Metaphors are an important linguistic device that can enable music teachers to explain expressive performance features in a way that makes sense to their students. This study extends the limited literature on the application of metaphors within advanced music instruction, providing new insights into the nature and function of metaphor in the way that music is perceived, performed and taught. It is based on an investigation of 80 hours of teacher instruction recorded across five instrument areas: strings, woodwinds, brass, percussion and keyboard. Metaphors were identified, analysed in relation to contextual meanings, and explored in relation to relevant literature. The findings suggest that with attentive use, metaphors can be useful “bridges to learning” in music instruction contexts.
BartenS. S. (1998). Speaking of music: The use of motor-affective metaphors in music instruction. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 32(2), 89–97.
2.
BhataraA.TirovolasA. K.DuanL. M.LevyB.LevitinD. J. (2011). Perception of emotional expression in musical performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37(3), 921–934.
3.
BlakemoreC.JennettS. (Eds.). (2001). The Oxford companion to the body. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
4.
CacciariC. (2008). Crossing the senses in metaphorical language. In GibbsR. W. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 425–443). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
5.
CameronL. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. London, UK: Continuum.
CortazziM.JinL. (1999). Bridges to learning: Metaphors of teaching, learning and language. In CameronL.LowG.Researching and applying metaphor (pp. 149–176). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8.
CoutinhoE.CangelosiA. (2009). The use of spatio-temporal connectionist models in psychological studies of musical emotions. Music Perception, 27(1), 1–15.
9.
CoutinhoE.DibbenN. (2012). Psychoacoustic cues to emotion in speech prosody and music. Cognition & Emotion, 27(4), 658–684.
10.
DeutscherG. (2010). Through the language glass: Why the world looks different in other languages. New York, NY: Picador.
11.
DuboisM. (1981). Dictionnaire moderne Français Anglais. Paris, France: Librairie Larousse.
12.
EitanZ.GranotR. Y. (2006). How music moves: Musical parameters and listeners’ images of motion music perception. Music Perception, 23(3), 221–247.
13.
EitanZ.RothschildI. (2011). How music touches: Musical parameters and listeners’ audio-tactile metaphorical mappings. Psychology of Music, 39(4), 449–467.
14.
EitanZ.SchupakA.MarksL. E. (2008). Louder is higher: Cross-modal interaction of loudness change and vertical motion in speeded classification. In MiyazakiK.HiragaY.AdachiM.NakajimaY.TsuzakiM. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition (pp. 1–10). Adelaide, Australia: Causal Productions.
15.
FeldS. (1981). Flow like a waterfall: The metaphors of Kaluli musical theory. Yearbook for Traditional Music, 13, 22–47.
16.
GentnerD.BowdleB. (2008). Metaphor as structure-mapping. In GibbsR. W. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 109–128). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
17.
GibbsR. W. (2002). A new look at literal meaning in understanding what is said and implicated. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(4), 457–486.
18.
GibbsR. W. (2008). Metaphor and thought: The state of the art. In GibbsR. W. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 2–13). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
19.
GoatlyA. (1997). The language of metaphors. London, UK: Routledge.
20.
GuntherL. (2012). The physics of music and color. New York, NY: Springer.
21.
JuslinP. N. (2003). Five facets of musical expression: A psychologist’s perspective on music performance. Psychology of Music, 31(3), 273–302.
22.
JuslinP. N.FribergA.SchoonderwaldtE.KarlssonJ. (2004). Feedback learning of musical expressivity. InWilliamonA. (Ed.), Musical excellence: Strategies and techniques to enhance performance (pp. 247–270). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
23.
JuslinP. N.LaukkaP. (2003). Communication of emotions in vocal expression and music performance: Different channels, same code. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 770–814.
24.
JuslinP. N.LindströmE. (2010). Musical expression of emotions: Modelling listeners’ judgements of composed and performed features. Music Analysis, 29, 334–364.
25.
JuslinP. N.PerssonR. S. (2002). Emotional communication. In ParncuttR.McPhersonG. E. (Eds.), The science and psychology of music performance: Creative strategies for teaching and learning (pp. 219–236). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
26.
JuslinP. N.SlobodaJ. A. (2001). Music and emotion: Theory and research. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
27.
KarlssonJ.LiljeströmS.JuslinP. N. (2009). Teaching music expression: Effects of production and delivery of feedback by teacher vs. computer on rated feedback quality. Music Education Research, 11(2), 175–191.
28.
KövescesZ. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
29.
LaukkaP. (2004). Instrumental music teachers’ views on expressivity: A report from music conservatoires. Music Education Research, 6(1), 45–56.
30.
LakoffG.JohnsonM. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
31.
LakoffG.JohnsonM. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh. New York, NY: Basic Books.
32.
LindströmE.JuslinP. N.BresinR.WilliamonA. (2003). Expressivity comes from within your soul: A questionnaire study of music students’ perspectives on expressivity. Research Studies in Music Education, 20(1), 23–47.
33.
LippmanE. A. (1977). A humanistic philosophy of music. New York, NY: New York University Press.
34.
LipscombS. D.KimE. M. (2004). Perceived match between visual parameters and auditory correlates: An experimental multimedia investigation. In LipscombS.AshleyR.GjerdingenR.WebsterP. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Music Perception & Cognition. Retrieved from http://www.lipscomb.umn.edu/docs/LipscombKim_ICMPC8_proceedings.pdf
SchippersH. (2006). “As if a little bird is sitting on your finger …”. Metaphor as a key instrument in the education of professional musicians. International Journal of Music Education, 24(3), 209–217.
37.
SchippersH. (2010). Facing the music: Shaping music education from a global perspective. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
38.
ShayanS.OzturkO.SicoliM. A. (2011). The thickness of pitch: Crossmodal metaphors in Farsi, Turkish, and Zapotec. Senses & Society, 6(1), 96–105.
39.
SheldonD. A. (2004). Listeners’ identification of musical expression through figurative language and musical terminology. Journal of Research in Music Education, 52(4), 357–368.
40.
SlobodaJ. A. (1996). The acquisition of musical performance expertise: Deconstructing the “talent” account of individual differences in musical expressivity. In EricssonK. A. (Ed.), The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports and games (pp. 107–126). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
41.
SlobodaJ. A. (2008). Science and music: The ear of the beholder. Nature, 454(7200), 32–33.
42.
SteenG. J.DorstA. G.HerrmannJ. B.KaalA. A.KrennmayrT.PasmaT. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins B.V.
43.
SwanwickK. (1979). A basis for music education. Windsor, UK: NFER-Nelson.
TraceyH. (1948). Ngoma: An introduction to music for Southern Africans. London, UK: Longmans Green.
46.
Van ZijlA.SlobodaJ. A. (2010). Performers’ experienced emotions in the construction of expressive musical performance: An exploratory investigation. Psychology of Music, 39(2), 196–219.
47.
WoodyR. H. (1999). The relationship between advanced musicians’ explicit planning and their expressive performance of dynamic variations in an aural modeling task. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(4), 331–342.
48.
WoodyR. H. (2000). Learning expressivity in music performance: An exploratory study. Research Studies in Music Education, 14(1), 14–23.
49.
WoodyR. H. (2002). Emotion, imagery and metaphor in the acquisition of musical performance skill. Music Education Research, 4(2), 213–224.
