sign in sign up
<<
Home , Metaphor, Parable

THE STUDY OF CONCEPTUAL IN THE ABOUT KINGDOM OF IN ST. MATTHEW’S

AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra in English Letters

By

YOSUA SEPTIAN ELIA

Student Number: 0642140044

ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2011

THE STUDY OF IN THE PARABLES ABOUT KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IN ST. MATTHEW’S GOSPEL

AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra in English Letters

By

YOSUA SEPTIAN ELIA

Student Number: 0642140044

ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2011

i

A Sarjana Sastra Undergraduate Thesis

THE STUDY OF METAPHORICAL LANGUAGE OF THE PARABLES ABOUT KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IN ST. MATTHEW’S GOSPEL

By

YOSUA SEPTIAN ELIA

Student Number: 064214044

Approved by

ii

A Sarjana Sastra Undergraduate Thesis

THE STUDY OF CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR IN THE PARABLES ABOUT KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IN ST. MATTHEW’S GOSPEL

By

YOSUA SEPTIAN ELIA

Student Number: 064214044

Defended before the Board of Examiners on March 28, 2011 and Declared Acceptable

BOARD OF EXAMINERS

iii

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY

I honestly declared that the thesis which I wrote does not contain the works of parts of the works of people, except those cited in the quotations and bibliography, as a scientific paper should.

Yogyakarta, April 4th, 2011 The Writer

Yosua Septian Elia

iv

LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS

Yang bertandatangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:

Nama : Yosua Septian Elia Nomor Mahasiswa : 064214044

Demi perkembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya berjudul:

THE STUDY OF METAPHORICAL LANGUAGE OF THE PARABLES ABOUT KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IN ST. MATTHEW’S GOSPEL.

Beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya ke internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.

Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya.

Dibuat di Yogyakarta Pada tanggal: 4 April 2011 Yang menyatakan

Yosua Septian Elia

v

MOTTO PAGE

“Life must be understood backwards in order to live your future”—Kierkegaard “They are not told about the graciousness of God in a but are shown a situation of ordinary life which has been revolutionized by grace” (McFague, 1975: 71) Consummatum Est

vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First, I would like to extend the sweetest gratitude to my advisor, Dr.

Francis Borgias Alip, Mpd., M.A. for his advice and supports. Second, I would like to convey my appreciation to my co-advisor, Dra. Bernardine Ria Lestari

M.S. Third, I would also thank to my academic advisor, Anna Fitriati S.pd,

M.hum., for encouraging me to study hard in each semester. Fourth, I send my best regards to all lecturers in English literature department and to all its staff.

Fifth, I would like to give my appreciation to all library staff for their help. Last but not least, I would like to thank all my friends. Thank you very much for the time that we have shared together.

Yosua Septian Elia

vii

TABLE OF CONTENT

TITLE PAGE………………………………………………………… i APPROVAL PAGE…………………………………………………. ii ACCEPTANCE PAGE...... iii STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY...... iv LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS...... v MOTTO PAGE...... vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………… vii TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………… viii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………. x ABSTRAK…………………………………………………………… xi

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION………………………………….. 1 A. Background of the Study…………………………………….. 1 B. Problem Formulation…………………………………………. 3 C. Objectives of the Study………………………………………. 4 D. Definition of Terms…………………………………………... 4

CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL REVIEW………………………. 7 A. Review of Related Studies……………………………………. 7 1. Understanding Israelite metaphor...... 7 2. The Parables of Matthew...... 8 B. Review of Related Theories………………………………….. 10 1. Theory of Parable………………...... 10 a. The of Parable...... 10 b. The Elements of Parable...... 11 c. The Types of Parable...... 13 i. Similitude...... 13 ii. Parable...... 14 iii. Exemplary Story...... 15 d. The Structure of Parable...... 16 2. Theory on Metaphor...... 18 3. Parable as Extended Metaphor...... 19 4. Theory of Conceptual Metaphor………………………… 21 C. Theoretical Framework………………………………………. 22

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY……………………………….. 23 A. Object of the Study…………………………………………... 23 B. Approach of the Study……………………………………….. 23 C. Method of the Study…………………………………………. 25

viii

1. Data Collection...... 25 2. Data Analysis...... 25

CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS……………………………………….. 27 A. The Parable about the Kingdom of Heaven…………………. 27 1. Parable...... 27 2. Similitude...... 39 B. The Conceptual of the Parables…………………. 44 1. Agriculture Domain...... 44 2. Treasure Domain...... 47 3. Wedding Domain...... 48 4. Animal Domain...... 49 5. Business Domain...... 50 6. Architecture Domain...... 52 7. Pastry Domain...... 53 8. Household Domain...... 53 9. Family Domain...... 54

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION…………………………………… 55

BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………….... 58 APPENDIX I...... 60 APPENDIX II...... 65

ix

ABSTRACT

YOSUA SEPTIAN ELIA (2011). The Study of Metaphorical Language of the Parables about Kingdom of Heaven in St. Matthew’s Gospel. Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters, Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University

This thesis dicusses the metaphorical language in the parables about the kingdom of Heaven in St. Matthew’s gospel. The parables found in St. Matthew’s gospel concern about the virtues which Christ delivered about kingdom of Heaven. In this thesis, there are presents two problem formulations. The first problem is to identify the parables which concern about the Kingdom of Heaven. The second problem is to determine the conceptual metaphors which construct the parables. This thesis used library method in analyzing the data. In order to identify the parables, theory of parable was applied. Meanwhile, theory of conceptual metaphor was used to determine the conceptual metaphors of the parable. The approach used in present thesis was .

Through the course of the analysis, seventeen parables related to the Kingdom of Heaven were found. They are the Parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders, the , the Parable of the Weeds, the Parable of the Mustard Seed, the Parable of the Yeast, the Parable of Hidden Treasure, the Parable of the , the Parable of the Net, the Parable of the Household, the Parable of the Lost Sheep, the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant, the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, the , the Parable of the Tenants, the Parable of the Wedding Banquet, the Parable of the Ten Virgins, and the Parable of the Talents. Twelve parables belong to parable, while five parables are classified as similitude.

There are seventeen conceptual metaphors which shape the parables. Five parables derive its source domain from agriculture, i.e. the Parable of the Tenants, the Parable of the Weeds, the Parable of the Mustard Seed, the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, and the Parable of the Sower. Wedding domain is used to conceptualize two parables, i.e. the Parable of the Ten Virgins and the Parable of the Wedding Banquet. Treasure domain is also used to conceptualize two parables, i.e. the Parable of Hidden Treasure and the . Parables from business domain are the Parable of the Unmerciful servant and the Parable of the Talents, while animal domain is used in the Parable of the Net and the Parable of the Lost Sheep. The other parables derive its source domain from architecture (the parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders), family (the Parable of the Two Sons), household (the Parable of the Household), labour domain (the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard) and pastry (the Parable of the Yeast).

x

ABSTRAK

YOSUA SEPTIAN ELIA (2011). The Study of Metaphorical Language of the Parables about Kingdom of Heaven in St. Matthew’s Gospel. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Facultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Skripsi ini membahas tentang bahasa metaforis yang berada di dalam parabel tentang Kerajaan Surga di dalam injil menurut St. Matius. Parabel-parabel yang ditemukan di Injil menurut St. Matius berpusat pada ajaran yang Yesus Kristus sampaikan mengenai Kerajaan Surga. Di dalam skripsi terdapat dua rumusan permasalahan yang akan dibahas. Masalah pertama adalah menentukan parabel-parabel yang berpusat pada Kerajaan Allah. Masalah kedua adalah menentukan conceptual metaphor (metafor konseptual) membentuk parabel- parabel. Skripsi ini menggunakan metode penelitian perpustakaan dalam menganalisis data. Agar dapat menemukan parabel-parabel, teori mengenai parabel digunakan. Sementara, teori mengenai conceptual metaphor (metafor konseptual) digunakan untuk menentukan metafor-metafor konseptual di dalam parabel-parabel. Pendekatan yang digunakan dalam skripsi ini adalah kognitif linguistik.

Melalui analisis, sebanyak tujuh belas parabel yang berkaitan dengan Kerajaan Surga ditemukan, yaitu the Parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders, the Parable of the Sower, the Parable of the Weeds, the Parable of the Mustard Seed, the Parable of the Yeast, the Parable of Hidden Treasure, the Parable of the Pearl, the Parable of the Net, the Parable of the Household, the Parable of the Lost Sheep, the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant, the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, the Parable of the Two Sons, the Parable of the Tenants, the Parable of the Wedding Banquet, the Parable of the Ten Virgins, and the Parable of the Talents. Dua belas parabel digolongkan ke dalam tipe parabel, sementara lima parabel diklasifikasikan ke dalam similtude.

Terdapat sebanyak tujuh belas conceptual metaphor (metafor konseptual) yang membentuk parabel. Lima parabel bersumber dari dunia pertanian, yaitu the Parable of the Tenants, the Parable of the Weeds, the Parable of the Mustard Seed, the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, dan the Parable of the Sower. Domain pernikahaan digunakan pada dua parabel, yaitu the Parable of the Wedding Banquet dan the Parable of the Ten Virgins. Domain harta digunakan juga untuk membentuk dua parabel, yaitu the Parable of the Pearl dan the Parable of Hidden Treasure. Parabel-parabel yang berasal dari dunia bisnis adalah the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant dan the Parable of the Talents sementara dunia hewan digunakan di dalam the Parable of the Net dan Parable of the Lost Sheep. Parabel-parabel yang lain berasal dari arsitektur (the Parable of the Wise and the Foolish Builders), dunia keluarga (the Parable of the Two Sons), dunia perumahan (the Parable of the Household), dunia kerja (the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard), dan pastri (the Parable of the Yeast).

xi

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study

The Holy has been an inspiration for many people since the first century. It has drawn attention to many people from various backgrounds. It can be studied from many different angles. Those who are interested in history can study the course of historical progresses of the Jewish people in it. Meanwhile, archaeologists can also use it as reference when they want to excavate a new site in the Middle-East area, although it has been criticized for its objectivy. Linguists also can make use of it, if they want to examine the language in the Holy Bible.

This present thesis concerns the language use in the Holy Bible. Specifically, the focus of the study is in the metaphorical language in the parables about the

Kingdom of Heaven in St. Matthew’s Gospel.

Despite being doubted for its originality of the language, the Holy Bible presents to the reader the eloquence of language used by many prophets. Some of the prophets show their outstanding use of language for making prophecies.

Examples of this can be found in the books listed as the prophecies of the prophets, such as Jeremiah or Isaiah. Some of them speak eloquently to praise or lament to God. One can find good examples of this in Psalm or Songs of

Solomon.

1

2

The Second Testament is initiated by the birth of Jesus. In fact, the whole contents of the Second Testament refer to Jesus. He is the heart of Christianity. He is the word of God that is manifested in this world. Travelling across the Middle-

East areas, he preached about the kingdom of Heaven. This is the central message—or the good news—that he wanted to share to those who were interested in salvation. Every time he delivered his teachings, he never expressed it in a clear crystal way. He always left his enigmas because he spoke metaphorically in the form of short stories widely known as parable. In the course of this study, it will be found later that every time he mentioned about kingdom of

Heaven, Jesus always used a parable in explaining about it. This manner of delivering teaching or wisdom is commonly done in Jewish (Boucher,

1981: 11).

When he did his ministry, Jesus was always accompanied by his twelve disciples. Excluding Jude, they were later known as the apostles. They spread out

Jesus’ teaching, called the Good News, accross the Mediterranian areas. Some of them delivered it orally, some other disciples wrote down the course of Jesus’ ministry. The first four parts of the Second Testament known as Gospel are entitled under the name of the four of Jesus disciples. They are Matthew, Mark,

Luke, and John. It is true that the authenticity of the Gospel’s writers might be doubted. However, one thing that can be concluded from these writings is that all of these books refer to the life of Jesus and his teachings. He is the melting point of the four perspectives. 3

Speaking about perspective, this study will examine the metaphorical language in the perspective of cognitive linguistics. In this perspective, metaphor is not regarded as the property of people with eloquence in language use—such as poet, or in the Bible, the prophets. Lay people often use metaphorical language, although they seldom realize it (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980: 3). The misunderstanding is furthered by the common belief that it is the way of expressing ideas by means of language. In fact, a metaphor is more than just that simple language expression, because metaphor is also used to conceive a concept in terms of another concept (Ungerer and Schmid, 1996: 118). In the words of

George Lakoff and Mark Johson, the proponents of cognitive linguistics,

The essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980: 5).

So far, the introduction revolves around metaphor, parables, and kingdom of

Heaven. These aspects will be the focuses of this study. This thesis will examine the metaphorical language used in the parables about the Kingdom of Heaven in the Gospel according St. Matthew.

The reason of choosing this topic is that because there is no previous work that analyzes the conceptual metaphor in the Gospel.

B. Problem Formulation

There are two questions formulated in this study. The first question relates to the parable, while the second question concerns with the conceptual metaphor.

Those two questions are: 4

1. What are the parables about kingdom of Heaven in St. Matthew’s Gospel?

2. What are the conceptual metaphors in the parables?

C. Objectives of the Study

The first objective of this study is to collect the parables which concern about the kingdom of Heaven. This process of selection will not randomly assigned. It will make use of the theory on metaphor as the guideline. The second objective attempts to find the conceptual metaphors that serve as the bedrocks of the metaphors in those parables.

D. Definition of Terms

There are some terms that are important to be reviewed shortly in this section in order to avoid misunderstanding. Those terms are:

1. Metaphor: In Exploring : Writing and Thinking about Poetry, Frank

Madden defines metaphor as

A more direct and more complete than a . A metaphor does not announce itself; it states that something is something else (my love is a red rose) or implies it (my love has red petals and sharp thorns) (Madden, 2002: 65).

In cognitive linguistics perspective, metaphor is seen as a set of

correspondances (technically called mapping) between two domains—the

source target and the target domain. (Kovecses, 2002: 12). 5

2. Parable: There are many forms of parable. It is a kind of popularly

used by rhetoricians or wise people. According to Madeleine L. Boucher,

parables are a tradition which had already spread accross Mediterranian world

long before Jesus began his ministry (Boucher, 1981: 11). In modern time, the

term parable is commonly used to refer to stories in the gospel.

3. Gospel: The term is derived from Greek word, evanggelion. In Pengantar Injil

Sinoptik, Suharyo makes the term more specific. He says that in the second

century the word gospel started to be used to denote the writings concerning

the life and Christ (Suharyo, 1989: 15). The Gospel is divided

into four books. Each is named after the four of Jesus’ disciples. They are St.

Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John.

4. Cognitive Linguistics: According to Friedrich Ungerer and Hans-Joerg

Schmid, in their book An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics, cognitive

linguistics is

An approach to language that is based on our experience of the world and the way we perceive and conceptualize it (Ungerer and Schmid, 1996: x).

5. Kingdom of Heaven: It is difficult to describe in words what the Kingdom of

God is. However, Groenen, in Pengantar ke dalam Perjanjian Baru, describes

the Kingdom of Heaven as salvation which comes from God manifested in

Jesus’ words and deeds (Groenen, 1984: 73). 6

6. Metaphorical Linguistic Expression: Words or other linguistic expressions

that come from the language or terminology of the more concrete conceptual

domain (Kovecses, 2002: 4).

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL REVIEW

A. Review of Related Studies

To sustain the foundation of the analysis, two previous related studies are presented in this chapter. There are two studies reviewed, e.g. Marc Zvi Brettler’s

God is King: Understanding Israelite Metaphor and John R. Donahue’s The

Gospel in Parable: Metaphor, Narrative, and Theology in the Synoptic .

1. Understanding Israelite Metaphor

The present thesis manages to provide studies on Israelite metaphorical language in order to have insight from these previous studies. One of them is done by Marc Zvi Bretller. In his book, God is King: Understanding Israelite

Metaphor, Brettler traces the source of metaphorical concept GOD IS KING. The primary result of this study is the of what calling GOD IS KING meant in ancient Israel. His findings suggest that the metaphorical concept God is

King is essential for the Isrealite . Tracing back to the First Testament,

Brettler examines the royal appealations that is used to address God. Among of them are king and master. He furthers his study into royal qualities. When discussing about this, he comments that

The populace of ancient Israel wanted a king who possessed certain qualities such as longevity, wisdom, wealth and strength, since such a king would foster social stability (Brettler, 1989: 51).

7

8

Despite the fact that these people long to have such an ideal king, there are almost none who ever exist. Indeed, the most exalted King David closely resembles to this idealization. He continues his study by examining the domain of royal trappings. In this part, he explores the clothing as well as ornaments usually used by the kings in order to distinguish them from the other Israeli people. At first, he mentions the crown as the most distinctive feature of a king. He also mentions other ornaments which are tightly close to the kingship, such as royal bracelets, royal garments, royal platform, scepter, and throne. In the following chapter, he discusses about the role of the king in his sovereignty. His exploration in this chapter focuses on the relation between the king and people within his kingdom. The last part of his study is to examine the process of assuming the throne.

.Brettler’s study provides valuable source for this study, since it has the same focus as this thesis. GOD IS KING metaphor has relation with the topic of discussion of this study, which emphasizes on the metaphorical language in describing the Kingdom of Heaven.

2. The Parables of Matthew

For the purpose of this study, it is necessary to put review of previous study on the parable of St. Matthew’s Gospel. Previous study on this topic will be advantageous for this study in the way that it will give valuable insight. John R.

Donahue’s study has been chosen, because it provides concise comprehension about parables in St. Matthew’s Gospel. 9

John R. Donahue presents the study of parables in St. Matthew’s Gospel in his book, The Gospel in Parable: Metaphor, Narrative, and Theology in the

Synoptic Gospels. Through this book, he explores the aspects of parables in the four Gospels. One of the Gospels analyzed is, of course, St. Matthew’s.

In discussing St. Matthew’s Gospel, Donahue starts his study by making comparison between parables in St. Matthew’s Gospel and the parables in the three other Gospels. Then, he underlines the most distinctive characteristics of this

Gospel. Here, he mentions that, compared to St. Mark’s, St. Matthew’s Gospel has more parables. He continues that the style of the Gospel is indicated by the stark contrasts and reversals (Donahue, 1988: 63). Speaking about the important aspect of this Gospel, once again compared to St. Mark’s Gospel, Donahue comments that

While Mark’s discourse serves his Christology and the summons to discipleship, Matthew stresses more the ethics and the relation of ethics to (Donahue, 1988: 64).

In other words, St. Matthew’s Gospel concerns about the ethical matters which are imposed to those who follow Jesus’ footstep in order to reach salvation. This is the focal point of this Gospel.

Donahue’s study continues with the examination of parables in the St.

Mattew’s Gospel. He delineates three important aspects when examining parables.

The first step in analyzing parable is examining it intrisically. This first step examines the elements of a parable. The next step is interpretation and the last one is looking at the context of the parable. 10

Since the present thesis focuses on the parables in St. Matthew’s Gospel, it will be appropriate to put Donahue’s work as one of references in the related previous studies. To sum up, his study provides characteristics of parables in St.

Matthew’s Gospel, the focal points of this Gospel, and also the method of parable examination. These aspects are useful for the prospect of this present study.

B. Review of Related Theories

To conduct the analysis, some related theories are needed so that the analysis will not be shaky. Theories that are gathered relate to the focus of this study. Those theories include the theory of parable and the theory of conceptual metaphor. Each theory presented here has relation to the questions formulated for this study.

1. Theory of Parable a. The Concept of Parable

Speaking theoretically about parable, there is a need to identifty parable and to dissect its body. Several theorists mention first of all the origin of the term parable. Bernard Brandon Scott begins in his introduction by discussing the process of naming the parable. Originally, the term parable derives from Greek word—parabole. However, this Greek term is used to refer to mashal. David B.

Gowler tries to define what mashal is. According to him, it is almost hard to define the word. The root meaning of it means “to represent”, or “to be like”

(Gowler, 2000: 42). This is Hebrew term for variety of (Scott, 1989: 11

7). For this occassion, many other theorists agree with Scott. John Dominic

Crossan, in In Parables: The Challange of Historical Jesus, also says that

The Hebrew term mashal and its septugiant translation parabole refer to a very broad field of language and the use of this latter term in the is just as general (Crossan, 1973: 7)

It has been said before that mashal includes variety of literary genre. The term covers literary forms, such as a proverbial , a byword, a prophetic figurative oracle, a song of derision, a didactic poem, and a similitude (Gowler,

2000: 42-43). This evidence suggests that the term parable has not been the same as it is today. Madeleine L. Boucher suggests

The term parable is not, and indeed should not be, used in the sam senses in scholarly discussion today as it was in antiquity (Boucher, 1981: 13).

Boucher comments further that the term parable as it is comprehended this day refers to any of the Gospel stories which is more or less extended (Boucher, 1981:

14).

From above explanations, it can be concluded that mashal, which covers the broad area of literary form, is the original term for parable. This term covers literary form, such as proverbial saying as well as parable as it is understood this days. Using Boucher’s statement about the meaning of parable, this study is in line with modern comprehension of parable, which refers to stories in the Gospel. b. Elements of Parable

Moving ahead, there is a need to set the characteristics of parable for this present thesis, so that the there will be no random selection of the parables. 12

In her book, Madeleine L. Boucher defines elements of parables. The first criterion she mentions is that parable is a narrative which has various forms. Some stories are concise, while the other might be developed into a long story (Boucher,

1981: 15). Usually these derive their materials from many things which relate well with people in daily life. According to Boucher, the common sources of these narratives are

Taken from real life, from nature or the human scene. They are simple and realistic stories, drawn from the everyday life of the household, the kitchen, farming and fishing, the courtroom, temple worship (Boucher: 1981, 15).

So far, it has been cited from Boucher’s work that a parable is narrative which draws its story from real life—either by nature or human scene. However, she mentions that a parable is more than just a story. It is also used, according to

Boucher, as the tool to transfer values (Boucher, 1981: 15).

Serving as the tool for transferring value, parable is often difficult to understand. Indeed, to capture the meaning of the stories is not easy, because some points of the stories are stated directly, some are not obvious (Boucher,

1981: 15). This is because a parable has two layers of meaning. The first meaning is its literal meaning, while the second is figurative meaning. Therefore, when a parable is not enough to read its literal meaning. To comprehend the intended meaning of the stories, one needs to read between the lines.

Since the parable has its purpose to transfer value, it is supposed not merely to entertain audience. According to Boucher, the purposes of the parables 13

Are far more important. It is to bring about a change of mind, or a better change of heart, in the hearer, perhaps to move the hearer to conversion (Boucher, 1981: 16).

In Suharyo’s words, the sole purpose of a parable is to invite the audience to contemplate their lives or their deeds so that they can judge it by themselves and lead to a new way of life (Suharyo, 1989: 145).

From these remarks, it can be concluded that the purpose of a parable is to persuade the audience to rebuild their own lives by thinking deep in thought about the story, which is drawn from daily lives, and making their judgment of their lives to it in the hope for a better way of life. c. Types of Parable

So far, the discussion has revealed some aspects of a parable based on theories related to it presented by some experts. When discussing a parable, there is a need to comprehend types of parables. Boucher writes down three basic types of parable (Boucher, 1981: 17). According to her, the types of parables are divided based on its structures. She mentions that those three types are similitude, parable, and exemplary story. i. Similitude

Similitude is the first type of parable. There might be question about what is the difference simile and similitude since it has the same expressions, such as like or as. Looking at the expressions, both terms has the same function, i.e., to make 14

an open comparison between a concept with other concept. The difference is that similitude refers to the type of parable in the Gospel.

The form of similitude is concise. Typically, it narrates a simple story drawn from events recurrent in the real life. In Boucher’s definition, similitude is

“The most concise type of parable. It briefly narrates a typical recurrent event from real life. It tells a story which everyone would recognize as a familiar experience” (Boucher, 1981: 17). ii. Parable

The second type of parable is called parable. It seems confusing to name this type of parable with the same name. Boucher comments that this is because there is not yet an exact term for this type of parable. What she suggests is that the name of parable refers to parable which denotes to mashal and parable which belongs to this type (Boucher, 1981: 17). Despite this, the term parable will be used to refer to the second type of the parable.

A parable has longer form than similitude. Since it has more developed form, this type of parable is more ornamented with details. Boucher comments that

“The parable is often (though not always) longer more detailed than similitude. The parable tells a story, not about something recurrent in real life, but about one-time event which is fictitious” (Boucher, 1981: 17).

Its distinctive typical beginnings is best exemplified in the Parable of the

Sower in Matthew 13: 1-8, “ A farmer went out to sow his seed”, or the Parable of the Persistent Widow in Luke 18: 1-5, “In a certain town there was a judge..” 15

(NIV, 1). This is to be the unique introductory formula for this type of parable—parable. however, in St. Matthew’s Gospel, the beginning of the parable is similiar with similitude such as “Kingdom of Heaven is like this”, or “Kingdom of Heaven migh be compared to”. iii. Exemplary Story

The third type of parable is called an exemplary story. Based on Boucher’s theory, there is a distinction between similitude as well as parable and exemplary story. She comments that similitude and parable present an implied comparison between two very different things (e.g. the reign of God is compared to seed), while exemplary story makes an example of a specific case in order to illustrate a general principle. Simply to say, in the similitude and parable, the teo compared are not similar, while in exemplary story the concepts are similar

(Boucher, 1981: 20).

To sum up, Boucher’s study has revealed that there are three types of parable. The first is a similtude, the second is a parable, and the last is an exemplary story. Each type of parable has distintive features. Some are shared with the other types, some are unique to each type. A similitude has a concise form and has a typical introductory formula, such as “Kingdom of Heaven is like”. Parable shares the same typical beginnings like those in similitude.

However, this type of parable also has unique introductions, such as “A man went out to sow his seed”, or “In a certain town there was a judge”. Comparing their forms, a parable has more longer form than similitude. Therefore, it is rich in 16

details. The last type of parable is an exemplary story. This type of parable shares some features with parable. It is resemblant to a parable in the length of the content and its once-upon-a-time introduction. The only distinctive feature of it is that exemplary story derives its material from examples in the real life. It presents actual facts, or examples, when suggesting ideas, or concepts. d. Structure of Parable

The last aspect which is important in examining parable is its structure.

Among theorists who discuss about the structure of parable is Rudolf Bultmann.

His major work, entitled The History of the Synoptic Tradition, dissect the body of the parable. His theory of parable’s structure is well documented in Boucher’s The

Parable (Boucher, 1981: 23-24):

First of all, according to Bultmann, the story in a parable is narrated in one set of events. It means that the story in a parable is complete in a single narrative.

There is no continuation of the narrative to tell the other parts of story.

Second, a parable involves only no more than three characters. Each in the story appears to represent something. Indeed, there are a group of people inside the story as revealed in the Parable of the Unmerciful Servants

(Matthew 18: 23-34), or of Workers in the Vineyard (: 1-15). These people, according to Bultmann, are seen as people which have common characteristics, or attributes. In examples above, the servants and the workers are people which share characteristics as people who are subjects of his master, or landlord. Therefore, they are treated as one single unit. Bultmann adds that an 17

unessential character is never mentioned in the parable. The mother of the two sons (Matthew 21: 28-30) does not exist, because it doesn not have any relevance with the topic of the parable.

Third, the personality of the characters is often characterized by what they do, or what the other characters say about them. The case in the parable of the ten

Maidens (Matthew 25: 1-13) reveals the difference of personality of the maidens by what they do.

Fourth, just like folk stories, a parable also utilizes repetition. Such a literary device is used to remember the important aspect of the story. Twice do the prodigal son confesses “Father, I have sinned against Heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son” (NIV, verses 19 and 21). The parable of the Unmerciful Servant has also the form of repetition. However, the case is different since it is not the unmerciful servant who repeat the utterance “Be patient with me. I will pay back everything” (NIV, verses 26 and 29), but his contemporary. Still, there is a repetition. Only the speaker is different.

The last aspect of the structure of a parable is that it often employs a contrastive concept. Most of the contrastive concepts in the parables, of St.

Matthew’s especially, involve only two concepts. The parable of the Sower,

(Matthew 13:3-8), is an exception, because it contains four contrastive units. The concepts being contrasted represent the important points of the parable.

All aspects in theory of parable are needed to be summed up, so that they can be used as the guidelines in the course of the analysis. First of all, a parable is 18

the Greek translation of mashal. Mashal covers many literary forms, such as a proverbial saying, a byword, or even a parable in the Gospel. The root of the word means “to represent” or “to be like” (Gowler, 2000: 42-43). Therefore, the term parable is not the same as it is understood today. Parable in modern era refers to stories in the Gospels (Boucher, 1981: 14).

The second aspect is that a parable is narrative drawn from daily situations which is supposed as the means of transffering value and persuades the to reverse the course of life.

The third aspect of this theory reveals three types of parable. They are a similitude, a parable, and an exemplary story. A similitude has a concise form and typically begun with “Kingdom of Heaven is like”. A parable has longer form and it is like folk story which has opening, such as “A farmer went out to sow”. The last type is called exemplary story. This type is almost parallel with a parable.

2. Theory on Metaphor

Since the focus of this study is on conceptual metaphor, there is a need to present theory on relation between on metaphor in general before plumbing the conceptual metaphor.

In ancient Greek, metaphor was a which functioned to persuade people. So important metaphor that some people regard it as master of , or figurative language (Evans and Green, 2006: 293). Tom McArthur in his book, The Oxford Companion to the , also concludes that another figurative languages, such as , hyperbole, and even simile are subordinates of metaphor (McArthur, 1992: 653). Such conclusion is generated 19

from the idea of the main purpose of those figurative languages, i.e. to compare.

The difference is on the way each figurative language works.

The way metaphor works is that it compares two concepts by using schematic form A is B. In this schema, A becomes B. It works its way by associating the shared characteristics of two concepts, but not based on physical resemblance. Using metaphor Achilles is a lion, Vyvyan Evans and Melanie

Green postulate that

The resemblance is not physical: Achilles does not actually look like a lion. Instead, due to cultural which holds that lions are courageous, by describing Achilles as a lion we associate him with the lion's qualities and ferocity (Evans and Green, 2006: 293).

3. Parable as Extended Metaphor

The idea of parable as metaphor was started by Robert W. Funk’s

Language, Hermeneutic, and Word of God. Norman Perrin compiles Funk’s book in his own book Entitled Jesus and the Language of the Kingdom (1976). There are two important points that Funk discusses about parable as metaphor. The first about distinction between simile and metaphor, and the second is function of metaphor in parable.

Funk, in Perrin’s Jesus and the Language of the Kingdom, says that the difference between simile and metaphor is not merely a matter of grammar, but it involves the essential function of them. Perrin comprehends the distinction of these two concepts as

In a simile “the less known is clarified by the better known”, but in metaphor “two discrete and not entirely comparable elements” are juxtaposed, and this juxtaposition “produces an impact upon the imagination 20

and induces a vision of that which cannot be conveyed by prosaic and discursive speech” (Perrin, 1976: 135)

He adds that another distinctive element that simile and metaphor share is that simile makes illustration in comparing two concepts, while metaphor produces new meaning in the story—in Funk’s words, the creative of meaning. It is the creative function of metaphor which funk stresses (Perrin, 1976: 136).

In parable, the story of daily lives is presented metaphorically with a brand new meaning. This provides the audience to have a new perspective on everything they usually take for granted. It is the power of metaphor which transcends everydayness into sublime contemplation. In simple words, metaphor blends the real situation and the situation which is contained in the story assuming the audience to think again about their daily lives. Therefore, a parable is not merely a simile A is like/as B anymore, but it becomes A is B. To conclude this part, it is not a matter of structure of simile or metaphor which is crucial, but it is the capability of parable in presenting metaphor in a form of narrative. In Sallie

McFague’s words

“But while the grammar may suggest simile—an image that illustrates what we already know—it is obvious that we do have a genuine metaphor here, not only because we do not “already know” what the Kingdom of Heaven is but also because the image put forth—the ensuing story—is not discrete comparison but a whole nexus of images, a total situation, an extended metaphor” (McFague, 1975: 68).

4. Theory of Conceptual Metaphor

It has been mentioned that in cognitive linguistics metaphor is conceptualization of a concept in terms of another concept. Indeed, this process 21

of conceptualization is essential in understanding a metaphor in the cognitive linguistics perspective.

There are many experts who have explained theory of conceptual metaphor.

The most concise theory of it is presented by Zoltan Kovecses in his book

Metaphor: A Practical Introduction (2002). A conceptual metaphor is the heart of cognitive linguistics, because in this field a metaphor is regarded as

“understanding one conceptual domain in terms of the other conceptual domain”

(Kovecses, 2002: 3). This process interaction between two domain is known as mapping. This process of interaction is unidirectional. It means the mapping process always starts from the source domain to target domain.

From that comprehension, it can be figured out that conceptual metaphor maps two different domains. One of the domain is used to understand the other domain. These two domains are known as the source domain and the target domain. The source domain is the concept, or terminology, which is used to conceptualize target domain. An example given by Lakoff and Johnson, “time is money” indicates two different domain. In this conceptual metaphor, time acts as the target domain while money is the source domain. The source domain usually derives from the concrete world, while the target domain is asbtract. In Kovecses’ words,

They go from concrete to abstract domains; the most common source domains are concrete, while the most common targets are abstract concepts. In this way, conceptual metaphors can serve the purpose of understanding intangible, and hence difficult-to-understand, concepts (Kovecses, 2002: 25).

22

Therefore, a conceptual metaphor always starts with the concrete concepts in order to shed a light to the more intangible concepts.

This theory is relevant to this study, since it will serve as the foundation of the metaphorical basis of metaphors.

C. Theoretical Framework

The theories mentioned above are added in this section with definite purposes. The theory of parables will be used in answering the first question. This theory provides definition, elements, and structure of the parables. Therefore, there should not be a random selection process in identifying the parables. The second and third theory are used to clarify the parable as extended metaphor.

Theory of conceptual metaphor is essential for the analysis. This theory will be used to answer the second question formulated in this study, since the second question attempts to examine the conceptual metaphors in the parables.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

A. Object of the Study

The data taken in this study have been in the form of sentences or phrases.

The source of the data is from Holy Bible New Internatiol Version, from which the parables in St. Matthew’s Gospel are taken.

Holy Bible New International Version is published by Zondervan

Publishing House in 1983. This newest version of the Bible is a completely new translation of it done supervised by scholars. The original source of the Bible is taken from various texts in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. This new translation version focuses at the accuracy and the fidelity to the original texts.

B. Approach of the Study

The approach used for this study is cognitive linguistics. This relatively new field of lingustics study provides a bridge between language and thought. The emerging of cognitive linguistics begins in the 1970s. Since then, many researchers involve themselves in this relatively new area in linguistics study. The field of cognitive linguistics study is wide. It starts from a semantic study to historical linguistics. The most studied subject in cognitive linguistics is polysemy and metaphor (Croft and Cruse, 2004: 3).

23

24

The basis of cognitive linguistics is that language reflects the pattern of thought (Evans and Green, 2006: 5). It assumes that the mind acts as mediator to interact with the world by storing many information about it (Geeraerts and

Cuyckens, 2007: 5). Therefore, the focal point of cognitive linguistics lies on the relation between mind and the world as articulated in language use. Geerarts and

Cuyckens states that

Cognitive Linguistics is interested in our knowledge of the world and studies the question how natural language contributes to it (Geeraerts and Cuyckens, 2007: 6).

It has been stated before that metaphor is the most studied subject in cognitive linguistics. Indeed, metaphor is vastly studied in this field. The landmark of metaphorical study begins with the work of and Mark

Johnson in their book entitled Metaphor We Live By (1980).

Through their work, they postulate that it is erroneous to believe that metaphor is not an ordinary language (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980: 3). It is also false to believe that metaphor is given only to talented people. The last but not the least, it is somewhat incorrect to say metaphor is simply a matter of language expression.

In fact, metaphor is not extraterrestial for ordinary people. These ordinary people make us of it every day in many ocassions and they are not aware of it.

They do not use metaphor not for just for expressing something, but they do also think that something in that way. Ungerer and Schmid comment that 25

Metaphors are not just a way of expressing ideas by means of language, but a way of thinking about something (Ungerer and Schmid, 1996: 118).

It is an instrument that they use to conceptualize a concept in terms of another concept. This is known as conceptual metaphor.

This approach is related to this present study, because metaphor in cognitive linguistics is seen as the best example of aspects of human cognition featured in language usage (Grady, 2007: 188). Some points which can be concluded from this perspective in metaphor is that metaphor is a not just a matter of words, but it is a property of a concept which is used to understand the other more vague concepts through logical reasoning even by lay people (Kovecses, 2002: viii).

C. Method of the Study

The present study has employed a library method. There have been several steps taken in conducting the analysis.

1. Data Collection

The first step taken was conducting close-reading on the parables in St.

Matthew’s Gospel. After the close-reading process, the parables were then sorted out into a list. The next step taken was to copy the sorted parables, so that it would make the analysis more easily.

2. Data Analysis

After those initial steps, the first analysis was to dissect each parable. From the selection process, seventeen parables were collected. This selection process 26

was done in accordance with the theory of parable. This theory helped the selection process in the way it provided insights about the elements as well as the structure of parable.

The second step was to analyze the conceptual metaphors in the parables.

In this step, each parable was read once again in order to find the conceptual metaphor of it. Using theory of conceptual metaphor, this step came into conclusion.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS

This chapter presents the examination of the two questions stated in the beginning chapter. Since there are two problems, this chapter will be divided into two sections. The first part will attempt to identify the parables related to

Kingdom of Heaven. The second part will examine the conceptual metaphors which underlie in the parable. The findings in each section of this chapter will be written based on its qualifications.

A. The Parable about the Kingdom of Heaven

1. Parable a. The Parable of the Wise and Foolish Builder (Matthew 7: 24-27)

It has been stated previously that parable has shared typical opening just like similitude, i.e. the usage of expressions “like” or “as”. This parable introduces the story with such opening formula:

Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock (NIV, verse 24)

Structurally, the parable consists of only two main characters. The details added in this parable serve not just to ornament the story, but to convey certain purpose. For example, the following sentence is meant not just to embellish the story, but it serves to employ an idea:

27

28

The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash. (NIV, verses 25 and 27).

In the story, this sentence is repeated twice in order to give the idea of natural phenomenon so that the audience will make distinction of which builder is more prepared in building a house. The form of repetition, based on Bultmann’s theory, is essential in parable.

This parable also employs the contrastive unit. The entities being contrasted in this parable are the two builders. Specifically, it is the personality of the two builders which is contrasted. The first builder constructs his house with a plan, while the second builder constructs the house without any plans. This presence of contrastive method proves to be important element in the parable. Overall, the structure of the parable is developed. This parable belongs to the second type of parable, i.e. parable. b. The Parable of the Sower (Matthew 13: 3-8)

The second parable is told in front of the assembly of Jesus’ followers. This is revealed by the situation given by the writer of the Gospel. This narrative suits to be called parable for several considerations. First of all, it is a story about activity which occurs in daily life.

When Jesus narrated this parable, he did not use the typical beginning as it is found in the first parable. Instead, he begins by directly mentioning the character’s activity:

A farmer went out to sow his seed (NIV, verse 3). 29

Looking at this beginning, it is proper to classify this parable into the parable.

Moreover, it has more details despite the minimum amount of character.

This parable is economical in terms of the amount of the character. Unlike the first parable, this narrative includes only a single character. His existence in the story as the sole character is not without purpose, because later it will be found out that his single existence in there is to represent a concept. However, it is not this farmer that is to be the central point of the parable. It is the seed that is focal in the story. This can be known by the repetition of the phrases “some fell” (NIV, verses 4 and 5) and “other seed fell” (NIV, verses 7 and 8). According to

Bultmann, the form of repetition is utilizied to emphasize the important aspect of the story (Boucher, 1981: 24).

This character sows seed in four different soils. Those soils can be regarded as contrastive units, since every seed sown in each soil comes with different outcome. Last of all, this parable is narrated in one single event. c. The Parable of the Weeds (Matthew 13: 24-30)

This parable is narrated in sequence with the previous parable. this parable is introduced with typical beginnning, but this time it mentions two concepts which are compared

The Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field (NIV, verse 24).

This parable, compared to the first two parables, is the first parable to compare the concept of the Kingdom of Heaven with the other concept. In this 30

parable, the Kingdom of Heaven is parallel to the activity of a farmer. This is activity, like the second parable, which can be seen in daily occurence.

The structure of this parable is developed making possible to give rich details. Therefore, it might be proper to include this parable to parable. There might be objection about the characters. It is stated before that the amount of characters in parable is no more than three. In fact, this parable has four characters: the farmer, the enemy, the servants, and the harvesters. It might be simple to say it as an exception. However, it might be correct to regard servants and harvesters as one single unit, since they are subjects to the farmer who acts as the landowner. Therefore, to put it into comprehension, the parable consists of three characters: the landlord, the enemy of the landlord, and workers who work for the landlord.

There is a form of contrastive unit in this parable: the weeds and the wheat.

The consideration of this assumption is that the two concepts will be treated differently when the harvest comes. d. The Parable of the Net (Matthew 13: 47-48)

This narrative might generate the story from the parable of the Weeds. Only does this parable simplify its form and modify its story. Unlike the parable of the

Weeds, it does not have conversations in it. However, this parable can be said to be moderately developed. The introductory fomula of this parable is typical.

The Kingdom of Heaven is like a net that was let down and caught all kinds of fish (NIV, verse 47). 31

Looking at these three points, it can be concluded that this parable belongs to parable.

Structurally, there is only one character involved in the story, i.e. fishermen.

It is true that the fishermen are considered to be plural. However, Bultmann has stated before that these people should be treated as one single unit, since they share one characteristic, i.e., fisherman. The presence of the net is considered to be eminent. It is indicated by the fish which are caught by it. These fish are opposed to each other. From this contrastive unit, which is the important device of a narrative, it is true that it is really important to this parable. e. The Parable of the Lost Sheep (Matthew 18: 12-13)

This parable is told directly after the discourse about who is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven. The corpus of this parable is moderately developed. The introductory formula of this parable is unique, because it starts with a question

What do you think? If a man own a hundred sheep (NIV, verse 12)

Its unusual beginning makes it clear that this parable can be classified into parable. From its opening, there is no device of comparison, just like the parable of the Sower (Matthew 13: 3-8).

This parable involves two characters—a man and the sheep. From identification of the sheep, that man is likely to be a sheperd. There is no method of contrast in this parable as well as no repetition. The central of this parable is on the man’s decision to search one of his sheep which has gone ashtray. His 32

decision is considered to be strong message from this parable, even though if there is no further explanation by Jesus himself in verse 14. f. The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant (Matthew 18: 23-34)

This parable is more developed, making it possible to provide details, such as conversations. This narrative derives its story from the court life. The typical beginning occurs again in this parable.

Therefore, the Kingdom of Heaven is like a king who want to settle accounts with his servants (NIV, verse 23).

Specifically, this example suggests that Kingdom of Heaven is compared to a king’s relationship with one of his servants. There are two characters involved in the story. They are the king and the servants. This parable utilizes both repetitive and contrastive methods. The repetition occurs first in verse 26

The servant fell on his knees before him. ’Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything’ (NIV, verse 26). and then in verse 29.

His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back’ (NIV, verse 29).

It is true that the structure and the speaker of the repetition are different, but still it has one meaning—begging to be patient until the debt is settled. This is the first focal point of this parable.

The contrastive unit occurs in the opposing characteristics of the king and the unmerciful servant. The king is characterized as a compassionate person. This 33

can be traced by his decision to forgive his indebted servant. However, while this forgiven servant meets his contemporary who has debt to himself, this servant shows no mercy for his fellow servant. This indicates an opposing characteristic to the King’s.

To sum up the analysis, there are two importan aspects of this parable. The first aspect is emphasized in the of begging of as it is repeated twice in verse 26 and 29. The second aspect of this parable is the different characteristics of the two characters in responding to the first aspect as it is shown in the king’s and the servant’s responses. g. The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20: 1-15)

This narrative has developed corpus. It presents conversations between the landowner and his hired men. Here, the landowner serves as the source domain of comparison which is used to map the target domain, i.e. Kingdom of Heaven. The source domain is developed into story which is related to the domain of agriculture. The introductory formula of the parable is typical

For the Kingdom of Heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire men to work in his vineyard (NIV, verse 1).

Instrinsically, this parable has two main characters. They are the landowner and hired men. There is repetitive method found in the parable as shown in verse

4 :

You also go and work in my vineyard.. (NIV, verse 4). and verse 7 : 34

You also go and work in my vineyard (NIV, verse 7).

It is noticed that the concept a denarius—a validated money at that time— also occurs repetitively in this parable as it is stated in verse 2 “He agreed to pay them a denarius for the day and sent them into his vineyard” (NIV), verse 9, “The workers who hired about the eleventh hour came and each recieved a denarius”

(NIV), verse 10 “But each of them also received a denarius”, and verse 13

“Friend, I am not being unfair to you. Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius?”

(NIV).

The workers hired in different time might indicate the presence of contrastive method. There are four group of people who has been hired in different time. The first is in the first hour, the second is in the third hour, the third is in the sixth hour, and the last is in the eleventh hour. Therefore, it should be right to regard these people are different in terms of the time.

Considering the corpus of the parable as well as its internal structure, it might be appropriate to regard this parable as a parable. h. The Parable of the Two Sons (Matthew 21: 28-30)

This parable is concise in form. However, it is dynamic since it contains conversations in it. This parable opens with question imposed by Jesus

What do you think? There was a man who had two sons (NIV, verse 28). 35

This opening is the uniqeness of a parable. Such an opening is also found in the parable of the Sower and of the Lost Sheep. Its story derives from domestic family live.

This parable involves three characters, i.e. the father and the two sons.

There are repetitive and contrastive methods. The repetitive method is shown in the father’s inquiry for his sons to work in the vineyard.

Son, go and work today in the vineyard (NIV, 21).

The second occurance of his inquiry is not stated directly, since it takes indirect form. Still, it can be regarded as the repetition of the inquiry.

The contrastive method in this parable is revealed in the sons’ responses to the father’s inquiry. The first son answers ‘no’, while the second son replies ‘yes’.

Despite refusing it at first, the first son finally does what his father wishes. On the contrary, the second does not do that.

From the explanation above, the father’s inquiry and the sons’ responses to it must be considered to be important aspects for this parable. To sum up the discussion, it can be said that this parable is a parable. i. The Parable of the Tenants (Matthew 21: 33-39)

This parable is opened with the imperative then it is followed by the same formula as it is found in the Two Sons: 36

Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard (NIV, verse 33).

The corpus of the parable is much more detailed compared to the Two Sons. The opening of the story foreshadows the domain from which this story derives— agriculture.

The internal stucuture of the parable consists of three characters and a repetitive method. Actually, there are four characters in this parable. However, since the tenants and the servants work for the landowner, it must be regarded as one unit. The other characater is the son of the landowner. The repetitive method is implemented in the taken by the tenants to the landowner’s servants.

The tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned a third. Then he sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way (NIV, verse 35-36).

Not only do they kill the servants, they also kill the landowner’s son

So they took him out of the vineyard and killed him (NIV, 39).

What this characters do in response to the landowner’s envoys is characterized themselves in the story. This repetitive action of the tenants does emphasize the central attention in the story. From the examination of this parable, it might be righ to classify this parable as a parable. j. The Parable of the Wedding Banquet (Matthew 22: 1-13)

The parable of Wedding Banquet has its introductory formula just like the most parables have. This parable introduces the Kingdom of Heaven by comparing it with the king who has a feast 37

The Kingdom of Heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son (NIV, verse 1).

The story derives its material from the court life which celebrates the wedding of the king’s son. The form of the parable is developed making it possible to provide details and conversations.

This narrative consists of three characters. They are the king, the servants, and people in the street. The people in the street shared a common characteristic, i.e. people outside the court. This narrative employs both repetition and contrast.

The repetitive method occurs when the king sends his servants to invite people on the street to come to wedding banquet. The first occurance happens in verse 3.

This invitation is rejected by the people. The second occurence is repeated in verse 4. The response to the second invitation is vary, more specific and extreme.

But they paid no attention and went off—one to his field, another to his business. The rest seized his servants, mistreated them and killed them (NIV, verses 5-7).

The king then sends the last invitation as shown in verse 8. This time, he orders to find all the people—both good and bad. Now, the contrastive method appears in this binary opposition. This bad people is assumed to be those who are not properly dressed in the banquet. This is known from someone who is thrown out from the feast for not being properly dressed. From the examination from these two concepts, it can be assumed that the invitation and binary opposition as represented in good and bad people indicate aspects to be considered important to this parable. To end the discussion, it is appropriate to categorize this parable as a parable. 38

k. The Parable of the Ten Virgins (Matthew 25: 1-13)

This parable takes its source material from a weeding occasion. Its typical beginning compares Kingdom of Heaven with the ten virgins who is prepared to wait for the bridegroom. The introductory formula of this parable is relatively new, because it uses the

At that time the Kingdom of Heaven will be like ten virgins.. (NIV, verse

1).

Its corpus is developed into conversations, so that it is dynamic. There is contrastive method in this narrative. This method is represented in the opposite characteristic of the virgins. Five of the virgins are considered wise because they prepare themselves by providing more oil for their lamps while waiting for the bridegroom. On the contrary, the other five women are foolish, because they do not prepare to bring the additional oil for their lamps. When the bridegroom finally appears, the foolish virgins are away to buy the oil. This point are focal to this parable.

Examining the corpus and elements of the parable, it can be concluded that this parable belongs to parable. l. The Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25: 14-30)

This is to be the last parable in St. Matthew’s Gospel. This narrative takes its story from the economical field. This parable has a developed corpus. It 39

provides details and conversations in it. The introductory formula is again similar to the Ten Virgins.

This narrative involves two characters, i.e. the master and the servants. The recurrent concept in this narrative, which indicates its important presence, i.e. talent. There occurs also a repetitive statements as

’Master’, he said, ‘you entrusted me with five talents. See, I have gained five more.’ His master replied. ‘well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with few things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’ (NIV, verses 20-21).

This statements occurs again in verses 22-23. Despite the different amount of talents given, it still has the same concept, i.e. money.

The last servant immediately indicates the contrast with the previous two servants.

His action early in the story foreshadow his characteristic. The master finally sends remark about him as being, “wicked, lazy servant” (NIV,verse 26).

Therefore, different talents and characteristics between the first two servants and the third servant are considered to be essential concept to this parable. To sum up, the form and the internal structure of the parable indicates that this is parable.

2. Similitude a. The Parable of the Household (Matthew 13: 52)

This parable occurs to conclude the parable of the Net. Parable of the

Household is concise in form. It is complete in only one sentence which consists of only five lines. Looking at its typical beginning, it is clear that the concept to be 40

compared of this parable refers to the teachers of the law. These people are then compared to the owner of a house who has both old and new furniture. By examining its form, this parable belongs to similitude.

Therefore every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the Kingdom of Heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old (NIV, verse 52).

Structurally, this parable has only one character. Although this character is the point of comparison, but it is not the focal of the parable. It is the furniture which is important to this parable, since this concept has two different characteristics—the new and the old furniture—which indicate the contrast. b. The Parable of the Mustard Seed (Matthew 13: 31-32)

The Mustard Seed is narrated in sequence with parable of the Weeds. This is to be the first parable which has a concise form. Examining the content of the parable, there are not much details compared to the previous three parables. This parable consists only of seven lines

The parable is introduced by

The Kingdom of Heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field (NIV, verse 31).

This parable evokes the image of the Kingdom of Heaven by comparing it with the farming activity. Looking at these two points, the content and the introductory formula, it can be concluded that this parable belongs to the first type—a similitude. 41

There is one character in the story, namely the farmer. This farmer sows seed in his field. Unlike the previous seed in the previous three parables, this parable is more specific from the beginning about the genus of the seed, e.g. mustard seed. The specificness of the seed is considered to be important. This assumption will be strengthened by the form of contrastive unit related to the seed in verse 32

Though it is the smallest of all you seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of the garden plants and becomes a tree.. (NIV, verse 32).

Parallel to Bultmann’s theory, contrastive unit is a literary device which is used to emphasize the important aspect of a story, just like repetition. c. The Parable of the Yeast (Mattew 13: 33)

This is to be the second of the four shortest parables found in St. Matthew’s

Gospel. The form of the parable is very concise. It has only four lines in which there exists only one character. The introductory formula is still the same. In this parable, the image of the Kingdom of Heaven is parallel to the yeast that woman uses to make a . Therefore, it can be classified into similitude. There is a form of contrastive unit in the parable, though it is implied. According to Leaks and Smith, yeast is very small (Leaks, 2003: 299; and Smith, 1989: 176). This small concept is then compared to the result of the dough, which is bigger. At this point, it is proper to say that the focal point of the parable is in the yeast.

42

d. The Parable of the Hidden Treasure (Matthew 13: 44)

Robert H. Smith regards this parable as a twin of the next parable (Smith,

1989: 179). It is twin in terms of the form as well as the course of the story. This parable consists only of four lines. This story also presents only one character and its identity remains anonymous. As usual, this parable is introduced with the typical formula.

The Kingdom of Heaven is like a treasure hidden in the field (NIV, Verse

44).

It is clearly stated the point of comparison is on the concept of hidden treasure. However, it is not enough to draw the conclusion only from the intorductory formula. To make it solid, one can see the course of the story. It is the hidden treasure that makes that unidentified man decides to sell all his belongings.

When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field (NIV, Verse 44).

Therefore, it is true that hidden treasure is an essential concept to this parable. To sum up the discussion on this parable, it might be proper to put this parable into a similitude. e. The Parable of the Pearl (Matthew 13: 45)

This is the twin of the parable of the Hidden treasure. structurally, it has the same form with the previous one: typical beginning, four lines, one thing, one 43

character, and the course of action. What makes this parable different is that this parable is more specific. The character is recognized as a merchant and the treasure is identified as the pearl. There are no commentaries about this. However, it can be assumed that the specificness of this parable tends to draw more closer connection to the real situation.

This parable still has the same focal point on the concept compared with

Kingdom of Heaven—the pearl. Indeed the character and the treasure are specific, but the course of action is approximately still the same:

When he found one of the great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it (NIV, verse 45).

By examining these two parables, the form of repetition appears at last. In parable of the Hidden Treasure, there is sentence “..in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field” (NIV, verse 44), while in the Pearl it is stated ”he went away and sold everything (NIV, verse 45). These two utterances indicate that that treasure is the focal of these two parables.

Based on the analysis of the parable, eighteen parables have been identified.

Most of the parable are parables, a small number of them are similtudes, while no exemplary story is found in St. Matthew’s Gospel. Another aspect concluded in the story is all of the parables derive their stories from the physical world in order to comprehend Kingdom of Heaven. This last point will be discussed in the next part of this chapter.

44

B. Conceptual Metaphors of the Parabel

1. Agriculture Domain i. The Parable of the Sower (Matthew 13: 3-9)

Looking at glance, the title itself indicates that this parable derives its source domain from agriculture. Indeed, the words like sower, seed, soil, plant, root, thorns, and crop are associated with agricultural field. This parable uses this domain as the sole source domain of the parable. This parable still has the same topic as the previous one. Its focal point lies on the personality of the people, to whom the message about Kingdom of Heaven is delivered. The concepts used in this parable are explained by Jesus in details (Matthew 13: 18-23). Reading through the explanation, it can be concluded that the conceptual metaphor of this parable is HUMAN IS SOIL. ii. The Parable of the Weeds (Matthew 13: 24-30)

This parable is uttered after explaining the parable of the Sower. The topic of this narrative is about the separation between good and evil. When explaining this topic, Jesus uses terms from agriculture. Words, such as good seed, wheat, sprouted, weeds, root up, grow, harvest, harvesters, and barn. These words are linked up well with agricultural domain. Again, Jesus takes agricultural terms as the source domain in order to explain the point the parable. This parable is also explained in details by Jesus (Matthew 13: 37-43). From his explanation, it is shown that this parable uses conceptual metaphor HUMAN IS PLANT. This is 45

emphasized in the contrastive concept wheat and weeds. In verses 38-39, he explains that

The good seed stands for the sons of the Kingdom. The weeds are the sons

of evil one (NIV, verse 38-39).

By considering the importance of contrastive unit in the parable and the focal point of this parable, it can be concluded that the conceptual metaphor of this parable, indeed, HUMAN IS PLANT. This conceptual metaphor is very conventional. iii. The Parable of the Mustard Seed (Matthew 13: 31-32)

It seems that agricultural domain is the recurrent source in the parables in

St. Matthew’s Gospel. The title has already suggested that this has connection with agriculture. The focal point of this parable is about Jesus’ ministry spreading the words of God. The parable utilizes the contrastive unit in terms of quantity.

This is sampled in the verse 32:

Though it is the smallest of all your seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest

of garden plants and becomes a tree.. (NIV, verse 32).

From this passage, it indicates that his ministry is small, and often overlooked, because it does not have significant quantity. However, when it grows it will provide shelter for those who believe in it. Taken the focal point of this parable, this narrative has conceptual metaphor MINISTRY OF KINGDOM OF

HEAVEN IS PLANT. 46

iv. The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20: 1-16)

This parable returns its basic conceptual domain to agriculture. This makes agriculture to be the most recurrent domain in parable about Kingdom of Heaven in St. Matthew’s Gospel. However, there are only two metaphorical linguistics expressions which relate to this domain, i.e landowner and vineyard. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider this parable having agricultural domain as its source domain.

By considering words like to hire men to work, pay them a denarius, workers, and pay them their wages, it can be judged apropriately that this parable emphasizes its conceptual domain from labor domain.

The intended goal of this parable is to express the idea of sharing the same reward that will be earned from God regarding of serving His will. By looking at these two aspects, the conclusion is that this parable has conceptual metaphor

GOD IS EMPLOYER. v. The Parable of the Tenants (Matthew 21:33-40)

This narrative lies it conceptual domain in agricultural domain. In this parable, this domain is used to enrich details of this narrative. Metaphorical linguistics expressions related to this domain are landowner, planted, vineyard, winepress, harvest, and farmers. These are concepts derived from the domain of agriculture. These metaphorical linguistics expression occurs also in the previous parables which use agriculture. 47

The idea of this parable focuses on the wrath of God upon people who disregard God’s envoys. The landowner here represents God and the son refers to

Jesus himself. The concept of a landowner has occured before in the previous parable (Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard). The servants might be interpreted as the prophets. The vineyard—parallel to field—is the world, while the farmers refers to those Israeli who reject the prophet. Note that the concept of a farmer here is not in the same sense like farmer in the Parable of the Sower.

Farmer in that parable is parallel to the landowner and the sower (Parable of the

Weeds and Parable of the Mustard Seed). Based on the analysis, the conceptual metaphor of this parable is GOD’S WRATH IS FATHER’S .

2. Treasure Domain i. The Parable Hidden Treasure and the Pearl (Matthew 13: 44-46)

These two parables will be discussed at once, because they are told in sequence and share the same conceptual domain. These parables express the mental state of the person who can find the Kingdom of Heaven. Both characters are extremely joyful when they have found the treasure. Treasure, great value, , and merchant are characteristics of treasure domain. The joyfullness of finding Kingdom of Heaven is parallel to the joyfullness of finding precious thing.

To classify treasure and pearl into one concept, the term used for this is a precious thing. Therefore, it can be concluded that the conceptual metaphor of this parable is KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IS PRECIOUS THING.

48

3. Wedding Domain i. The Parable of the Wedding Banquet (Matthew 22: 1-14)

This narrative use the concept from court life domain in its beginning, i.e. king. However, the title and the course of the story relate to the domain of marriage. Metaphorical linguistics expressions, such as weeding clothes, weeding hall, and wedding banquet. Moreover, the first verse indicates the presence of the bridegroom, i.e. the king’s son

The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son (NIV, verse 1).

The demonstrations of those metaphorical linguistics expressions is that the king, just like in Parable of the Unmerciful Servant, refers God, while the son, similar in the parable of the Wedding Banquet demonstrates Jesus, as the Son of

God. The party itself, the wedding banquet, is the Jesus’ initiation as the Messiah.

The servants, like in the prior parables are related to prophets who have preached for the messiah. This is strengthened by the killing of the servants by the invited people which is parallel with Parable of the Tenants. The dress in the wedding refers to the attitude of people.

From the firs step, it is revealed that the most recurrent domain in the parable comes out from the weeding domain. The second step demonstrates some recurrent concepts which can be found in the previous parables. Therefore, the last step of this examination shows that the conceptual metaphor of this parable is

THE COMING OF THE MESSIAH IS A WEDDING PARTY. 49

ii. The Parable of the Ten Virgins (Matthew 25: 1-13)

This parable has the issue of Jesus’ second coming. The story is developed with references to weeding domain. The parable demonstrates the concept of bridegroom as the messiah, while the ten virgins are people who wait for the messiah. The intended goal of waiting for the bridegroom is to be taken into the wedding banquet, which is the heavenly feast.

The first two steps have identified the domain and the demonstration of the parable. From these steps, the conceptual metaphor of this parable is THE

COMING OF THE MESSIAH IS A WEDDING PARTY.

4. Animal Domain i. The Parable of the Net (Matthew 13: 47-51)

This parable has the same topic with Parable of the Weeds. Only is this parable simplified in its form. The source domain of this parable is also switched from agriculture. Although the title presumes that it has relation with fishing, there is a need to exemplify the metaphorical linguistics expressions of the parable. Words like net, fish, and fishermen are related to the domain of fishery.

As mentioned afore, this parable has the same topic with Parable of the Weeds.

Then they sat down and collected the good fish in the baskets, but threw the bad away (NIV, 48). 50

The difference is that this parable conceptualizes good and bad people with good and bad fish. Therefore, the conceptual metaphor of this parable is HUMAN

IS ANIMAL. ii. The Parable of the Lost Sheep (Matthew 18: 12-14)

Parable of the Lost Sheep expresses the idea of God’s love for mankind.

From this parable, Jesus emphasizes his mission to search for the sinners. The title suggests that this parable associates with husbandry domain. This domain is used as the source domain. Husbandry is reccurent domain which is used thoroughly in

Hily Bible, especialy in Psalm. In this parable, sinners are conceptualized as the sheep which has gone ashtray. Similar to the Parable of the Net, this narrative also employs the conceptual metaphor HUMAN IS ANIMAL.

5. Business Domain i. The Parable of the Unmerciful servant (Matthew 18: 23-35)

This narrative emphasizes on act of forgiving. This topic is focal in Jesus’ teaching. When explaining about this topic, Jesus uses concept king to refer to

God. This has already revealed by Brettler’s study, God is King: Understanding

Israelite Metaphor. Based on this explanation, Jesus draws terms from the court life domain. Words such as king and servants belong to this domain. However, the focal point of this parable is not derived from the court life domain. In fact, this parable derives its conceptual domain from economy. Words such as accounts, owed, talent, pay, debt, pay back, and denarii are more recurrent than terms from 51

court life domain. Here the act forgiveness the sin is parallel to the king’s forgiveness to the servant (NIV, verse 35). Sin as the important clue for this parable is conceptualized by debt. Therefore, the conceptual metaphor for this parable is SIN IS DEBT. ii. The Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25: 14-30)

This narrative introduces a new domain, but still has the same topic as the last two parables. The source domain of this parable derives from business domain. Metaphorical linguistics expressions representing this domain are money, talents, accounts, deposit, bankers, and interest.

The parable conceptualizes Jesus as the man—or the master—of the servants who are regarded to be those who want to be his disciples. Money and talents are in the same sense the seed, while interest is parallel to the plant, or the fruit.

From the analysis, it can be concluded that this parable has conceptual domain which originates from economy domain. The conceptual metaphor for this parable is SECOND COMING IS BUSINESS INTEREST.

From the analysis, seventeen conceptual metaphors are collected. Five parables derive its source domain from agriculture, while wedding domain is used to conceptualize two parables. Treasure domain is also used to conceptualize two parables. The remaining parables derive its source domain from different field, 52

such as architecture, pastry, fishery, husbandry, interior house, court life, family relationship, and bussiness domain.

6. Architecture Domain i. The Parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders (Matthew 7: 24-27)

This parable has association with the architectural domain. This parable is intended to explain two kinds of people in respect to the Kingdom of Heaven. The course of its narrative is filled with terms from architecture. Builders, house, foundation, and rock are concepts originated from this domain. Beside using architecture, this parable employs also terms from the weather domain. The metaphorical linguistics expressions which indicate weather domain are shown in the sentence below

The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house (NIV, verse 25).

Considering that the italicized words are in full sentece, it can be read as bad weather. From this first step, it can be clearly seen that this parable uses the domain of architecture and weather as the source domains of the conceptual metaphor.

In its beginning, it clearly shows that this parable conceptulizes two kinds of personalities in respect to Kingdom of Heaven. The first is the wise one, and the second is the foolish builder. From this point, the conclusion that can be drawn is that the conceptual metaphor of this parable is HUMANS ARE BUILDING

CONSTRUCTIONS. It is mentioned afore that this parable also includes the 53

weather domain. The terms related to the second domain are utilized to express the troubles in life. Therefore, the second conceptual metaphor found in this parable is BAD WEATHER IS A TROUBLE IN LIFE. These two conceptual metaphors are considered the important concepts which serve as the basic foundation of the parable.

7. Pastry Domain i. The Parable of the Yeast (Matthew 13: 33)

This short narrative—similitude—is told in sequence with the prior one. It still has the same emphasis on the ministry. However, unlike the parable of the

Mustard Seed, this parable switches into the pastry domain. Metaphorical linguistics expressions, such as yeast, flour, and dough, are related to pastry.

These are ingredients used to make a bread. Again, the contrastive unit used here relates to quantity. Yeast and dough are two different concepts which have different size. The prior is small, while the latter is big. To sum up, this narrative employs its source domain from pastry. Therefore, the conceptual metaphor of this parable is MINISTRY OF KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IS PASTRY.

8. Houseshold Domain i. The Parable of the Household (Matthew 13: 52)

This parable is related to the concept of interior of a house. The point of this parable directs to the people—teachers of the law—who understand the presence of Kingdom of Heaven. In expression this idea, Jesus derives the concept of 54

property of a house. This property is furniture which is being contrasted as new and old furniture. Here, the furniture refers to the law. The old furniture is the law prior to Jesus, while the new furniture refers to the message which he brings to the people. therfore, it can be said that the conceptual domain of this parable derives its source property of a house. Meanwhile, the conceptual metaphor of this parable is LAW IS FURNITURE.

9. Family Domain i. The Parable of the Two Sons (Matthew 21: 28-31)

This parable narrates relationship between a father and his two sons. From this parable, Jesus expresses the importance of showing deed rather than word.

Relationship between father and son is common in the Holy Bible, because this reflects the relationship between God and people. At this point, it can be argued that this parable lies its source domain on domain of family. Since the point of this parable refers to God’s favour to those people who practice the words of God into deed, it can be concluded that the conceptual metaphor of this parable is

KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IS PRACTICAL DEED.

From the analysis, seventeen conceptual metaphors are collected. Five parables derive its source domain from agriculture, while wedding domain is used to conceptualize two parables. Treasure domain is also used to conceptualize two parables. Business domain and animal domain area also used to conceptualize in four parables. The remaining conceptual metaphors derive its source domain from varioes fields such as architecture, pastry, household, and family relationship. CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION

Based from the analysis conducted in the first part, this study has succeeded to outline seventeen parable. By using the theory of parable proposed by Boucher and Bultman, this study has identified twelve parables which are parable.

The parables which belong the second type of parable—parable—are the

Parable of the Wise and Foolish Builder (Matthew 7: 24-27), the Parable of the

Sower (Matthew 13: 3-8), the Parable of the Weeds (Matthew 13: 24-30), the

Parable of the Net (Matthew 13: 47-48), the Parable of the Lost Sheep (Matthew

18: 12-13), the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant (Matthew 18: 23-34), the

Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20: 1-15), the Parable of the

Two Sons (Matthew 21: 28-30), the Parable of the Tenants (Matthew 21: 33-39), the Parable of the Wedding Banquet (Matthew 22: 1-13), the Parable of the Ten

Virgins (Matthew 25: 1-13), and the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25: 14-30).

Meanwhile, five parables are considered to be similitudes. Parables which are identified as similitude are the Parable of the Household (Matthew 13: 52), the

Parable of the Mustard Seed (Matthew 13: 31-32), the Parable of the Yeast

(Mattew 13: 33), the Parable of the Hidden Treasure (Matthew 13: 44), and the

Parable of the Pearl (Matthew 13: 45)

The findings mentioned above are based on Bultmann’s theory about characteristics of parable. From this analysis, it is also found that most parables

55

56

utilize contrastive concepts to emphasize the important aspects of the narrative.

Meanwhile, there are only small number of parables which use the repetitive device.

The second anaylsis attempts to excavate the conceptual metaphors of the parables. Before finding the conceptual metaphors, the first step taken is to define the source domain of the conceptual metaphor of the parables. From this first step, it is concluded that the most recurrent domain is from agriculture. This domain is used to conceptualize parables, such as the Parable of the Sower (Matthew 13: 3-

9), the Parable of the Weeds (Matthew 13: 24-30), the Parable of the Mustard

Seed (Matthew 13: 31-32), the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matthew

20: 1-16), and the Parable of the Tenants (Matthew 21:33-40). The second occurence is from wedding, business, treasure, and animal domain. Parables which use terms from wedding domain are the Parable of the Wedding Banquet

(Matthew 22: 1-14) and the Parable of the Ten Virgins (Matthew 25: 1-13).

Parables which derive its source domain from treasure domain are the Parable

Hidden Treasure (Matthew 13: 44) and the Parable of the Pearl (Matthew 13: 45-

46). Parables from business domain are the Parable of the Unmerciful servant

(Matthew 18: 23-35) and the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25: 14-30), while animal domain is used in the Parable of the Net (Matthew 13: 47-51) and the

Parable of the Lost Sheep (Matthew 18: 12-14). The other parables derive its source domain from architecture (the parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders,

Matthew 7: 24-27), family (the Parable of the Two Sons, Matthew 21: 28-31), household (the Parable of the Household, Matthew 13: 52), and pastry (the 57

Parable of the Yeast, Matthew 13: 33). From this analysis, it is also concluded that the domains used originate from the more concrete and physical world, while the abstract concepts of the parable are personality, ministry about the Kingdom of

Heaven, human, God, sin and second coming.

By revealing the second finding, this study has completed the analysis of two problems. The second question has exposed the conceptual metaphors which are in accordance with cognitive linguistics’s claim that the source domain of the conceptual domain is derived from the physical world, while the abstract concept serves as the target domain. The suggestion for the next study is to find the cultural background which has influenced the conceptual metaphors of the parables.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boucher, Madeleine L. The Parables. Dublin: Veritas Publication, 1981.

Brettler, Marc Zvi. Understanding Israelite Metaphor. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989.

Croft, William and D. Alan Cruse. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Crossan, John Dominic. In Parables: The Challange of Historical Jesus. New York: Harper and Row Publisher: 1973.

Donahue S.J., John R. The Gospel in Parable: Metaphor, Narrative, and Theology in the Synoptic Gospels. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988.

Evans, Vyvyan and Michelle Green. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd, 2006.

Geeraerts, Dirk and Hubert Huyckens. The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (Ed. Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Huyckens. Oxford: Oxford Press, 2007.

Gowler, David B. What are They Saying about Parable.

Grady, Joseph. The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Ed. Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Huyckens. Oxford: Oxford Press, 2007.

Holy Bible, The. New International Version. Detroit: Zondervan Bible Publishers: 1983.

Howie, Bonnie. Because You Bear This Name: Conceptual Metaphor and Meaning 1 Peter. Boston: Brill, 2006.

Kovecses, Zoltan. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: , 2002.

Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. Metaphor We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1980.

Longman. of Contemporary English. Essex: England, 2003.

58

59

McArthur, Tom. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.

McFague, Sallie. Speaking in Parables. Philadelphia, Fortress Press: 1975.

Perrin, Norman. Jesus and the Language of the Kingdom. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1976.

Scott, Bernard Brandon. Hear Then the Parables: A Commentary on the . Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1989.

Smith, Robert H., Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament: Matthew. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1989.

Suharyo Pr., Ignatius. Pengantar Injil Sinoptik. Yogyakarta: Kanisius, 1989.

Ungerer, Friedrich and Hans-Joerg Schmid. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. New York: Addison Wesley Longman Limited, 1996.

APPENDICES APPENDIX I

Agriculture Domain

A farmer went out to sow his seed” (Mat 13: 3)

Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil” (Mat 13: 5)

But when the sun came up, the plant was schorched, and they withered because they had no root (Mat 13: 6)

Other seed feel among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants (Mat 13:

7)

Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop (Mat 13: 8)

But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away (Mat 13: 25)

Because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them (Mat 13: 29)

Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters

(Mat 13: 30)

Then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn (Mat 13: 30)

The kingdom of Heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field (Mat 13: 31)

Though it is the smallest of all your seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and perch in its branches (Mat 13: 32)

60

61

For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire men to work in the vineyard (Mat 20: 1)

There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey (Mat 21: 33)

When the harvest time approached, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his > (Mat 21: 34)

Treasury Domain

The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in the field (Mat 13: 44)

Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls (Mat

13: 45)

When he found one of a great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it (Mat 13: 46)

Wedding Domain

The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son (Mat 22: 2)

But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes (Mat 22: 11)

And the weeding hall was filled with the guests (Mat 22: 9) 62

At that time the kingdom of heaven wil be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom (Mat 25: 1)

The virgins who were ready went with him to the wedding banquet (Mat 25:

10)

Architecture Domain

Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock (Mat 7: 24)

Yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock (Mat 7: 25)

Pastry Domain

The kingdom of Heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into a large amount of flour until it worked all through the dough (Mat 13: 33)

Animal Domain

Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish (Mat 13: 47).

When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore (Mat 13: 48).

Then they sat down and collected the good fish in the baskets, but threw the bad away (Mat 13: 47).

If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not 63

leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off

(Mat 18: 12).

Household Domain

Therefore every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old (Mat 13: 52)

Family Domain

What do you think? There was a man who had two sons. He went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work today in the vineyard’ (Mat 21: 28)

Then the father went to the other son and said the same thing (Mat 21: 30)

Labour Domain

For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire men to work in the vineyard (Mat 20: 1)

He agreed to pay them a denarius for the day and sent them into his vineyard

(Mat 20: 2)

’Because no one has hired us,’ they answered (Mat 20: 7)

When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman (Mat 20: 8) 64

Call the workers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first (Mat 20: 8)

Business Domain who called his servants and entrusted his property to them (Mat 25: 14)

To one he gave five talents of money, to another two talents, and to another one talent, each according to his ability (Mat 25: 15)

But the man who had received the one talent went off, dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money (Mat 25: 18)

After a long time the master of the servants returned and settled accounts with them (Mat 25: 19)

Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest (Mat 25: 27) the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants (Mat 18: 23)

As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talent was brought to him (Mat 18: 24).

Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt (Mat 18: 25).

But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii (Mat 18: 28). APPENDIX II

Parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders (Matthew 7: 24-27)

24”Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock, 25The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.”

Parable of the Sower (Matthew 13: 3-9)

3Then he told them many things in parables, saying: “A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6But when the sun came up, the plant was schorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7Other seed feel among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. 8Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop—a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown.

9He who has ears, let him hear.”

65

66

Parable of the Weeds (Matthew 13: 24-30)

24Jesus told them another parable: “The kingdom of Heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared. 27”The owner’s servants came to him and said, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Where the did the weeds come from?’ 28”’An enemy did this’, he replied. “The servant asked him,

‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’. 29”’No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. 30Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’”

The Parable of the Mustard Seed (Matthew 13: 31-32)

31He told them another parable: “The kingdom of Heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field. 32Though it is the smallest of all your seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and perch in its branches.”

The Parable of the Yeast (Matthew 13: 33)

33He told them another parable: “The kingdom of Heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into a large amount of flour until it worked all through the dough.” 67

The Parable of Hidden Treasure (Matthew 13: 44)

44”The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in the field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field.”

The Parable of the Pearl (Matthew 13: 45-46)

45”Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls.

46When he found one of a great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it.

The Parable of the Net (Matthew 13: 47-51)

47”Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish. 48When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore. Then they sat down and collected the good fish in the baskets, but threw the bad away. 49This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 51Have you understood all these things?”

Parable of the Household (Matthew 13: 52)

52He said to them, “Therefore every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old.” 68

The Parable of the Lost Sheep (Matthew 18: 12-14)

12”What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? 13And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. 14In the same way your father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost.”

The Parable of the Unmerciful servant (Matthew 18: 23-35)

23“Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talent was brought to him. 25Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt. 26The servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me’, he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ 27The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go. 28But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii. He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’, he demanded. 29His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.’ 30But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened. 32Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said,

‘I cancelled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33Shouldn’t you have 69

had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ 34In his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

35This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart.”

The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20: 1-16)

1”For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire men to work in the vineyard. 2He agreed to pay them a denarius for the day and sent them into his vineyard. 3About the third hour he went out and saw others standing in the marketplace doing nothing. 4He told them, ‘You also go and work in my vineyard, an I will pay you whatever is right’. 5So he went. He went out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour and did the same thing.

6About the eleventh hour he went out and found still others standing around. He asked them, ‘Why have you been standing here all day long doing nothing?’

7’Because no one has hired us,’ they answered. He said to them, ‘You also go and work in my vineyard’. 8When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Call the workers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first. 9The workers who were hired about the eleventh hour came and each received a denarius. 10So when those came who were hired first, they expected to receive more. But each one of them also received a denarius. 11When they received it, they began to grumble against the landowner.

12’These men who were hired last worked only one hour’, they said, ‘and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat 70

of the day’. 13But he answered one of them, ‘Friend I am not being unfair to you.

Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius? 14Take your pay and go. I want to give the man who has hired the last the same as I gave you. 15Don’t I have right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?’.

16So the last will be the first, and the first will be last”.

The Parable of the Two Sons (Matthew 21: 28-31)

28”What do you think? There was a man who had two sons. He went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work today in the vineyard’. 29’I will not’, he answered, but later he changed his mind and went. 30Then the father went to the other son and said the same thing. He answered, ‘I will, sir’, but he did not go. 31Which of the two did what his father wanted?”

The Parable of the Tenants (Matthew 21:33-40)

33“Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey. 34When the harvest time approached, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his fruit. 35The tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned the third.

36Then he sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way. 37Last of all, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son’, he said. 38But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him and take his inheritance’. 39So they 71

took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. 40Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”

The Parable of the Wedding Banquet (Matthew 22: 1-14)

1Jesus spoke to the again in parables, saying: 2“The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son. 3He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell them to come, but they refused to come. 4Then he sent some more servants and said, ‘Tell those who have been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen and fattened cattle have been butchered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet’. 5But they paid no attention and went off—one to his field, another to his business. 6The rest seized his servants, mistreated them and killed them. 7The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed those murderers and burned their city. 8Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited did not deserve to come. 9Go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you find’. 10So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the people they could find, both good and bad, and the weeding hall was filled with the guests. 11But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. 12‘Friend’, he said, ‘how did you fet in here without wedding clothes?’. The man was speechless. 13Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth’. 14For many are invited, but few are chosen”.

72

The Parable of the Ten Virgins (Matthew 25: 1-13)

1“At that time the kingdom of heaven wil be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. 2Five of them were foolish and five were wise. 3The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. 4The wise, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. 5The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep. 6At midnight the cry rang out: ‘Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’ 7Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. 8The foolish ones said to the wise,

“Give us some of you oil; our lamps are going out’. 9‘No’, they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’ 10But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut. 11Later the others also came. ‘Sir! Sir!’, they said. ‘Open the door for us!’ 12But he replied, ‘I tell you the truth, I don’t know you.’ 13Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.”

The Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25: 14-30)

14“Again, it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his property to them. 15To one he gave five talents of money, to another two talents, and to another one talent, each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey. 16The man who received five talents went at once and put his money to work and gained five more. 17So also, the one woth the two talents gained two more. 18But the man who had received the one talent went off, dug a 73

hole in the ground and hid his master’s money. 19After a long time the master of the servants returned and settled accounts with them. 20The man who had received five talents brought the other five. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with five talents. See, I have gained five more.’ 21His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’ 22The man with the two talents also came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with two talents; see, I have gained two more.’ 23His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’ 24Then the man who had recieved one talent came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed. 25So I was afraid and went out and hid your talent in the ground. See, here is what belongs to you.’ 26His master replied, ‘You wicked, lazys servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? 27Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest. 28‘Take the talent from him and give it to the one who has the talents. 29For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 30And throw that wortheless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’”