Fractal metaphor LIFE IS A STORY in biographical narrative

Open access


The paper applies an interdisciplinary perspective to a fictional text showing that fractals as mathematical models are a powerful tool for conceptualizing life experience in biographical narratives. The multilevel construction of Chatterton by Peter Ackroyd is explored on the basis of fractal metaphor theory. This research focuses on the LIFE IS A STORY conceptual fractal metaphor which is built up on analogical mappings, mental space connections, and blends. The fractal model of metaphor in biographical narrative, which is assigned to the formula LIFE IS A STORY f (1) + f (2) + f (3) + … + f (n), contains the mental space of the intentional source domain story, which provides a way to structure the understanding of the limiting target domain of the concept life. Fractal metaphors aim at making the conceptual metaphor flexible and dynamic, renewing its ability of self-development and self-perfection, transforming itself into one of the means of changeable conceptualization of reality.

ACKROYD, P., 1987. Chatterton. [S. l.]: Penguin Books.

BRUHN, M.J., 2011. Harmonious madness: The poetics of analogy at the limits of blending theory. Poetics Today, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 619-662

BUTNER, J., PASUPATHI, M. and VALLEJOS, V., 2008. When the facts just don't add up: The fractal nature of conversational stories. Social Cognition, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 670-699.

COLEMAN, R., 2009. Fractal analysis of stealthy pathfinding aesthetics. International Journal of Computer Games Technology, vol. 2009. [Accessed September 2014] Available at:

DANESI, M., 2008. Of cigarettes, high heels, and other interesting things: An introduction to semiotics. 2nd ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

EFTEKHARI, A., 2006. Fractal geometry of texts: An initial application to the works of Shakespeare. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, vol. 13, no. 2-3, pp. 177-193.

FAUCONNIER, G. and TURNER, M., 1998. Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science. vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 133-187.

FINAN, T.E., 2012. The “Lords of Life”: Fractals, recursivity, and “experience”. Philosophy and Rhetoric, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 65-88.

FLUDERNIK, M., 2010. Narrative and metaphor. In: D. McIntyre and B. Busse, eds. Language and style. In honour of Mick Short. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 347-363.

GIBBS, R.W., 1994. The poetics of mind. Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

GIBSON, J. and WOLFREYS, J., 2000. Peter Ackroyd. The Ludic and Labyrinthine Text. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.

GLOTOVA, E., 2013. Metaphor and the political identity of a writer (on the basis of Elizabeth Gaskell’s Mary Barton). Topics in Linguistics, no. 12, pp. 56-64.

GÓRSKA, E., 2010. LIFE IS MUSIC. A case study of creative metaphorical thought. English Text Construction, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 275-293.

KÖVECSES, Z., 2002. Metaphor: A practical introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.

LAKOFF, G. and JOHNSON, M., 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

LAKOFF, G. and TURNER, M., 1989. More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago : Chicago University Press.

MANDELBROT, B., 1983. The fractal geometry of nature. New York: W. H. Freeman.

MIKKELSEN, N., 2002. Diamonds within diamonds within diamonds: Ethnic literature and the fractal aesthetic. Melus, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 95-116.

SASSÓN-HENRY, P., 2006. Chaos theory, hypertext, and reading Borges and Moulthrop. Comparative Literature and Culture, no. 8.1. [Accessed April 2014] Available at:

TURNER, J., 1997-8. Turns of phrase and routes to learning: The journey metaphor in educational culture. Intercultural Communication Studies, no. VII, pp. 23-35.

WENAUS, A., 2011. Fractal narrative, paraspace, and strange loops: The paradox of escape in Jeff Noon’s Vurt. Science Fiction Studies, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 155-174.

WERTH, P., 1999. Text worlds: Representing conceptual space in discourse. London: Longman.

Journal Information

CiteScore 2018: 0.25

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.144
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.447


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 335 214 15
PDF Downloads 181 133 10