When the walls come down: metaphorical language and framing in Star Trek’s ‘Darmok’

Authors

• Eduardo Alves Da Silva Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
• Vinicius Bezerra UFC

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17058/signo.v50i99.20508

Keywords:

conceptual metaphor, frames, language, star trek, cognitive linguistics

Abstract

This article analyzes the mechanisms of meaning construction in the episode “Darmok,” from the series Star Trek: The Next Generation, based on the principles of Cognitive Linguistics. The objective is to understand how the metaphorical language used by the Tamarians is structured through cultural and narrative frames, forming an alternative communicative system. The theoretical approach draws on the studies of Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 1999) on conceptual metaphors and embodied cognition, Fillmore’s (1976) formulations on frame semantics, and Duque’s contributions (2015, 2017) regarding language as situated cognitive behavior and interactional frames. The methodology adopted is qualitative, following the parameters of Denzin and Lincoln (2005), and guided by Ginzburg’s (1989) evidential or venatic paradigm, which emphasizes the interpretation of clues and traces in discursive data. The analysis focuses on the verbal interactions in the narrative, aiming to identify the frames activated through metaphors and mythical references. The results indicate that Tamarian communication, although initially unintelligible, becomes understandable when interpreted as a manifestation of cognitive structures grounded in shared experience and culture. It is concluded that the episode provides an effective fictional representation of the central tenets of Cognitive Linguistics, inviting reflection on the limits of literal language and the centrality of metaphor and embodied experience in the construction of meaning.

References

BAKER, Paul. Contemporary Corpus Linguistics. London: Continuum, 2011.

D’ANGELO, Paul A.; KUYPERS, Jim A. (Eds.). Doing News Framing Analysis: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. New York: Routledge, 2010.

DENZIN Norman; LINCOLN, Yvonna. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. New York: Sage Publishing, 2005.

DUQUE, Paulo Henrique. A emergência do comportamento linguístico. Revista Virtual de Estudos da Linguagem. Porto Alegre, v.14, n.27, p. 151-172. 2016.

DUQUE, Paulo Henrique. De perceptos a frames: cognição ecológica e linguagem. SCRIPTA, Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n.41, p. 21-45. 2017.

DUQUE, Paulo Henrique. Discurso e cognição: uma abordagem baseada em frames. Revista da ANPOLL. Florianópolis, v.1, n.39, p. 25-48. 2015.

DUQUE, Paulo Henrique; SILVA, Eduardo Alves Da. A manipulação informativa e seu modus operandi no enquadramento ideológico nas redes sociais. Cadernos De Letras Da Uff. Rio de Janeiro, v.30, n.59, p.235-248, 2019.

EVANS, Vyvyan; GREEN, Melanie. Cognitive Linguistics: An introduction. Hillsdale, NJ and Edinburgh: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates/Edinburgh University Press, 2006, pp. 296-303.

FILLMORE, Charles. frame semantics and the nature of language. In: HARNARD, Steven R.; STEKLIS, Horst D.; LANCASTER, Jane. (eds.) Origins and evolution of language and speech. New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 1976.

GINZBURG, Carlo. Sinais: raízes de um paradigma indiciário. In: ______. Mitos, emblemas, sinais: morfologia e história. Federico Carotti (trad.). São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1989. p. 143–179.

GOFFMAN, Erving. frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row, 1974.

GRADY, Joseph. Foundations of Meaning: Primary Metaphors and Primary Scenes. 1997. 299 f. Tese (Doutorado em Filosofia da Linguística) – University of California. Berkley, 1997.

JOHNSON, Mark. The body in the mind: the bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1987.

JOHNSON, Mark. The Meaning of the Body: Aesthetics of Human Understanding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007.

KENDON, Adam. Gesture. Annual Review Anthropology.California, v. 26. 1997. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.26.1.109

KRESS, Gunther; VAN LEEUWEN, Theo. Reading images: the grammar of visual design. London: Routledge, 1996.

LAKOFF, George. Don't Think of an Elephant! Know Your Values and frame the Debate: The Essential Guide for Progressives. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2004.

LAKOFF, George. The neural theory of metaphor. In: GIBBS, R. W., Jr. (Ed.). The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. p. 17- 38.

LAKOFF, George; JOHNSON, Mark. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.

LAKOFF, George; JOHNSON, Mark. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books, 1999.

MATURANA, Humberto e VARELA, Francisco (1984). A árvore do conhecimento - As bases biológicas do conhecimento humano. Campinas: Ed. Psy, 1995.

MINSKY, Marvin. A. framework for representing knowledge. In: WINSTON, P. H. (ed.). The Psychology of Computer Vision. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975. DOI https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110858778-003.

PELOSI, Ana. Cristina. Social Cognitive Representations of Violence in Urban Brazil: Violence as an Uncontrolled Force. Revista da ANPOLL (Online), v. 01, p. 273-296, 2014.

SILVERMAN, David. Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook. London: SAGE Publications, 2000.

SIQUEIRA. Maity; LAMPRECHT, Regina Ritter. As metáforas primárias na aquisição da linguagem: um estudo interlinguístico. DELTA: Documentação de estudos em linguística teórica e aplicada. v.23, n.2, p. 245-72. 2007. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-44502007000200004. Acesso em: 20 de junho de 2025.

TANNEN, Deborah. Framing in Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

WITTGENSTEIN, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations. Trans. G.E.M. Anscombe. Oxford: Blackwell, 1953.