the dog) and, figuratively, 'perspicacity' and 'discernment': fr. "flairer qqch", "avoir du nez" or "avoir le nez, fin, o creux"; cat. "tenir, nassada, o fums" . In this respect, French and Catalan use the verbs avoir, tenir and sentir, respectively: "avoir du nez" and "tenir nas"; "avoir du flair" and "sentir de nas". Finally, the degree of 'perspicacia' and 'discernment' is qualified in esp. and fr. with adjectives: "tener, largas narices" and "avoir le nez, fin, o creux".
As for «no ver una persona más allá de sus narices» (not to see a person beyond his nose), the lexical correspondence with French and Catalan is almost complete, as we have in Fr. "ne pas regarder, or voir, plus loin que le bout de son nez" and in Cat. But French also makes use of an element deeply rooted in French culinary tradition, "le saucisson": "avoir des peaux de saucisson devant les yeux". In the case of Spanish and Catalan, the words 'venda' and 'bena' are used: 'tener una venda en los ojos' and 'tenir una bena als ulls'.
Ultimately, the idea of 'perception' may be unpleasant, so that all three languages suggest 'displeasure' in a perceptible way with the following verb forms: esp. "torcer alguien las narices"; fr. "tordre le nez o faire, un long nez, o un drôle de nez"; and cat. "arrufar el nas".
3.1.4. Idea of discomfort
The nose metaphorises the idea of 'anger' and 'contempt' because of the metaphor "lo bueno está arriba; lo malo, abajo", although in French, the voice head ("en avoir par dessus la tête") and back ("en avoir plein le dos")6 , and in Catalan, neck ("estar fins al coll"), are used to emphasise the 'unbearability' of a situation. If we pay attention to the aforementioned phraseological units, we could be tempted to identify that "the bad is at the top". However, the underlying metaphor is "what is full is heavy or excessive; what is empty is light", so that the nose (or the eye: esp. "up to the eyes"; fr., "jusqu'aux yeux", and cat. "estar d'una cosa fins als als ulls"), as a protruding object of the body that marks a limit ("up to", "fins"; "par dessus") measures (vertically) the degree of 'discomfort' of a situation in our body.
The idea of 'discomfort' is expressed figuratively with verbs suggesting a 'progression', such as "hinchar", "monter" and "pujar" in "hinchársele a alguien las narices", "la moutarde lui monte au nez" and "pujarli a algú la mosca al nas", because of the respiratory difficulty caused by the mustard and the fly. In Spanish, smoke is used: "subírsele a uno el humo a las narices".
Similarly, the nose expresses 'discomfort' in "tener a alguien montado en las narices" (Spanish) and "avoir qqn dans le nez" (French). The same meaning appears in the Gallic verb "sentir" and "piffer" (derived from "pif", a colloquial synonym for "nez") in "je ne peux pas, le sentir, o le piffer". In Spanish and Catalan one can say "tener a alguien, entre cejas, o entre ceja y ceja "7 (cf. "entre ojos") and "posarseli algú entre cella i cella"; "tener sentado a alguien en la boca del estómago" and "no poder pair algú", mentioning the figurative indigestion that antipathy towards someone causes in one.
Finally, the phraseological units esp. "tener narices", fr. "avoir du culot" and cat. "tenir nassos" express 'annoyance', with the possibility of emphasising it with numerical determiners (esp. "tener tres pares de narices"). As regards its application to a thing, the word nose can be replaced by the adjective strong in esp. "ser fuerte", fr. "être un peu fort" and cat. "ser fort". In French the word "culot" means "Lower part of some objects" and its use with the figurative sense of 'cheekiness', for the idea of a strong base, of a certain solidity and poise, goes back to the end of the 19th century.
3.1.5. Idea of convergence and reception
As we saw in the idea of 'curiosity', as the nose is "a prominent object", it metaphorically designates the 'point of reception' of external manifestations. An example of this would be «reírse en, mis, tus, sus, etc., propias narices», equivalent to fr. "rire, au nez de qqn, o sous le nez" (emphatically, "rire au nez et à la barbe") and to cat. «riure als nassos de algú». At the same time, the nose plays metaphorically the role of 'receptacle' (of blows) in esp. "romperle a alguien las narices", fr. "casser, le nez, o la gueule, o la figure, de qqn" and cat. "inflar els morros a algú".
To conclude this point, we bring up the phraseological units of esp. "pasar, o
restregar, una cosa a una persona por las narices"; fr. "jeter, à la figure, o au visage, o au nez"; and cat. "clavar, o tirar, o fer petar, per la cara", which express the idea of how the nose figuratively acts as a receptacle for the haughtiness of another person.
3.2. The ear
3.2.1. Idea of curiosity and perception
The idea of 'curiosity' and 'perception' is identified with certain animals (horses, dogs... ) that raise their ears to show their attention. In this respect, since "the ear is an open object or an upright and therefore more open object", some phraseological units emulate the fact of 'raising the ears' to show 'curiosity' and facilitate 'perception' by means of the verbs "to open" or "to prick up" ("abrir, o aguzar, las orejas, o los oídos"), "ouvrir", "tendre", "dresser" and "prêter" ("dresser, o tendre, o o ouvrir, o prêter, l'oreille"), and "dreçar" and "obrir" ("dreçar, o obrir, les orelles").
As opposed to the idea of 'perception', we note the sense of 'inattention' in the phraseological units of esp. "hacer, orejas, u oídos, de mercader"; fr. "faire la sourde oreille"; and cat. "fer orelles de marxant". On the one hand, Spanish and Catalan coincide in the reference to the 'merchant' ("mercader" and "marxant") as the prototype of a person who does not listen to his interlocutor in order to sell his product. On the other hand, "hacer oídos sordos", more commonly used than "hacer, orejas, oídos, de mercader", is closer to the French "faire la sourde oreille". We also have phraseological units referring to the fact that someone 'does not know how to dissimulate': esp. "asomar, o enseñar, o descubrir, la oreja" (cf. "vérsele a alguien el plumero"); fr. "montrer, o laisser passer, le bout de l'oreille"; and cat. "ensenyar l'orella".
Finally, with the phrase "ver las orejas al lobo" ( figuratively the danger is a wolf) we allude, first, to its 'voracity' (esp. "hambre de lobo", fr. "une faim de loup", cat. "una fam de llop") and, secondly, to the perception of 'danger', in allusion to its mouth ("se fourrer, o se jeter, o se précipiter, dans la gueule du loup"), to its claws (cat. "caure a les arpes del llop") and to its ears (esp. "ver las orejas al lobo", cat. "veure l'orella al llop").
3.2.2. Idea of embarrassment
As the inclination of the head is a sign of 'humiliation' and 'shame', in line with the metaphor of orientation "the good is above; the bad is below", the ear metaphorises the idea of 'shame', as the inclination of the head visually highlights the ears. Although the expression "avoir l'oreille basse" (cf. esp. «bajar las orejas») is used in French, "baisser, les yeux, o le nez" is more frequent, as the eye and the nose metonymically replace the head, with the exception of the cat. "abaixar el cap" and "cap, cot, o baix", and the colloquial variant "abaixar la cresta".
Let us now look at the locution "con las orejas, caídas, o gachas". In contrast to the Spanish, the French uses the word échine: "l'échine, or l'oreille, basse". In the same vein, the fr. "la queue entre les jambes", the esp. "con el rabo entre las piernas" and the cat. "amb la cua entre cames" visualize the 'dejection' and 'de-
feat' in the dog's terrified flight.
Finally, the incarnate color denotes the "color that shame brings out in the face, and which makes it flame", as exemplified in the phraseological units esp. "poner a alguien las orejas coloradas"; fr. "rougir jusqu'aux oreilles"; and cat. "pujar els colours a la cara" and "tornarse, o posarse, vermell fins a les orelles".
3.2.3. Idea of dominion
The idea of 'dominion' is expressed, on the one hand, with the punishment of 'tirar de las orejas' in esp. "calentar a alguien las orejas"; fr. "tirer, o frotter, les oreilles à qqn"; and cat. "estirar les orelles"; on the other hand, with the dominion exercised over someone (esp. "mener qqn par le bout du nez"; and cat. "tenir algu dins del puny" and "fer ballar algu com una baldufa"), except that the three languages analysed differ in the body parts (esp. oreja, fr. nez and cat. puny). Similarly, dominance can originate from our insistence on some claim: esp. "estar a la oreja" and cat. "penjarse a les orelles"; French avoids mentioning the ear: "être pendu à qqn" or "coller qqn".
In order to conclude this section, it is worth mentioning the idea of 'provocation', a preliminary step to 'mastery'. In this respect, the phraseological units of esp. "mojar la oreja", fr. "chercher la merde" and cat. "buscar les pessigolles" are clear. In the case of Spanish, we mean: "[...] to wet the ear of another person (generally children) with saliva is a gesture that some of us who write about phraseology today have still made: the index finger of the right hand (if one is right-handed) or that of the left hand (if one is left-handed) is wetted with a good spit and applied to the reverse ear of the opponent in a clear sign of defiance.
CONCLUSIONS
From the detailed analysis of the phraseological units collected in the trilingual corpus of this article, it has been shown that the metaphor per se is not an obstacle to translation, but rather the different conceptualization underlying it. Indeed, in an onomasiological sense, we find that the different metaphors considered ("the nose is a prominent object", "the nose is a prominent object that collides", "the nose is a prominent fragile object that collides with the risk of breaking", "the good is above; the bad, below", "the full is heavy or excessive; empty is light', 'the ear is an open object or an upright object and therefore more open') and the ideas of 'curiosity', 'shock', 'perception', 'discomfort', 'convergence', 'reception', 'embarrassment', 'dominance', 'control', 'care', 'vigilance', 'seduction', 'knowledge', 'courage' and 'positive and negative feelings' are expressed in all three languages with phraseological units arising from the same body part (eye, nose and ear), although some phraseological units sometimes metaphorise different parts of the body, inter alia. In turn, other phraseological units diverge, on the one hand, in the spatial metaphor: "the good is above; the bad, below" and "the full is heavy or excessive; the empty, light"; on the other hand, in the grammatical number.
Another linguistic divergence between the phraseological units is registered in the phraseological units with a marked cultural character, such as "avoir des
фнЛОЛОГНА,ЛННГБНСТНКЛ
112
peaux de saucisson devant les yeux" and "mojar la oreja a alguien". All this is evidence of the influence of the culture of the speaking community on the language, and the power of the cultural substratum in lexical formation.
However, the anisomorphism highlighted in the preceding paragraphs shows that translation is a process, not a linguistic substitution, which overcomes the dichotomy of literality vs. iliterality. The central idea is to express the same idea in the source language and in the target language, with or without a phraseological unit (cf. the equivalents croire and rester, chouchou, se tromper, avoir les yeux dans la poche and se voir comme le nez au milieu de la figure).
So, what is the task of translating metaphors? We believe that to translate metaphors is to translate behavioral schemas and thus to show how metaphor has to do, above all, with relations between cultures rather than relations between languages.
In this sense, metaphor brings into play a set of behaviors that engage different levels, from the cognitive to the ideological. Comprising a metaphor entails re-metaphorising. Consequently, translating means dialogically redefining the nuances of a behavior and, therefore, of our relationship with the world through language. To construct a metaphor in a culture is to identify the margins within which our behaviors acquire value. To translate, that is, to re-metaphorise, means to think again about these margins, to re-discuss and re-establish them.
Библиографический список:
[1] Азимов Э.Г., Щукин А.Н. Новый словарь методических терминов и понятий (теория и практика обуче-
ния языкам) / Э.Г. Азимов, А.Н. Щукин. - М.: Издательство ИКАР, 2009. 448 с.
[2] Виноградов В.В. Об основных типах фразеологических единиц в русском языке. Избранные труды. Лек-
сикология и лексикография. Москва.: Наука: 1947. С. 140-162.
[3] Новикова И.Ю. Обучение профессиональному общению как приоритетная составляющая языковой
подготовки специалистов в техническом вузе. // Материалы Всероссийской конференции «Теоретические и методические основы технологий предвузовского обучения российских и иностранных студентов». М.: Издательство Российского университета дружбы народов, 2005. С. 238-240.
[4] Шанский Н.М. Фразеология современного русского языка (3-е изд. 1985) Москва: Высшая школа. 1963. 93 с.
[5] Лакофф Д., Джонсон М.Метафоры, которыми мы живем, М.: 2004. С. 124-128.
[6] Борковец, Н.И. Техническая метафора в художественной картине мира (на материале немецкой прозы
20 века и ее переводов на русский язык), Екатеринбург, Челябинский государственный университет, 2002. 146 с.
[7] Гарсиа Маркес Г. La literatura colombiana, un faffe a la nación. Аксьон Либерал, 1960. № 2. С. 44-47.
Reference
[1] Azimov E.G., Shchukin A.N. New dictionary of methodological terms and concepts (theory and practice of
teaching languages) / E.G. Azimov, A.N. Shchukin. - M.: IKAR Publishing House, 2009. 448 p.
[2] Vinogradov V.V. About the main types of phraseological units in the Russian language. Selected works.
Lexicology and lexicography. Moscow: Science: 1947. Р. 140-162.
[3] Novikova I.Yu. Training in professional communication as a priority component of language training for
specialists in a technical university. // Materials of the All-Russian conference "Theoretical and methodological foundations of technologies for pre-university education of Russian and foreign students." M.: Publishing house of the Russian Peoples' Friendship University, 2005. Р. 238-240.
[4] Shansky N.M. Phraseology of the modern Russian language (3rd ed. 1985) Moscow: Higher School. 1963. 93 p.
[5] Lakoff D., Johnson M. Metaphors by which we live, M.: 2004. Р. 124-128.
[6] Borkovets, N.I. Technical metaphor in the artistic picture of the world (based on the material of German prose
of the 20th century and its translations into Russian), Ekaterinburg, Chelyabinsk State University, 2002. 146 p.
[7] García Márquez G. La literatura colombiana, un faffe a la nación. Aksion Liberal, 1960. № 2. P. 44-47.
Мороз Ю.А.
Кандидат философских наук, доцент.
Севастопольский государственный университет.
Гакало А.А.
Преподаватель. Севастопольский государственный университет.
Шувалова А.А.
Студент. Севастопольский государственный университет.
О (не)переводимости метафоры с точки зрения некоторых испанских, французских и каталонских выражений и фразеологизмов Аннотация. В связи с тем, что метафора отражает концепцию мира, цель статьи - показать, что метафора не мешает ей переводить, но другая концептуализация, лежащая в основе метафоры. Как следствие, в рамках когнитивной семантики мы будем изучать трехъязычный корпус (испанский, французский и каталанский) метафорических идиом, связанных с человеческим телом (носом и ухом).
Ключевые слова: метафора, перевод, концептуализация, когнитивная семантика, фразеологизмы, метафорические фразеологизмы.
Moroz Yu.A.
Associate Professor. Sevastopol State University.
Gakalo A.A.
Teacher. Sevastopol State University.
Shuvalova A.A.
Student. Sevastopol State University.
About the (un)translatability of metaphor in the perspective of some Spanish, French and Catalan locutions and Phraseological units Abstract. Due to the fact that metaphor reflects a conception of the world, the aim of the article is to demonstrate that metaphor does not prevent it from translating, but the different conceptualization underlying on metaphor. As a consequence, in the framework of cognitive semantics, we will study a trilingual corpus (Spanish, French and Catalan) of metaphorical idioms related to human body (nose and ear).
Key words: metaphor, translation, conceptualization, cognitive semantics, phraseological units, metaphorical idiom.
