Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Metaphorical and non-metaphorical imagery use in vocal pedagogy : an investigation of underlying cognitive… Jestley, Jennifer Aileen 2011

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
24-ubc_2011_fall_jestley_jennifer.pdf [ 3.02MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 24-1.0055335.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0055335-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0055335-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0055335-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0055335-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0055335-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0055335-source.json
Full Text
24-1.0055335-fulltext.txt
Citation
24-1.0055335.ris

Full Text

METAPHORICAL AND NON-METAPHORICAL IMAGERY USE IN VOCAL PEDAGOGY: AN INVESTIGATION OF UNDERLYING COGNITIVE ORGANISATIONAL CONSTRUCTS  by JENNIFER AILEEN JESTLEY  B.Mus., The University of British Columbia, 1976 M.Mus., The University of British Columbia, 1981  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY  in  THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES  (Curriculum Studies)  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) October 2011  © Jennifer Aileen Jestley, 2011  ii Abstract  This study investigates the metaphorical and non-metaphorical imagery used by voice teachers for pedagogical purposes. The study objectives were to investigate what—if any—underlying pictorial, structural, and/or conceptual approaches governed the expressions employed. In order to analyse the expressions offered by the voice teachers, I drew on linguist George Lakoff’s and philosopher/linguist Mark Johnson’s conceptual metaphor theory for help in revealing cross-domain mapping. I employed two components of their theory in order to account for the logic which connects singers’ shared embodied experiences with the non-imagistic realm of tone creation, and borrowed from a third component to show a particular underlying conceptual image which holistically organised a number of discrete expressions and actions in singing. To address my objectives, I carried out an instrumental case study at a university and a community college located in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. The data came from interviews with six voice teachers working at these two institutes, and covered four broad categories commonly addressed in vocal pedagogy: Body alignment, Breath management, Resonance/Phonation, and Sound production. My findings clearly indicated that the voice teachers participating in this study employed all three organizational constructs. The analysis showed that the underlying structures involved in these constructs had sufficient internal structure to constrain meaning and reasoning. Even abstract concepts such as the colour and quality of tone were shown to be constrained by embodied experience through a process of association. Such transferences of information indicated that the expressions examined were not arbitrarily construed, despite arguments to the contrary. Notably, this study establishes a basis for contending that the three constructs which emerged from the data qualify as the “common [vocabularies]” which the vocal community has long sought to establish (Cleveland, 1989, p. 41).  iii Preface  Ethics approval granted by the UBC Behavioural Research Ethics Board UBC BREB NUMBER H06-03792  iv Table of contents  Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... ii Preface....................................................................................................................................... iii Table of contents........................................................................................................................iv List of tables...............................................................................................................................ix List of figures......................................................................................................................... xvii Acknowledgements..................................................................................................................xix Dedication ................................................................................................................................xxi Chapter 1. Introduction to the study ...........................................................................................1 1.1 1.2  1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8  Prologue .............................................................................................................................1 Background to the problem................................................................................................2 1.2.1 Idiosyncratic approaches within vocal pedagogy ..................................................2 1.2.2 The ongoing debate concerning metaphor and imagery ........................................3 1.2.3 Brief arguments against the use of metaphor and imagery....................................4 1.2.4 Brief arguments for the use of metaphor and imagery ..........................................5 1.2.5 The nature of imagination......................................................................................6 General problem area ........................................................................................................7 Research questions ............................................................................................................8 Purpose of the study ..........................................................................................................9 Significance of the study .................................................................................................10 Limitations of the study...................................................................................................11 Definitions of terms.........................................................................................................13  Chapter 2. Literature review and related research issues..........................................................15 2.1  Arguments against the continued pedagogical use metaphor and imagery .....................15 2.1.1 A science-based approach is easier, faster, and more honest ...........................15 2.1.2 Imagery usage is not historically mainstream......................................................16 2.1.3 Metaphorical language is not understandable, pertinent, or important................17 2.1.4 Imagery must be based on objective terminology ...............................................19 2.2 Arguments for the continued pedagogical use of metaphor and imagery .......................20 2.2.1 Teaching is impossible without using metaphoric and imagistic language.........20 2.2.2 Sensations are the singer’s main language...........................................................21 2.2.3 Renowned singers use metaphor and imagery....................................................24 2.2.4 Scientific information can be difficult to convey ................................................25 2.2.5 Paradoxes challenge the scientific approach........................................................26  v  2.3 2.4  2.5  2.6  2.2.6 Thinking analogically and imaginatively is innate ..............................................29 2.2.7 Non-literal language meets different learning needs and styles ..........................31 Research on metaphor and imagery use in vocal pedagogy ............................................32 Research on imagery theories ..........................................................................................41 2.4.1 Symbolic learning theory.....................................................................................42 2.4.2 Dual code theory ..................................................................................................42 2.4.3 Gross framework theory ......................................................................................43 2.4.4 Functional equivalence hypothesis ......................................................................43 2.4.5 Tacit learning theory ............................................................................................45 Cognitive instruction and skill acquisition ......................................................................46 2.5.1 Perspectives and modalities .................................................................................46 2.5.2 Combining approaches.........................................................................................48 The call for a solution ......................................................................................................49  Chapter 3. Cognitive organizational strategies .........................................................................52 3.1 3.2 3.3  3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7  3.8 3.9  Metaphorical imagery ......................................................................................................53 Conceptual metaphor theory ............................................................................................55 Embodied and experiential cognition ..............................................................................56 3.3.1 Embodiment: Definition and overview................................................................56 3.3.2 Evidence of neural mechanisms...........................................................................57 3.3.3 Objectivism/Subjectivism ....................................................................................59 3.3.4 Experientialism: An alternative ...........................................................................62 Music as a metaphorical language ...................................................................................64 Image metaphors..............................................................................................................68 Image schemas .................................................................................................................71 Gestalt structures..............................................................................................................75 3.7.1 Equilibrium ..........................................................................................................77 3.7.2 Verticality ............................................................................................................78 3.7.3 Container..............................................................................................................79 3.7.4 Source-Path-Goal.................................................................................................80 3.7.5 Link ....................................................................................................................81 3.7.6 Force ....................................................................................................................82 3.7.7 Restraint ...............................................................................................................83 3.7.8 Restraint removal .................................................................................................83 3.7.9 Scalarity ...............................................................................................................84 Conceptual metaphors......................................................................................................87 A conceptual image..........................................................................................................89  Chapter 4. Methodology and methods ......................................................................................91 4.1 Participant selection .........................................................................................................91 4.2 Methodology ....................................................................................................................92 4.2.1 Case study ............................................................................................................92 4.2.2 Unit of analysis ...................................................................................................92 4.2.3 Types of case study..............................................................................................94 4.2.4 Triangulation........................................................................................................97  vi 4.3  Methods............................................................................................................................98 4.3.1 Delineating categories and subcategories ............................................................98 4.3.2 Interview schedule ...............................................................................................99 4.3.3 Pre-interview observations.................................................................................100 4.3.4 Transcribing interviews .....................................................................................101 4.4 Data analysis ..................................................................................................................102 4.4.1 General procedures ............................................................................................102 4.4.2 Identifying the relevant text ...............................................................................104 4.4.3 Creating Excel worksheets (individual voice teachers) .....................................104 4.4.4 Scheming the data ..............................................................................................105 4.4.5 Listing relevant text and identifying image schemas.........................................106 4.4.6 Grouping image schemas within gestalt structures............................................109 4.4.7 Creating Excel worksheets (grouping of voice teachers) .................................110 4.4.8 Displaying the data (Excel bar graphs) ..............................................................112 4.4.9 Tabulating the data (Microanalysis) ..................................................................114 4.4.10 Additional appendices........................................................................................117 Chapter 5. Data findings: Image metaphors ...........................................................................118 5.1 Research question #1 .....................................................................................................119 5.2 Body alignment ..............................................................................................................119 5.3 Breath management .......................................................................................................123 5.4 Resonance/Phonation.....................................................................................................130 5.5 Sound production ...........................................................................................................133 Chapter 6. Data findings: Image schemas...............................................................................136 6.1 Research question #2 .....................................................................................................137 6.2 Body alignment ..............................................................................................................138 6.3 Breath management .......................................................................................................142 6.4 Resonance/Phonation.....................................................................................................147 6.5 Sound production ...........................................................................................................151 Chapter 7. Data findings: A conceptual image .......................................................................163 7.1 Research question #3 .....................................................................................................164 7.2 Body alignment ..............................................................................................................165 7.3 Breath management .......................................................................................................167 7.4 Resonance/Phonation.....................................................................................................173 7.5 Sound production ...........................................................................................................174 Chapter 8. Conclusions and implications................................................................................181 8.1  Conclusions of the study................................................................................................182 8.1.1 General question ................................................................................................182 8.1.2 Research question #1 .........................................................................................183 8.1.3 Research question #2 .........................................................................................184 8.1.4 Research question #3 .........................................................................................186  vii 8.2 Discussion of the study ..................................................................................................187 8.2.1 General findings.................................................................................................187 8.2.2 Addressing criticisms.........................................................................................191 8.3 Implications of the study................................................................................................194 8.3.1 The role of theory in this study ..........................................................................194 8.3.2 Implications for practice ....................................................................................197 8.3.3 Implications for research....................................................................................200 8.4 Future directions ............................................................................................................201 8.5 Epilogue .........................................................................................................................203 Endnotes..................................................................................................................................206 References...............................................................................................................................216 Appendix A: Running list of expressions ...............................................................................260 Body alignment .......................................................................................................................261 Breath management ................................................................................................................263 Resonance/Phonation..............................................................................................................273 Sound production ....................................................................................................................276 Appendix B: Overview of imagery theories ...........................................................................284 Appendix C: Cover letter and consent form ...........................................................................286 Cover letter to instructor .........................................................................................................287 Consent form to instructor ......................................................................................................288 Appendix D: Semi-structured interview schedule ..................................................................291 Appendix E: Microanalysis of data.........................................................................................294 Body alignment .......................................................................................................................295 Breath management ................................................................................................................297 Resonance/Phonation..............................................................................................................307 Sound production ....................................................................................................................310 Appendix F: Aggregated totals of expressions .......................................................................320 Total number of expressions by teacher and type...................................................................321 Total number of expressions by teacher and subcategory ......................................................322 Total number of expressions by category and subcategory ....................................................323  viii Appendix G: Excel worksheets and bar graphs ......................................................................324 Body alignment .......................................................................................................................325 Breath management ................................................................................................................335 Resonance/Phonation..............................................................................................................355 Sound production ....................................................................................................................368 Appendix H: Excerpts from two interviews ...........................................................................383 Excerpts from Interview #1 (Guy)..........................................................................................384 Excerpts from Interview #6 (Albert).......................................................................................393  ix List of tables  Table 3.1. Underlying gestalt structures and image schemas pertaining to the data ................76 Table 3.2. ANGER IS HOT FLUID IN A CONTAINER conceptual metaphor.....................................89  Table 4.1. Listing expressions and identifying schemas.........................................................107 Table 4.2. Ongoing listing of expressions and identifying of new image schemas................108 Table 4.3. Preparing to list teachers’ expressions within the first subcategory ......................111 Table 4.4. Passaggio: Imagery to facilitate going through the passaggio...............................115 Table 4.5. Colour-coded worksheet: Jaw/Tongue/Larynx......................................................116  Table 6.1. General posture: Imagery related to alignment of external body-container ..........140 Table 6.2. General posture: Imagery related to general stance when singing ........................141 Table 6.3. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to continuous iterative actions ...................144 Table 6.4. Leaps: Imagery to help connect notes prior to and during ascent .........................146 Table 6.5. Leaps: Imagery meant to help avoid erroneous “up and down” thinking .............147 Table 6.6. Miscellaneous: Imagery related to resonance and voice placement ......................149 Table 6.7. Soft Palate: Imagery related to sensations involving the stretched palate .............151 Table 6.8. Miscellaneous: Imagery for blending vocal colour throughout range ...................156 Table 6.9. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to the core of the sound (1)........................157 Table 6.10. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to hitting the core of the sound ................158 Table 6.11. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery to help focus the sound ........................................159 Table 6.12. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to the development of a sung tone ...........160 Table 6.13. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to the core of the sound (3)......................161  x Table 7.1. Imagery used to convey three different kinds of sound production ......................175 Table 7.2. External body-container: Imagery related to expansion ........................................177 Table 7.3. Internal body-container: Imagery related to expansion .........................................177 Table 7.4. A Singer’s Body Is An Expanding Container conceptual image .............................. 178  Table B.1. Overview of imagery theories...............................................................................285  Table E.1. General posture: Imagery related to alignment and projection of self ..................295 Table E.2. General posture: Imagery related to alignment of external body-container..........295 Table E.3. General posture: Imagery related to general stance when singing ........................295 Table E.4. Head/Neck: Imagery related to improper forward head positioning.....................295 Table E.5. Head/Neck: Imagery related to a tension-free neck (1) ........................................295 Table E.6. Head/Neck: Imagery related to a tension-free neck (2) ........................................296 Table E.7. Shoulders/Chest/Ribs: Imagery related to an ideal chest level .............................296 Table E.8. Shoulders/Chest/Ribs: Imagery related to the torso region...................................296 Table E.9. Shoulders/Chest/Ribs: Imagery related to body alignment ...................................296 Table E.10. Lower Back/Pelvis: Imagery related to the lumbar region..................................296 Table E.11. Lower Back/Pelvis: Imagery related to the entire torso region...........................297 Table E.12. Legs/Feet: Imagery related to overall body stability...........................................297 Table E.13. Intake of air: Imagery related to placement of air (1) .........................................297 Table E.14. Intake of air: Imagery related to placement of air (2) .........................................297 Table E.15. Intake of air: Imagery related to body expansion (1) ..........................................297 Table E.16. Intake of air: Imagery related to body expansion (2) ..........................................298 Table E.17. Intake of air: Imagery related to lack of body expansion....................................298  xi  Table E.18. Onset of tone: Imagery related to preparatory aspect before onset of tone.........298 Table E.19. Onset of tone: Imagery related to preparatory motion prior to onset ..................298 Table E.20. Onset of tone: Imagery related to the onset of tone (1).......................................299 Table E.21. Onset of tone: Imagery related to the onset of tone (2).......................................299 Table E.22. Onset of tone: Imagery to help with pitch when initiating tone ..........................299 Table E.23. Onset of tone: Imagery to convey erroneous abdominal activity........................299 Table E.24. Onset of tone: Imagery to convey sensations when initiating support................299 Table E.25. Onset of tone: Imagery to help engage abdominal muscles ................................300 Table E.26. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to the sensation of support.......................300 Table E.27. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to continuous iterative actions.................300 Table E.28. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to apportioning breath (1)........................300 Table E.29. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to apportioning breath (2)........................301 Table E.30. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to sensations of abdominal activity (1) ...301 Table E.31. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to sensations of abdominal activity (2) ...301 Table E.32. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to lack of breath control ..........................301 Table E.33. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to lifting abdominals inward (1)..............302 Table E.34. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to lifting abdominals inward (2)..............302 Table E.35. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to ongoing expansion ..............................302 Table E.36. Breath maintenance: Imagery related to the transport of sound..........................302 Table E.37. Offset of tone: Imagistic activities used to access primal sound.........................302 Table E.38. Offset of tone: Imagery related to improper release of tone ...............................303 Table E.39. Air flow: Imagery related to circularity and the act of breathing........................303  xii Table E.40. Air flow: Imagery related to initial and ongoing release of breath .....................303 Table E.41. Air flow: Imagery related to the movement of sound .........................................303 Table E.42. Air flow: Imagery related to the ongoing movement of air and tone..................303 Table E.43. Air blockages: Imagery related to the incorrect use of air ..................................304 Table E.44. Air blockages: Imagery related to stopping the movement of air and tone ........304 Table E.45. Air blockages: Imagery related to exaggerated support (1) ...............................304 Table E.46. Air blockages: Imagery related to exaggerated support (2) ................................304 Table E.47. Air blockages: Imagery related to forcing the air and tone .................................304 Table E.48. Leaps: Imagery related to placement of the bottom and top notes......................305 Table E.49. Leaps: Imagery to help connect to higher notes prior to and during ascent........305 Table E.50. Leaps: Imagery related to abdominal activity and execution of high notes ........305 Table E.51. Leaps: Imagery to help avoid erroneous “up and down” thinking (1) ...............305 Table E.52. Leaps: Imagery to help avoid erroneous “up and down” thinking (2) ...............305 Table E.53. Leaps: Imagery related to the positioning of an open throat ...............................306 Table E.54. Dual-action tasks: Imagistic activities to connect support with sound ...............306 Table E.55. Dual-action tasks: Imagery related to abdominal resistance ...............................306 Table E.56. Dual-action tasks: Imagery connecting palate, larynx, and abdominals .............306 Table E.57. Soft palate: Imagery to help induce a stretched soft palate .................................307 Table E.58. Soft palate: Imagery related to perceived shape of stretched palate ...................307 Table E.59. Soft palate: Imagery related to the sensation of the stretched palate ..................307 Table E.60. Soft palate: Imagery related to the direction and height of stretched palate .......307 Table E.61. Lips: Imagistic activity to help induce upward lip movement ............................308 Table E.62. Lips: Imagery related to smiling muscles and the singer’s “masque”.................308  xiii Table E.63. Jaw/Tongue/Larynx: Imagery related to immobility of jaw ...............................308 Table E.64. Jaw/Tongue/Larynx: Imagery related to movement of jaw ................................308 Table E.65. Jaw/Tongue/Larynx: Imagistic activities to help with jaw movement................308 Table E.66. Jaw/Tongue/Larynx: Imagery related to jaw and tongue ....................................309 Table E.67. Jaw/Tongue/Larynx: Imagery to help stabilise the larynx ..................................309 Table E.68. Jaw/Tongue/Larynx: Imagery related to the jaw.................................................309 Table E.69. Mouth/Teeth/Cheekbones: Imagery related to cheekbones and teeth.................309 Table E.70. Mouth/Teeth/Cheekbones: Imagery related to the transport of sound ................309 Table E.71. Dual-action tasks: Imagery related to resonance and voice placement...............310 Table E.72. Miscellaneous: Imagery related to resonance and voice placement (1) ..............310 Table E.73. Miscellaneous: Imagery related to resonance and voice placement (2) ..............310 Table E.74. Passaggio: Imagery to facilitate going through the passaggio (1).......................310 Table E.75. Passaggio: Imagery to facilitate going through the passaggio (2).......................311 Table E.76. Passaggio: Imagery related to the concept of “covering” ...................................311 Table E.77. Passaggio: Alternative imagistic term for “covering” in the male voice ...........311 Table E.78. Chest voice: Imagistic activity related to natural functioning of chest voice......311 Table E.79. Chest voice: Imagery related to negative aspects of chest voice ........................311 Table E.80. Chest voice: Imagery related to descent into chest voice....................................312 Table E.81. Chest voice: Imagery to help strengthen a breathy sound...................................312 Table E.82. Vowel modification: Imagistic actions related to ascending and descending.....312 Table E.83. Vowel modification: Imagistic actions related to open and closed vowels ........312 Table E.84. Vowel modification: Imagery related to vowel use in different registers ...........313 Table E.85. Timbre: Imagery for adding and diminishing colour to the sound......................313  xiv Table E.86. Timbre: Imagery related to quality of coloratura and bell tones .........................313 Table E.87. Timbre: Imagery to help create a bright tone (1) ................................................313 Table E.88. Timbre: Imagery to help create a bright tone (2) ................................................314 Table E.89. Timbre: Imagery to give more edge to the tone ..................................................314 Table E.90. Timbre: Imagery to help induce a warm, rich sound .........................................314 Table E.91. Timbre: Imagery related to quality of sound created by palatal adjustment .......314 Table E.92. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to the core of the sound (1) .....................314 Table E.93. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to the core of the sound (2) .....................315 Table E.94. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to the core of the sound (3) .....................315 Table E.95. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to the function of vowels.........................315 Table E.96. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to the development of a sung tone...........315 Table E.97. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery to help focus the tone (1) ....................................315 Table E.98. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery to help focus the tone (2) ....................................316 Table E.99. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to changes in register...............................316 Table E.100. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to sound production...............................316 Table E.101. Focusing/Spreading: Imagery related to resonance track..................................316 Table E.102. Miscellaneous: Imagistic sensation related to sound production ......................316 Table E.103. Miscellaneous: Imagery to help induce different timbres .................................317 Table E.104. Miscellaneous: Imagery for blending vocal colour throughout range ..............317 Table E.105. Miscellaneous: Imagery related to the life and movement of the sung tone .....317 Table E.106. Miscellaneous: Imagistic activities to help create a big, resonant sound ..........317 Table E.107. Miscellaneous: Imagery to help avoid shifting gears into the lowest range .....318 Table E.108. Miscellaneous: Imagery related to beauty and carrying power of sound..........318  xv Table E.109. Miscellaneous: Imagistic activity to help project voice in the lower range ......318 Table E.110. Miscellaneous: Imagery related to exaggerated use of abdominals ..................318 Table E.111. Miscellaneous: Imagery related to results of erroneous sound production .......319 Table E.112. Miscellaneous: Imagistic activities to help increase energy and focus .............319 Table E.113. Miscellaneous: Imagery to help keep the tone from dying ...............................319 Table E.114. Miscellaneous: Imagistic activities to help induce a bright, open sound ..........319  Table F.1. Total number of expressions by teacher and type .................................................321 Table F.2. Total number of expressions by teacher and subcategory .....................................322 Table F.3. Total number of expressions by category and subcategory...................................323  Table G.1. General posture .....................................................................................................325 Table G.2. Head/Neck.............................................................................................................327 Table G.3. Shoulders/Chest/Ribs............................................................................................329 Table G.4. Lower back/Pelvis.................................................................................................331 Table G.5. Legs/Feet...............................................................................................................333 Table G.6. Intake of air ...........................................................................................................335 Table G.7. Onset of tone .........................................................................................................338 Table G.8. Breath maintenance...............................................................................................341 Table G.9. Offset of tone ........................................................................................................345 Table G.10. Air flow...............................................................................................................347 Table G.11. Air blockages ......................................................................................................349 Table G.12. Leaps ...................................................................................................................351 Table G.13. Dual-action tasks.................................................................................................353  xvi Table G.14. Soft palate ...........................................................................................................355 Table G.15. Lips .....................................................................................................................358 Table G.16. Jaw/Tongue/Larynx ............................................................................................360 Table G.17. Mouth/Teeth/Cheekbones ...................................................................................362 Table G.18. Dual-action tasks.................................................................................................364 Table G.19. Miscellaneous .....................................................................................................366 Table G.20. Passaggio.............................................................................................................368 Table G.21. Chest voice..........................................................................................................370 Table G.22. Vowel modification ............................................................................................372 Table G.23. Timbre.................................................................................................................374 Table G.24. Focusing/Spreading.............................................................................................377 Table G.25. Miscellaneous .....................................................................................................380  xvii List of figures  Figure 1.1. Singer using questionable imagery. Image by Harry Venning ................................1  Figure 3.1. The metaphor process between the teacher’s metaphor and the student’s tone outcome (Dunbar-Wells, 1997, p. 152...................................................................54  Figure 4.1. Bar graph: Intake of air ........................................................................................113 Figure 4.2. Bar graph: Focusing/Spreading............................................................................113  Figure 6.1. Posterior and anterior sway from center. Image by Huei-Ming Chai ..................139  Figure 7.1. Expanding body-container. Personal conceptualisation ......................................176  Figure G.1. General posture ...................................................................................................326 Figure G.2. Head/Neck...........................................................................................................328 Figure G.3. Shoulders/Chest/Ribs ..........................................................................................330 Figure G.4. Lower back/Pelvis...............................................................................................332 Figure G.5. Legs/Feet .............................................................................................................334 Figure G.6. Intake of air .........................................................................................................337 Figure G.7. Onset of tone .......................................................................................................340 Figure G.8. Breath maintenance.............................................................................................344 Figure G.9. Offset of tone.......................................................................................................346 Figure G.10. Air flow .............................................................................................................348 Figure G.11. Air blockages ....................................................................................................350 Figure G.12. Leaps .................................................................................................................352  xviii Figure G.13. Dual-action tasks...............................................................................................354 Figure G.14. Soft palate..........................................................................................................357 Figure G.15. Lips....................................................................................................................359 Figure G.16. Jaw/Tongue/Larynx...........................................................................................361 Figure G.17. Mouth/Teeth/Cheekbones .................................................................................363 Figure G.18. Dual-action tasks...............................................................................................365 Figure G.19. Miscellaneous....................................................................................................367 Figure G.20. Passaggio...........................................................................................................369 Figure G.21. Chest voice ........................................................................................................371 Figure G.22. Vowel modification...........................................................................................373 Figure G.23. Timbre ...............................................................................................................376 Figure G.24. Focusing/Spreading...........................................................................................379 Figure G.25. Miscellaneous....................................................................................................382  xix Acknowledgements  I would like to begin by thanking my research advisor, Dr. Gaalen Erickson, for his willingness to work with me, without which it would not have been possible to finish this study. Not only has it been a great privilege to work with a man of his stature and expertise, but the grace he has consistently exhibited toward me during some very trying times has been truly remarkable. His ability at sifting through my writing to get at its essence is especially noteworthy! Professor Roelof Oostwoud’s input was tremendously helpful, not only because of his obvious interest and knowledge of vocal science, but his ability to keep me properly focused on my chosen topic. I am also grateful to Dr. Peter Crocker whose expertise in kinesiology afforded him a different slant when critiquing this thesis, and for the kind manner he has always exhibited toward me. I have greatly appreciated each committee member’s ongoing forbearance during the protracted period of time it has taken to finish this dissertation. My heartfelt gratitude goes to all of the voice teachers who allowed me access to their studios, and to all of the voice students who were willing to be observed and interviewed. Without the teachers’ cooperation, this study could not have been realised. Although the students’ input was not included in the final analysis, it is extremely valuable and will likely be included in any book that may emerge from this study. I am also very grateful to Isabel da Silva with whom I have had a friendship extending back 35 years to my first lengthy university stint. She has tirelessly listened to me and unswervingly held out hope throughout the years. Special thanks go to Dr. Walt Werner for the remarkable fortitude and grace he showed in listening to me during the difficult early phases of the program, and for his feedback on some of my early writing. I am also thankful for the interest that Dr. Sandra Scott and her husband, doctoral candidate Doug Adler, have shown at various times in my journey, as well  xx as for the thoughtful insights which Dr. Samson Nashon shared with me concerning my work. I want to thank Bob Hapke who often went beyond the call of duty to help me with my computer problems, and for helping me get started with the Excel worksheets and bar graphs for analysing and presenting my data. I also thank Basia Zurek who ungrudgingly handled the necessary paperwork in my case and encouraged me whenever she saw that I was flagging. Great appreciation and respect go to Victor Dino who has always encouraged me. Having overcome tremendous personal adversity, he has truly modeled the tenaciousness I needed while facing my own unexpected and lengthy trials. Special credit is due my roommate Craig Moult for his ongoing support and understanding during this especially trying journey in which we both unwittingly learned a great deal about ourselves. I must thank Shirley Gettings, my friend of 45 years, and her husband Garry Bertagnolli, whose warmth and laughter always reminded me of life beyond staring at a monitor year in and year out! Your friendship is absolutely precious to me. I am especially grateful to Dr. Gabriele Sabbioni with whom I have had an abiding friendship for over 30 years. His unconditional love, support, encouragement, and guidance have helped me realise many major goals in my life. As for my family, I owe an incalculable debt of love to my sister, Andrea Stickney, who graciously and steadfastly cared and prayed for me through two life-threatening accidents. I also am profoundly indebted to my brother Garth Jestley and his wife Mary for having lifted me up in prayer almost daily for over four decades, the true impact of which will only be known in eternity. My greatest thanks go to the LORD Jesus Christ, faithful and full of grace. Without His indwelling presence it is unlikely I would have been able to finish such an unexpectedly long and arduous journey. Everything I needed to fulfil this project came from him (Psalm 89:1518; Isaiah 42:16; 1 Cor.1:30-31). To Him alone belongs all the glory (Rom.11:36).  xxi  Dedication  Rudolf Knoll 1 November 4, 1926 ‒ February 12, 2007 I dedicate this dissertation to my voice teacher and mentor, Rudolf Knoll, with whom I had the enormous privilege of working in the mid-1980s. In addition to a decades-long operatic career on American and European stages, he worked tirelessly for over three decades as a Professor of Voice at the University of Music & Performing Arts Mozarteum in Salzburg, Austria. An incredibly charismatic individual who possessed a bigger-thanlife persona, he impacted the lives of countless singers from around the world who clamoured to work with him during the Internationale Sommerakademie as well as year-round. It was his unique ability to articulate complex processes in simple ways that ultimately led me to pursue doctoral work after an accident cut short my professional concert career. His insatiable lust for life made his recent death all the more shocking and sad to everyone who knew him. I know that I speak for many when I say that the world has lost a profoundly gifted individual and an utterly brilliant voice teacher.  1  Photograph of Rudolf Knoll. Permission to use granted by relative Dorothee Bayer.  1 Chapter 1. Introduction to the study  1.1  Prologue Sing like you are an ice cream sundae with hot fudge dripping down the sides. . . . Pretend your diaphragm is an ice rink in front of your body, and every time you begin to sing, a little angel comes down from heaven and lands on the rink, twirling as fast as she can. Make your voice sound like that (as cited in Sell, 2005, p. 116). Imagine wanting to learn how to sing and being instructed to produce sound with help  from the above description. Would it be clear to you what you should do, or would you be confused and mystified, wondering how on earth this kind of description was going to help you accomplish your goal? Perhaps you are wondering if the mental images that singers conjure are simply random and arbitrary, as Figure 1.1 humorously suggests.  In this study, I examine 260 metaphoric and imagistic expressions used pedagogically by six participating voice teachers in order to find out whether any coherent structuring —implicit or explicit—governs them.  Figure 1.1. Singer using questionable imagery. Image by Harry Venning. i  2 1.2  Background to the problem 1.2.1  Idiosyncratic approaches within vocal pedagogy.  Historically, the field of singing has been characterised by various methods and terminologies, resulting in many contradictory pedagogical positions regarding singing practices in general, and mental imagery use in particular (Burgin, 1973; Fields, 1947; Hines, 1983; Wilson Spillane, 1989). One has only to undertake a cursory survey of the practice-based literature regarding singing practices in general, and mental imagery use in particular, to see that a lack of agreement exists regarding many fundamental issues (Burgin, 1973; Fields, 1947; Hines, 1983; Wilson Spillane, 1989). In the early part of the 20th Century, Taylor (as cited in Freed, 2000), denounced the approaches to singing that voice teachers were using, claiming “neither rule nor reason [determined] what materials [were] embodied in any one method” (p. 7). Around the same time, the famous singer Galli-Curci felt that some of the ideas pertaining to the teaching of voice were so outrageous that “one could make a museum of freak ideas” out of them (as cited in Fields, 1947, p. 5). Miller (1994) called some of the vocal techniques “pseudophysiologies” because they “[projected] a human physiology unknown to the rest of mankind” (p. 61). He claimed that many of the various pedagogical systems found throughout the practice-based literature were “based upon false information as to anatomical construction of the head, neck and torso, and upon ignorance of the physiology and acoustics of singing” (Miller, 1983, p. 28). According to Miller (1998a), the inability to tell a student what physiologic or acoustic source was contributing to a particular problem caused many voice teachers to unintentionally succumb and fall into “obscurantism . . . . a pedagogic abyss . . . from which they resolutely refuse to extricate themselves” (p. 42). He described their refusal to gain science-based  3 information which he felt was necessary to help the student as “an unidentified arrogance” (Miller, 1998a, p. 42). Unfortunately, the difficulty to apprehend and interpret signals that are constantly moving and largely perceptual, as well as the questionable approaches some teachers employ when teaching are not new problems, but rather have plagued the field of voice education for decades, even centuries (Ohrenstein, 2003). False information and misconceptions have resulted in characteristically idiosyncratic approaches which in turn have caused confusion and communication problems within and outside the vocal community (Miller, 1994; Wilson Spillane, 1989).  1.2.2  The ongoing debate concerning metaphor and imagery.  My particular interest from the very beginning of my doctoral work was to investigate the use of metaphor and imagery in the voice studio. I discovered that an ongoing debate between two camps within the vocal community concerning the role of mental imagery in the voice studio had been simmering for several decades, but without any resolution to date concerning the various issues raised. Advancements in the field of vocal science have resulted in metaphoric and imagistic language becoming less favourably regarded as a communicative strategy in the voice studio, largely due to its opaqueness (Freed, 2000, p. 5). Growing numbers of voice teachers and pedagogues (Burgin, 1973; Fields, 1947) now adhere to what Günter (1992a) classified as the “technical-mechanical” approach to vocal pedagogy (p. 4), believing that their students will make greater strides if told literal explanations of physiological processes rather than presumably struggling with abstract, subjective, and oftentimes opaque figurative language.  4 By contrast are large numbers of voice teachers and pedagogues who support an empirically-based “psychological” approach to vocal pedagogy (Pavarotti, as cited in Günter, 1992a, p. 4). They have remained firmly convinced that mental imagery, although beset with difficulties pertaining to its communicative potential, is nonetheless a vital component for conveying sensorimotor experiences (Günter, 1992a). In the next two sections I briefly present some of the opinions of both camps concerning this topic.  1.2.3  Brief arguments against the use of metaphor and imagery.  Many of the metaphoric and imagistic expressions used by vocal pedagogues have been denounced as “useless admonitions” and “illogical verbiage” (Miller, 1998a, pp. 41‒42), as well as “subjective speculation” and “mythological language” (Miller, 1980, p. 25). Vennard (1967), a well-known vocal pedagogue and advocate of using some forms of imagery who drew upon both the scientific and psychological approaches to vocal pedagogy, also described much of the language used by voice teachers as “mumbo jumbo . . . used so loosely and with so little consistency or reference to objective facts, that it becomes meaningless” (p. 149). Daniels (1983) depressingly stated that the task of finding knowledge which can be translated into practical studio applications may be “an exercise in futility” (p. 36). Other researchers claimed that it had become increasingly apparent that language in vocal pedagogy was “destined to remain subjective” (Mitchell, Kenny, Ryan, & Davis, 2003, p. 179). This comment certainly begs the question as to whether any kind of approach exists which could help make sense of the metaphoric and imagistic language used in the voice studio. Miller (1995) was convinced that many singers continued to attempt the impossible coordinations suggested by the imagery offered to them because they “[did] not examine the  5 validity of the concepts they . . . encountered” (p. 31). He also argued that the knowledge disseminated by voice teachers must be built on accurate information, “not on a system of invented structures and imagined controls” (Miller, 2001, p. 49). It is not difficult to understand why opaque imagery such as the “ice cream sundae” description that opened this chapter might be condemned as useless, ii but voice educators are increasingly referring to more mundane examples as ammunition to discourage the use of metaphorical imagery in the voice studio almost in its entirety. A much more detailed exploration into some specific arguments put forth by those against the continued use of figurative language is presented in Chapter 2, Section 2.1.  1.2.4  Brief arguments for the use of metaphor and imagery.  There are several reasons why the exclusive use of literal physiological explanations to teach voice will likely never happen. First, singers have a long history of using mental imaging techniques (Cleveland, 1989), and famously successful singers claim it is indispensable for singing and teaching (Hines, 1983). Second, to discourage the use of the imagination and teach voice using only physiological information denies peoples’ innate creative abilities (Holyoak & Thagard, 1997) and distances singers from their emotions (Bradshaw, 1996). Third, to advance a mechanistic approach supports the Cartesian dichotomy of body and mind that ignores many psychological elements considered indispensable in learning a complex skill (Annett, 1995b). A more detailed discussion concerning these and other arguments put forth by those who advocate the continued use of metaphorical imagery is presented in Chapter 2, Section 2.3.  6 1.2.5  The nature of imagination.  It is important to point out that although most of us understand imagination as the capacity humans possess for creativity and novelty, it does not necessarily follow that it is utterly unrestrained. Johnson’s (1987) life work is founded on the belief that the imagination at the core of metaphoric language is “essential to the structure of rationality” (p. ix). He was thus shocked when he found that no serious treatment or investigation of it had been undertaken by researchers involved with any of the dominant theories (then current) having to do with meaning and rationality. Distressed, he argued that this neglect was not mere oversight with regard to the views of human cognition but rather “symptomatic of a deep problem. . . . based as it is upon a widely shared set of presuppositions that deny imagination a central role in the constitution of rationality” (Johnson, 1987, p. ix). As a former singer, I am intimately aware of the kinds of logic which can be applied to singing. Accordingly, I found Turner’s (1987) statement concerning imagination particularly germane in light of this study: Imagination is . . . not unfettered; it is governed by principles [that] are automatic and below the level of consciousness. . . . [S]uch metaphoric principles are not arbitrary, and they do not come out of nowhere. . . .[T]he so-called free play of imagination is not, strictly speaking, free, though it is infinite. It is constrained by our knowledge, our experience, and our modes of cognition (p. 16, emphasis added). In examining the metaphoric and imagistic expressions offered by the voice teachers in this study, I have shown that they are constrained by three different underlying constructs arising from embodied experiences which act as natural constraints, and thus argue against the position of those who believe they are random and/or arbitrary. These findings in turn  7 challenge descriptions noted earlier of such language as “illogical verbiage” (Miller, 1998a, p. 42) and “subjective speculation” (Miller, 1980, p. 25).  1.3  General problem area Part of the problem this study seeks to address is whether some of the concerns by the  technical-mechanical camp concerning metaphor and imagery employed in the voice studio for pedagogical purposes are warranted. The ambiguous nature of some of the metaphoricallybased imagery that has been employed in vocal pedagogy can be partially explained by the difficulties that imagery researchers have had in reaching any agreement on a working vocabulary for imagery-related terminology (Carter, 1993). What is surprising in this ongoing debate is that literal explanations and metaphorical imagery are both used to elicit sensorimotor responses and yet are generally treated as mutually exclusive propositions. It seems clear that to champion one methodology over another fails to take into consideration the research findings that indicate a combinatorial approach brings about the best outcomes, since offering several communicative approaches in a learning environment enhances the possibilities that peoples’ preferred learning styles are addressed (Cleveland, 1989; Dunbar-Wells, 1997; Moorcroft, 2002; White, 1984). Freed (2000), for instance, noted that “if teachers help students identify sensations and help them reoccur, it is difficult to fault the method, whether scientific or empirical” (p. 10, emphasis added). In this study, I argue that Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980a, 1980b, 2003) experientialist theory grounding our ability to reason in shared embodied experiences is the middle approach which could finally bring the two disputed positions concerning imagery use back together. It was therefore important to undertake an in-depth examination of the expressions used by voice  8 teachers pedagogically to see if any kind of coherent structure underlay them. If coherently structured expressions were to be found, they would temper Miller’s (2001) presuppositions that the knowledge disseminated by voice teachers was based on a system of “invented structures and imagined controls” (p. 49). In light of an experientialist account, even subjectively-derived expressions must have a bodily basis (i.e., be grounded experientially) in order for them to make sense. Expressions such as the one at the beginning of this chapter directing the singer to “[s]ing like you are an ice cream sundae” would thus be a clear example of an expression which is not grounded experientially.  1.4  Research questions Because of the criticism levelled at the metaphorical and non-metaphorical imagery used  in the voice studio for pedagogical purposes, my general research question involved finding out if there was any kind of coherent structuring (implicit or explicit) underlying such imagery. The specific research questions which helped guide me to collect the data needed to achieve this objective, and which also formed the basis for the data analysis, were as follows: 1. What—if any—pictorial approaches underlie the metaphoric and imagistic expressions used by voice teachers for pedagogical purposes? 2. What—if any—structural approaches underlie the metaphoric and imagistic expressions used by voice teachers for pedagogical purposes? 3. What—if any—conceptual approaches underlie the metaphoric and imagistic expressions used by voice teachers for pedagogical purposes?  9 1.5  Purpose of the study Serious research pertaining to language use for pedagogical purposes has been largely  focused on the nature and effectiveness of metaphor and imagery (Carter, 1993; Dunbar-Wells, 1997). There has been a virtual dearth, however, concerned with its underlying structuring. Vocal pedagogy is a subject well-suited for such a study because, as Appelman (1967) noted, “[a]lthough aesthetic experiences and concepts embrace order, they defy the systems of obtaining that order. . . . [H]owever . . . certain areas of vocal instruction are not aesthetic in nature and . . . [demand] an orderly presentation of fact, rather than opinion” (p. 3). To date, no systematic theory or model concerning these issues has been advanced which could help explain the underlying principles of the pedagogical expressions used by singers and teachers of singing, something my study intends to address. According to Campbell (1988), a systematic approach could help people stop “[wandering] in a world of rank relativity, where perspectivism rules and unresolved points of view clash,” ever-present risks wherever a lack of systematicity exists (p. 61). According to Sell (2005), creating a sound, coherent approach “is far more likely to be internalized than isolated, unrelated ‘tips,’” and would help obviate the “hit-and-miss” approach used by some voice teachers (p. 55). I hypothesise that voice teachers use the knowledge they acquire through everyday experiences in the body—known in the field of cognitive linguistics, psychology, and neuroscience as embodied cognition—to help naturally construct and systematise the nonliteral expressions they employ (see Chapter 3, Section 3.4). I contend that the constraints underlying the three constructs examined in this study are evidence that the imagery used by voice teachers is structured and thus able to be articulated in an orderly manner, in no small part because humans inhabit similar bodies and share similar experiences. I further argue that  10 constructing knowledge via an embodied cognition perspective, grounded in an experientialist account of meaning, is an alternative to the objectivist and the subjectivist approaches and as such should help resolve the widening rift which has heretofore divided the vocal community between those who prefer teaching voice by primarily using literal explanations and those who continue to incorporate a substantial amount of non-literal explanations.  1.6  Significance of the study There are a number of reasons why this study is significant, ranging from the globally to  the locally significant: 1.  This study is unique in drawing upon components of Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980a, 1980b) conceptual metaphor theory and applying them to the metaphoric and imagistic language used pedagogically in the voice studio.  2.  This study examines and argues for different types of cognitive approaches underlying the non-literal language used by voice teachers, thus filling a gap in the research concerned with vocal pedagogy.  3.  The three constructs examined in this study (image metaphors, image schemas, and a conceptual image) represent different types of vehicles iii used by voice teachers use to help them communicate a variety of concepts pertaining to vocal pedagogy. As such, I contend these could qualify as the “common [vocabularies]” which the vocal community has long sought to establish (Cleveland, 1989, p. 41).  4.  The explicit presentation of the three constructs in this study will help voice teachers monitor the validity of the metaphoric expressions they presently use for pedagogical purposes, consciously identify and articulate their cognitive teaching strategies, and help  11 them craft new metaphoric and imagistic expressions (see Chapter 8, Sections 8.1.4, 8.2.1, 8.3.1, and 8.4). 5.  The three constructs underlying the figurative language examined in this study provide voice teachers with options for choosing the most suitable approach for a particular student: A pictorial approach for the novice who generally needs more concrete material, a structural/image-schematic approach for the more advanced student who is able to conceptualise his or her experiences abstractly, and a conceptual approach which can work for voice students at any level of advancement (see Chapter 8, Section 8.3).  6.  This study is the first of its kind to explicitly present an underlying conceptual image (see chapter 7) which simplifies the act of singing by holistically unifying several expressions related to a number of discrete tasks involved in vocal pedagogy. This construct may help facilitate metacognitive thinking and self-regulation in voice students. The three constructs presented in this study have been described in enough detail that  other researchers wishing to extend this study or begin working on a similar study involving a structured analysis may find the appended Excel worksheets and bar graphs a helpful place to begin.  1.7  Limitations of the study I came to this study with a lifetime of music behind me, starting with piano lessons at age  three. Upon leaving university, I was actively engaged as a soloist both nationally and internationally. As a contralto (an extremely rare voice type), I was afforded the opportunity to specialise in oratorio and concert repertoire. During my early years of singing professionally I completely changed my singing technique under the tutelage of Professor Rudolf Knoll to  12 whom this dissertation is dedicated. The simple approach to singing which I learned from him not only profoundly changed my own singing, but serendipitously fostered a strong desire in me to help others. Thus, in beginning this research, I brought with me my own personal lens concerning vocal pedagogy developed over many subsequent years which not only played a meaningful role in shaping the nature of this inquiry but was of inestimable help in understanding the figurative language at the heart of this study. As a formerly active singer, it was inevitable that some of the ways in which I interpreted the data in this study reflected my personal experience and bias (Glaser, 1992; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). I do not believe, however, that this limitation detracts from the significance of the findings. Bringing my own theoretical framework through which I have construed the phenomena of singing in this study has long been an acceptable approach for research studies (Genter & Grudin, 1985; Miles & Huberman, 1984), as was using my own experience, for instance, in identifying the methodological approach which best suited research into the field of vocal pedagogy (Foreman, 1948; Stake, 2006). At the beginning of the analysis, I had to make decisions about which data I was going to examine and which I was going to ignore. I chose not to screen for teachers holding a different ideological approach to my own and thus, because a few of the voice teachers held firmly to an ideology different from my own, some of the figurative language they used needed clarification. By having them explain in more detail what the actions in question entailed, I was able to remain as unbiased as possible when it came to interpreting the associated expressions. Having only observed a very limited number of voice lessons, it was not possible for me to know whether the voice teachers’ “espoused” expressions (i.e., those offered in the interviews) corresponded directly to their “expressions in use.” It is possible that at least a few  13 of the expressions offered by each teacher were not actively used by them to guide their thinking or teaching. This could be seen as a limitation to the study, as it is with all selfreported data. However, the frequency and consistency of many similar expressions used by multiple voice teachers provide evidence that the expressions offered in the interviews are for the most part actively used by the voice teachers (see Appendix A). Only six voice teachers situated in one geographical region participated in this study. Thus, because of these limitations, I am not claiming that the findings from this study are representative of or generalise to all voice teachers. However, in presenting the hypothesised theory associated with A Singer’s Body Is An Expanding Container conceptual image to the domain of vocal pedagogy, I am attempting to make an “[a]nalytic generalization [which] does not rely on samples and populations” (Firestone, 1992, p. 17), an aspect of the study that is discussed further in Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3. This conceptual image must be considered only suggestive, since more research is necessary to expand this study’s findings.  1.8  Definitions of terms The following is a brief list of definitions regarding a number of terms used throughout  the dissertation. External and internal body-container: I use two terms in this study related to the singer’s body: The external body-container refers primarily to the bony structures of the body which extend from the top of the head to the soles of the feet, while the internal body-container refers to the sensations of muscle groups that singers are trained to sense kinaesthetically. These sensations extend from the lower torso (abdominal region) to the inside of the mouth (e.g., nasopharyngeal region, soft palate).  14 Figurative language: This expression is used as a shorthand approach when referring to both metaphoric and imagistic language.  Literal language: This expression is occasionally used as a shorthand approach when referring to expressions voice teachers employ that directly employ physical musculature.  Metaphoric vs imagistic: These two terms are deliberately used throughout the dissertation to distinguish metaphoric expressions (i.e., those which employ cross-domain mappings that involve two different domains) from imagistic expressions (those which convey an image but are not metaphoric in the usual sense).  Metaphorical imagery: This term is used to simultaneously convey the notion of implied analogy whereby attributes ordinarily designating one entity are transferred over to another entity along with the impressions of the objects obtained by use of the senses (sensorimotor percepts). Although imagery and metaphor are usually discussed in the literature as separate notions, some authors use the terms—as I have done—in combination (e.g., Kimmel, 2010; Short, Afremow, & Overby, 2001). They are also referred to in the literature as “pictorial metaphors” (Forceville, 2009a, p. 19, 2009b, p. 389; Kennedy, 1982, p. 589; Kennedy, 1990, p. 122; Kennedy, Green, & Vervaeke, 1993, p. 244) and “visual metaphors” (Danesi, 1990, p. 229; Dent & Rosenberg, 1990, p. 983; Yus, 2009, p. 147). A working definition of the term metaphorical imagery is given in Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1.  Singers: This term is a general reference to all singers within the vocal community, including voice teachers who either were at one time, or continue to be, actively pursuing their singing career.  15 Chapter 2. Literature review and related research issues This literature review identifies the issues and respective claims which constitute an ongoing debate between two opposing camps within the vocal community concerning the metaphoric and imagistic expressions used in the voice studio for pedagogical purposes. I first present the positions of those who are generally opposed to their usage and who prefer a technical-mechanical approach to vocal pedagogy, followed by the positions of those who support their continued usage and who prefer a psychological approach to vocal pedagogy. Research studies on this topic are also discussed. A number of theories related to imagery use which support the relevance and efficacy of its usage have been included, as well as a section concerned with the differences between external and internal modalities of employing imagery in relation to skill acquisition. Specific statements from those on both sides of the imagery debate with regard to advancing an appropriate vocabulary for use in the voice studio are presented.  2.1 Arguments against the continued pedagogical use of metaphor and imagery 2.1.1 A science-based approach is easier, faster, and more honest. As noted in Chapter 1, advancements in the field of vocal science have resulted in metaphoric and imagistic language becoming less favourably regarded as a communicative strategy in the voice studio, resulting in growing numbers of voice teachers and pedagogues who prefer giving literal explanations of physiological processes when teaching voice. The assumption that the proponents of the technical-mechanical approach to vocal pedagogy make is that the information gleaned from vocal science now enables teachers to tell their students “what really happens” (Chapman, as cited in Dunbar-Wells, 1997, p. 90). One of the  16 subsequent arguments is whether the figurative language used pedagogically is not simply based on subjective speculation which, in light of developments in vocal science in the last three or four decades, may have made them obsolete. Perhaps the most influential vocal pedagogue to champion the science-based approach, and one whose opinions are highly regarded and thus liberally used throughout this dissertation, has been Richard Miller, iv former Professor Emeritus of voice at Oberlin Conservatory of Music, and Adjunct Staff Member in the Cleveland Clinic Foundation’s Otolaryngology, Head, and Neck Surgery Department. His work in vocal science led him to believe that presenting voice students with recognizable physical and acoustic facts about the voice was “far easier, far simpler, far faster [and] far more honest” than using “invented structures” (i.e., metaphoric language) (Miller, 2001, p. 49). It is clear that Miller’s ideas and the ideas of those who agree with him have been widely felt in the vocal community, as growing numbers of teachers have replaced figurative language with explanations from vocal science. v  2.1.2 Imagery usage is not historically mainstream. Miller (1981, 1998c) backed up his particular beliefs by claiming an examination of the historic treatises showed that voice teachers of the past were preoccupied primarily with the physiological and stylistic aspects of singing, not imagery. He also contended that many famous Italian teachers assumed the voice was an instrument which obeyed laws of physics and acoustics, and gave precise information with regards to the breath, resonance, and laryngeal freedom (Miller, 1981, 1994, 1998b, 1998c). Thus, he justified his belief that directing students using orientations other than science-based ones departed from the pedagogical approaches he claimed were historically mainstream (Miller, 1981).  17 2.1.3 Figurative language is not understandable, pertinent, or important. In order for the reader to gain some insight into the kinds of expressions which concern those who adhere to a science-based approach, some examples are in order. Henderson, a renowned commentator back in the early 1900s, believed that charlatans the world over were telling their voice students, inter alia, to “sing from their feet . . . get their tones out of the backs of their heads . . . [to sing] entirely from the stomach . . . from the pelvis” (as cited in Freed, 2000, p. 8). Almost a hundred years later, Miller (1998a) claimed that voice students were similarly directed to put the tone ‘up the back of the throat wall and over into the forehead,’ ‘into the masque,’ ‘down the spine,’ ‘into the dome at the back of the throat,’ ‘out the chimney on the top of the head,’ or ‘out the funnel at the back of the neck,’ ‘[sing] on the breath,’ and ‘[spin] the tone’ (p. 42). Since these actions cannot literally be accomplished, Miller (1998a) felt that voice teachers who encouraged students to contrive nonexistent muscle groups, invent resonating spaces that do not exist, and control local manoeuvres which are inherently noncontrollable were basically giving “useless admonitions” (p. 42). Moreover, he claimed that students “want facts, not mythology . . . explanations that stand the harsh light of reality” (Miller, 1998a, p. 42). Cornelius Reid, another noted pedagogue, believed that imagery was neither pertinent nor important to the voice-building process, and stated that [i]magery as commonly practiced . . . is often destructive. Directives such as “sing on the breath,” “place the tone in the facial mask,” “feel your throat to be a long, flexible tube,”  18 “focus the tone against the hard palate,” and “feel as though there is a large grapefruit in your throat” are without merit. They neither are founded upon a valid mechanical principle, address themselves to problems related to muscular interference, nor contain elements capable of assisting in the development and coordination of the vocal registers (Reid, 1983, p. 156). Given Miller’s active work in the field of vocal science through which he was accustomed to scientific data and terminology regarding anatomy, phonetics, and physiology, it was not surprising that he was appalled by some of the metaphoric and imagistic language used in the voice studio. He confidently asserted that voice students did not want to pay $140 per hour to be asked to think of “blue, green, or red tones, or pink clouds, and gliding birds” (Miller, 1998a, p. 42). He felt that such requests accomplished nothing other than confusion and embarrassment for both the teacher and the student, and that short of a specific (i.e., sciencebased) diagnosis of the problem, voice students would experience “intellectual and emotional [barriers] to change” (Miller, 1998a. p. 41). Other approaches Miller felt did little to change the voice student’s aural concept of tone included being told one’s tone was “too dark,” “too bright,” “too far back,” “too far forward,” “too dull,” or “too shrill” (Miller, 1998a, p. 41). He also denounced the ubiquitous expression of asking the voice student for a “rounder sound” because, although this expression is generally clear to voice teachers, he claimed it was actually so vague and empty of real meaning that the student may wonder what “rounder” actually means, or how to “round” the sound. Thus, he labelled this particular expression “illogical verbiage” (Miller, 1998a, p. 42). Reid (1983) on the other hand, though generally in the same “camp” as Miller, had earlier taken another position when he claimed that positive effects have been produced during  19 training by the use of some general descriptive terms such as “round,” “spread,” “bright,” “dark,” “open,” and “covered,” as well as various sensations of vibrations (p. 206). However, he felt that imagery used to express certain specific qualities (e.g., “forwardness,” “point,” “ping,” and “nasal resonance”) interfered with the vocal process and “must be ruthlessly discarded” (Reid, 1983, p. 205). His proposal for changing language use in the voice studio was to have the voice student respond exclusively to stimuli such as rhythmic patterns, vowels, pitch, and/or intensity of the sounds produced, rather than concentrate on any specific qualitative concepts (p. 205), thus supporting Miller’s (1980) approach of coupling external observation with physiological and acoustical functions.  2.1.4 Imagery must be based on objective terminology. Another avenue in which Miller (1989) saw potential problems involved the artist-turnedteacher, many of whom he claimed instructed through the “language of imagery rather than through the use of objective terminology” (p. 15, emphasis added). His general stance regarding studio imagery was that it was a “mystical language which the student is unable to penetrate” (Miller, 1989, p. 15, emphasis added). He pointed out that private images given by singers who have long since learned to associate the image with the sensation are of little value to inexperienced singers who have not yet coordinated the singing instrument. He conceded the subjective use of metaphoric and imagistic language might work if the teacher and student had similar problems or voice types, but in general he argued that subjective descriptions of experience be replaced with objective terminology to effectively serve a broad range of singers. Importantly, he contended that there had to be a “common understanding” for such imagery to truly convey meaning (Miller, 1989, p. 15), an important point I relate later to Lakoff and Johnson’s theories of experientialism and embodied cognition (see Chapter 3, Section 3.3).  20 In support of his belief, Miller (1989) cited a great tenor who on one occasion felt like he was “winding golden ribbon around a small wheel two feet in front of his face,” and another famous tenor who felt once like he was “singing through an imaginary third eye in the middle of the forehead” (p. 15). Although Miller acknowledged that some sensorial descriptions could usefully spark a student’s imagination, he claimed that it was never very successful when teachers superimposed their own imagery on their students (Miller, 1989). As with all imagery use, if the student is not familiar with the characteristics of the source image, it will not be of much value to him or her in understanding the characteristics of the target image.  2.2  Arguments for the continued pedagogical use of metaphor and imagery 2.2.1 Teaching is impossible without using metaphoric and imagistic language. Several arguments have been put forth by proponents of the “psychological” approach in  support of the continued use of metaphoric and imagistic language used for training the voice. Voice teachers have repeatedly claimed that it is impossible to teach without using it (Carter, 1993). This claim has been supported by increasing number of researchers whose studies have shown that metaphor and imagery use is intrinsic to the way humans think and reason (Gentner & Grudin, 1985; Holyoak & Thagard, 1997; Lakoff & Johnson, 1980a, 1999, 2003), a subject discussed in more detail in Section 2.2.6. For instance, even though some of the teachers in Dunbar-Wells’s (1997) study claimed to avoid the use of metaphor, the findings showed that all of them used it. Even Henderson who publicly denounced the use of figurative language (see Section 2.1.3) used highly colourful metaphorical imagery himself. vi Voice educators who denigrate the use of metaphor and imagery do so despite the fact that there has never been a time when some form of mental training using these tools has not been advocated by singers and pedagogues (Fields, 1947). Although the expressions singers  21 may use are unrelated to reality, the resultant tone outcomes produced are nevertheless very real (Dunbar-Wells, 1997; Hines, 1983). The fact that so little attention had been paid to the psychological aspects of singing led Günter (1992a) to assume they played “a small and certainly far underestimated role in voice pedagogy” (p. 4). He also suggested that perhaps one of the reasons some in the vocal community rejected the psychological aspects of singing was because they viewed them as “a kind of charlatanism or speculation” (Günter, 1992a, p. 5). Despite his conclusions, Günter contended that voice teachers could not ignore the psychological aspects of learning.  2.2.2 Sensations are the singer’s main language. Strategies involving the use of metaphoric and imagistic language for goal-directed activities are viewed by many as essential to the learning process, and there are many theoretical reasons cited in the literature advocating their usage (Marks, 1999). In the field of singing, it is considered vital for conveying sensorimotor experiences (Günter, 1992a, 1992b). In fact, many voice teachers and singers consider it to be the main vocabulary or language for describing what they actually sense while singing (Dunbar-Wells, 1997; Emmons & Thomas, 1998; Green & Gallwey, 1986; Hemsley, 1998; Hines, 1983; Salaman, 1989). The singers in Carter’s (1993) study, for instance, were primarily concerned with how something felt, and all of them used kinaesthetic feedback repeatedly as an index for reliability (p. 186). Those who oppose non-literal language as a teaching tool do so in part because of the presumed subjecttivity of the expressions. However, not all researchers look suspiciously upon introspective reports concerning the empirical use of sensations, some viewing them insofar as quality, content, and structure are concerned as valid and highly reliable indicators (Marks, 1985).  22 The fact that many singers have difficulty verbalising their experiences does not mean they do not know what they are doing. Wilson and Keil (1998) noted that many people who have reached world class status in their chosen field are often unable to articulate their knowledge to novices, even though they have a perfect understanding of the procedural aspects involved in achieving their goals. In such cases, the knowledge they possess is simply “outside the sphere of conscious thought” (Wilson & Keil, 1998, p. 146). Hines (1983) claimed that singers were simply accustomed to thinking about the act of singing in the “non-verbal language of kinesthetic sensation” vii (p. 13). In addressing the kinaesthetic perceptions that singers experience, Günter (1992b) noted that “[t]hese sensations are real and with an adequate sensitivity can create a mental image which one can use in singing” (p. 4, emphasis added). This claim has been supported by studies showing imagery use to be a valid strategy in the educational process, particularly in sensorimotor activities (Markman & Brendl, 2005). Although the majority of research outside the vocal community concerned with imagery and metaphor use has been focused on the visual aspects, relatively recent research by researchers within the vocal community (Carter, 1993; Dunbar-Wells, 1997) has shown that voice teachers and singers constantly generate imagery and/or metaphor in multiple forms, employing visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic imagery and on occasion other modalities in their search of ways for making correspondences between their sensorial experiences and the figurative language they employ in order to articulate their experiences. For instance, renowned soprano Licia Albanese employed haptic imagery related to the modality of touch which she claimed helped her express the text’s meaning and colour her voice: “I think in terms of qualities. I feel I can see the tone. You have to treat one note with velvet cloth, another taffeta, another chiffon. I think very much in terms of texture” (Hines, 1983, p. 21).  23 Albanese’s approach was not at all surprising, since terms such as velvet, brilliance, and body have been used as descriptive terms by voice teachers for a very long time (Read & Osborne, 1983). According to Read and Osborne (1983), All singing tones are composites of three basic, variable characteristics — velvet, body, and brilliance — much as sunlight is a composite of the colors of the rainbow. Each characteristic must represent a specific muscular function, or complex of functions, operating with some degree of independence from each of the other two. When one of these variables dominates the tone we hear the tone primarily in terms of that particular quality, but the overall quality will indicate the degree of activity of the functions responsible for the other two in ways which become clues to vocal condition. Like three legs of a tripod, each is assisted — or limited — by the other two. . . . Each of the three variables contributes, in addition to a specific quality, a specific sense of physical tonal shape, i.e., brilliance is associated with a sense of width, body with depth, and velvet with height. (p. 39) A somewhat related experience to Albanese’s process involving different types of material was that of world-renowned tenor Plácido Domingo who, when asked a question about the process he used involving “covering,” a strategy used by men in a particular range of the voice, exclaimed, “Physiologically I cannot tell you the glottis did that or . . . It’s just the fact of singing and automatically making, in a way, a darker sound” (Hines, 1983, pp. 105106). Corroboration for this sort of experience is explained by Searle (as cited in Gibbs, 1992) who affirmed that underlying rules or principles do not apply in certain types of metaphor that constitute non-representational mental capacities other than the “sheer ability to make certain associations” (p. 584). Some concepts are simply impossible to describe in literal language and  24 therefore alternative non-technical approaches such as “green and blue” pedagogy are being used—in this case for thinking a certain colour in order to lighten or darken the voice (Freed, 2000, p. 10). Voice scientists have suggested that imagery may well be an important factor in teaching voice (Rammage, Morrison & Nichol, 2001; Sundberg, 1987; Titze, 1994). Rammage et al. (2001) claimed that once singers can relate their sensations to particular physiological and acoustical events, they are then in a position to use the sensations as feedback to confirm whether the actions they take are correct or not. Moreover, after singers have learned to successfully execute the action on a consistent basis, they can apply “whatever imagery they like to these experiences. The images can then become the means that singers use to keep in contact with their instrument in the midst of the complexities and distractions of vocal performance” (p. 243, emphasis added). It must be noted once again, however, that these comments refer to singers who have already established patterns of behaviour conducive with good sound production. Being more advanced in their vocal technique than those who are in the beginning years of learning how to sing, they are thus in a position to understand how to use a variety of metaphors and images to induce specific behaviours.  2.2.3 Renowned singers use metaphor and imagery. Despite the arguments of those who believe that metaphorical imagery is often just ineffectual fantasy, one cannot ignore the unequivocal success of many famous singers who have consistently employed it (Hines, 1983). Despite the small number of professional singers involved in Carter’s (1993) study on imagery use, a degree of generalisability regarding the respondents’ emphasis on the crucial role mental imagery played in their careers was assumed,  25 given their highly impressive credentials (ten of the eleven had worked with world class opera companies and two were acclaimed voice teachers). Carter proposed that “the reputations of these singers [permitted] them to speak with authority of the mental imagery phenomenon used in their creative process, in direct contrast to the non-artist status of many of the subjects of laboratory testing of imagery use” (Carter, 1993, p. 300). Of course, one can also legitimately argue that just because successful singers have found certain images to be effective does not necessarily mean they will be effective with voice students. The real issue is whether this imagery is of any value in teaching aspiring singers, and for that reason the present study was undertaken.  2.2.4  Scientific information can be difficult to convey.  Although many voice teachers include literal descriptions of physiological processes in their voice lessons (Dunbar-Wells, 1997), they often find it difficult to articulate scientific findings. Dunbar-Wells’s (1997) study revealed that when the voice teachers in her study described physical behaviours, they used “invariably orthodox descriptions, which were followed by descriptive metaphors intended to clarify the unfamiliar concepts” (p. 197, emphasis added). The fact that metaphorical descriptions were used to clarify scientific concepts supports my contention that metaphoric and image-based expressions are important pedagogical tools in the voice studio. Describing how the voice functions can be very confusing to even advanced teachers (Daniels, 1983). Anyone who has ever tried to communicate something intrinsically complex is aware of the difficulties giving such an account can pose. Scholarly research involved with the nature and function of the vocal instrument is highly complex. Respiration alone is so complex that Campbell (as cited in Appelman, 1967) claimed that it required “the detailed knowledge of  26 the classical anatomist and . . . the analytical understanding of an engineer” to understand (p. 10). The biomechanics of the laryngeal mechanism are similarly complex. That the language and theory are difficult to render into lay-language can be attested to when reading Appelman’s (1967) book, The Science of Vocal Pedagogy. Singers find discursive language in general to be limited in its effectiveness due to the time it takes to explain something, whereas metaphoric and image-based language is felt to be the quickest medium by which insights are transmitted (Bradshaw, 1996; Carter, 1993; Dunbar-Wells, 1997; Emmons & Thomas, 1998; Günter, 1992a, 1992b). Presentations of information using such approaches are particularly important for people who are visual learners and prefer specific actions contained in a compact form (Feldman, 2004; Larkin & Simon, 1987). The singers involved in Carter’s (1993) study felt that discursive and literal language could not adequately describe the “inner somatic mechanics of voice production” (p. 47) or provide the awareness of the sensory elements needed to create the memory patterns which set up the physical responses necessary for accurate tone creation (Dunbar-Wells, 1997).  2.2.5 Paradoxes challenge the scientific approach. Despite the fact that vocal science has made positive inroads in debunking many ridiculous claims in vocal pedagogy, there are other reasons why it is difficult to rely solely on science-based approaches in the voice studio. For instance, early in the 20th century, Earnest G. White developed a theory which held that vocal tone was “produced in the cranial sinuses and that the vocal cords were merely breath governors” (Dunbar-Wells, 1997, p. 2). White’s personal success in using his sinuses-as-a-wind-instrument image metaphor led him to teach it  27 to others who were similarly successful using his approach. He was so successful at restoring even the most dysfunctional speaking and singing voices that physicians sent their patients to him. Slater, an ardent follower of White’s, had so greatly benefited from this teaching that he was simply being pragmatic when he stated, “The proper and only question to ask . . . is ‘Does it work?’ not ‘Is it true?’” (as cited in White, 1938, p. xv). Despite such positive feedback, the majority of White’s colleagues as well as the medical profession did not accept his teaching. In 1960, William Vennard and Janwillem van den Berg established quite conclusively in their research at the Groningen Voice Research Lab of the University of Groningen and in their film Voice Production: The Vibrating Larynx that vocal sound was produced by the vibrating vocal folds. Winning several awards, including best medical research film from a festival in Prague, the film showed an excised human larynx in which the vocal folds were made to vibrate by adducting them and passing air through them. The evidence that sound was created by vocal fold vibration supported those who believed in the vocal cord theory (VCT). It is safe to say that the majority of the voice teachers in the world presently hold to this theory which has subsequently generated many pedagogical approaches. Having scientifically proven that sound was produced by the vocal folds, the voice teachers who adhered to the sinus tone production theory (STP) modified their theory by proceeding to instruct their students to sing “as if” the tone was produced in the cranial sinus region (Dunbar-Wells, 1997, p. 110). The paradox of White’s success with his technique vis-à-vis the fact that it was based on a false premise led Dunbar-Wells (1997) to formally ask the question, “If White was wrong, what did he do that was right?” (p. 211). She knew at the outset of her study that influential VCT teachers questioned the suitability of metaphor in general to convey the processes involved in tone production, and questioned the relevance of White’s theory in particular  28 “because it was not scientific and relied on transmitting information by metaphor” (DunbarWells, 1997, p. 199). I discuss her findings concerning metaphor use in Section 2.3.2. Dunbar-Wells’s (1997) doctoral study was the first empirical study to investigate the sinus tone production theory, as well as the first to compare the use of metaphor in general by those who held to the two teaching strategies. Participants in her study included one group of voice teachers who adhered to the sinus tone production theory (STP) and another group of voice teachers who adhered to the vocal cord theory (VCT). Her findings showed that White’s imagery was a surprisingly effective catalyst in triggering processes which lead to improved tone creation. Focusing the singer’s awareness of sensations away from the intrinsic muscles of the larynx, vocal folds, and vocal tract allowed for the singer’s energy to be directed into properly supporting the singing tone with the stronger extrinsic muscles of the body (e.g., back muscles), thereby leaving the vocal tract free to respond in an uninhibited manner. Vocal health was thus preserved, and an unrestricted tone was the result (Dunbar-Wells, 1997). Importantly, this research also showed that the awareness of sympathetic vibrations sensed in the sinus region may act as a useful placement guide which in turn may affect the tone a singer produces. viii Not only was White’s imagery found to be safe in accordance with the voice restoration criterion used in the study for evaluating its effectiveness, his strategy of focusing on tone as though it were produced in the sinuses was actually “closer to the therapeutic model” than the strategies associated with the vocal cord theory (Dunbar-Wells, 1997, p. 208). That an admittedly false theory of sound production resulted in findings considered to be very safe is a perfect example of the usefulness of imagery which reflects empirically-based sensations rather than imagery which lines up with scientific facts.  29 The desire to abandon the use of metaphoric language as a pedagogical tool is not new. In the late 1970s, Petrie (1979) countered those who still considered metaphor to be useless embellishment by claiming that “even though metaphors may turn out to be dispensable to a logical characterization of the subject being taught and learned, they may be indispensable to the pedagogical process of acquiring that subject” (p. 439, emphasis added). Vennard (1967) similarly argued that “the final reliance must be upon the realities of experience, even though unexplained and mysterious” (p. 209) because there were simply too many “infinite subtleties [exist] which defy explanation” to pretend to know otherwise (p. 160). To avoid any possible misunderstandings on the part of students, Vennard (1967) also cautioned that “[a]s long as we do not confuse fancy with fact, this can be a means of finding truths which are as yet beyond our understanding, but which may nonetheless have practical usefulness” (pp. 147, 149). Other writers echoed his belief in helping students understand what may in fact be happening physiologically so they do not become confused or overextend the application of an image beyond what it is meant to convey (Carter, 1993; Dunbar-Wells, 1997; Freed, 2000).  2.2.6 Thinking analogically and imaginatively is innate. Our innate ability to think analogically is perhaps the strongest reason why metaphoric and image-based language used for pedagogical purposes should not be curtailed in the voice studio. Holyoak and Thagard (1997) argued that “[t]he analogical mind is simply the mind of a normal human being” (p. 35). For instance, studies have shown that children begin developing their abilities to think analogically as young as two years of age (Gentner, 1977), increase their ability to use analogy as they begin to age (Gentner, 1977; Richland, Morrison, & Holyoak, 2006; Singer-Freeman & Bauer, 2008), and start to produce and comprehend metaphor about  30 the time they begin producing and comprehending language (Keil, 1986). Thus, to actually prohibit the use of metaphor in a person’s life would be, according to Black (as cited in Livingstone & Harrison, 1981), “a wilful and harmful restriction upon our powers of inquiry” (p. 98). As for the imagination, Anderson (1991) noted that an emphasis on task-analytic procedures and the like often failed to capitalize on our basic and natural inclinations to imagine. Many researchers felt that the very notion of creativity and sense of aesthetics would not exist were it not for the creative impulses generated by imagery (Anderson, 1991; Cannatella, 2004; Michel, 1999; Pike, 2004; Radford, 2004; Render, Padilla & Moon, 1988; Richardson, 1982; Sobel & Rothenberg, 1980). Moreover, Rothenberg’s (1979, 1995) contention that the superimposition of pictorial stimuli enhanced creativity was supported through research into fusion of visual stimuli (Sobel & Rothenberg, 1980). By contrast, Morgan (1993) found that listeners given explicit information or academic descriptions not only used their imagination less but their desire to learn was also consequently stifled. Bradshaw (1996) was concerned that singers who concentrate on what should be happening physiologically without engaging their imagination would actually distance themselves emotionally from what they were doing. Thus, the importance of allowing singers to use their imagination through tools such as metaphoric and imagistic language cannot be overstated. In fact, Hemsley (1998) claimed that improving how the singer connected the imagination with the sound produced was the “sole purpose” of vocal pedagogy (p. 111). According to Gagné and White (1978), the imagination is also indispensable when it comes to unifying disparate pieces of information. This is an important point, since the conceptual image A Singer’s Body Is An Expanding Container which is formed from several  31 expressions offered in this study reflects the metacognitive abilities that human beings possess which enable them to think about their thoughts and actions (discussed in Chapter 8, Sections 8.1.4, 8.2.1, 8.3.1, and 8.4).  2.2.7  Non-literal language meets different learning needs and styles.  It has been argued that employing non-literal language stimulates the learning needs and styles of some students better than a more literal science-based approach (Cleveland, 1989; Dunbar-Wells, 1997; White, 1984). This is supported by research which has shown that learning styles and approaches to accommodate learners vary from person to person (Arthurs, 2007; Boström & Lassen, 2006; Childers, Houston, & Heckler, 1985; Loo, 2004; McMullan & Cahoon, 1979; Statt, Plummer, & Marinelli, 2001; Wittrock, 1979). Bandler and Grinder (1979) argued that when the speaker’s language style (e.g., visual, auditory, kinaesthetic) matched that of the hearer, information was more fully understood; conversely, when the language between them differed, details were more likely to be missed. Dunbar-Wells (1997, 2003) contended that teaching voice should always incorporate multiple aids to convey the same information, since what is helpful to one person may not be helpful to another since their learning styles are different. Boström and Lassen (2006) argued that although learning and meta-learning can occur without actually having been taught, there was a greater possibility of facilitating a metalearning process if the methods used to teach the students were matched to their preferred learning styles. Boström and Lassen also felt that feelings of failure, lack of confidence, and subsequent lack of initiative could be reversed if students understood their own learning style and how to apply it to their situation. Having teachers develop knowledge of various learning strategies and styles was believed to be one of the key ways by which students could be  32 empowered with a desire for life-long learning (Boström & Lassen, 2006). These are important points, since there will undoubtedly be voice students who would thrive on learning about and implementing the constructs explicated in the present study.  2.3 Research on metaphor and imagery use in vocal pedagogy The resurgence of interest by researchers regarding the use and effectiveness of metaphoric and image-based language has been quite extensively undertaken in fields as diverse as art, competitive sports, science, math, psychology, and dance. Despite the advances made in these disciplines, very little research in this matter has been undertaken within the field of vocal pedagogy which is quite surprising given that singers have “consistently and historically used mental imaging techniques to achieve their objectives” (Cleveland, 1989, p. 41). It took a substantial amount of time to find substantive information regarding the use of imagery, metaphor, and/or commonly used maxims used in the voice studio. Until fairly recently, metaphor and imagery were rarely touched upon in the standard vocal pedagogy books. Occasionally, one may find a few ineffectual paragraphs or pages in a book referring simply to their existence as a tool used by some voice teachers in their voice studios, without any additional information to help the reader. A number of studies have been conducted which focused on the nature and effects of metaphor and imagery use among musicians (Barten, 1998; Sheldon, 2004). For instance, Robert Woody (2002, 2004, 2006a, 2006b) has studied mental imagery use among singers and pianists, comparing its effectiveness with aural modeling and verbal descriptions concerning concrete musical properties. Generally speaking, Woody’s focus regarding imagery use in singing has been primarily with vocal performance as opposed to vocal pedagogy, and for that reason I have not drawn upon his material.  33 A handful of recently published resources are now available which seem be very helpful for connecting sensorimotor experiences with the imagination (e.g., Bunch Dayme, 2005; Bunch & Vaughn, 2004; Chapman, 2006; Monahan, 2006). Leyerle (1977, 1981) was the only author in the practice-based vocal literature found to date whose empirically-based teaching philosophy employed geometric renderings to communicate information related to respiration, phonation, and resonation. He devised a conceptual system of sorts (albeit truncated) in which he superimposed a variety of shapes onto different body parts, thus helping voice students visually understand some of the motor activities in which they engaged. Accompanying some of his explanations were drawings employed to show where particular sensations would be felt, or to indicate the area under discussion. Jerome Hines’s (1983) well-known book entitled Great Singers on Great Singing is a compilation of interviews he undertook with over forty nationally and internationally known singers. After completing the project he admitted to having discovered so many diverse and conflicting opinions that he felt compelled to warn his readers they might “collapse in confusion” if the instructions given by those he had interviewed were used without the guidance of a good teacher (p. 16). He recognised that some students would be incapable of “translating the verbal imagery . . . into their own private vocabulary of bodily sensation” due to the many inconsistencies and contradictions among his interviewees (p. 14) which further led him to add an opening caveat by MacNeil (as cited in Hines, 1983) that stated, “Warning: This book may be injurious to your vocal health” (Frontispiece). At first glance I wondered if he meant the statement to be taken humorously, but upon reading the book it was also clear to me that the inconsistent language used by those he interviewed could confuse voice students who have not yet developed an established and workable singing technique.  34 The past century saw on-again, off-again attempts at initiating discourse surrounding the use of metaphor and imagery for vocal pedagogy, the majority of information being presented in short articles. In fact, numerous articles have been published about metaphor and imagery use in the voice studio over the past several decades, leaving one with the impression that a lot has been written on the subject. However, the short-article journals in which these have been published disallow elaborate discussions on almost any subject due to space limitation, and thus the majority of articles dealing with these topics are generally only two or three pages long. Moreover, many of the articles included criticisms concerning the use of metaphor and imagery and were seemingly used as a platform for promoting the more ‘advanced’ scientific approach (e.g., Miller, 1985). Lack of scientific knowledge among those who employ nonliteral language was also cited as a reason for advancing the notion that a scientific approach to vocal pedagogy was more efficacious and should thus be adopted to replace such an ‘outdated’ approach (e.g., Miller, 1993a). A small number of articles have positively discussed metaphoric and image-based language in some detail. Moorcroft (2002) began by calling for “pedagogical tolerance” between the two opposing camps in the imagery debate, claiming that neither approach was free from being misinterpreted or free from varying results (p. 651). She felt that championing one method over another not only restricted the options one had for teaching voice, but failed to acknowledge students’ different learning styles. Taking a conciliative position, she argued that optimal performances would result from a “united approach” employing contributions from both science and imagery (Moorcroft, 2002, p. 651). In a later article, Moorcroft (2007) discussed the use of directional imagery for teaching voice, and showed how imagery is often based on or related to various spatial orientations,  35 underlying structures which emerged in the present study. Despite the relative brevity of the article, Moorcroft presented several illustrative examples of images (e.g., posture, breath management, and tone production), discussed the scientific theories behind some of the examples, and explained how spatial imagery (i.e., directionally upward, directionally downward) applied to it. Her reason for doing so—even in such a brief article—was likely a response to having observed that “[w]hen directional imagery is taught, explanations as to what it hopes to achieve are rarely presented” (Moorcroft, 2007, p. 103). Her recognition of directional imagery as a valid approach corroborated my contention that the metaphoric and image-based expressions voice teachers use for pedagogical purposes is structured in part by spatial metaphors learned through bodily engagement with the environment. A quite different article by Nikitina (2004) described a one-week period in which she observed well-known soprano/voice teacher Phyllis Curtin’s master classes at Tanglewood Summer Institute and interviewed five of Curtin’s students. Curtin is renowned for fostering students’ imaginations, believing that tonal outcome “is neither just a muscle movement, nor a concept; it is a duality and union of spirited physicality or voice “married” to imagination” (p. 32). Nikitina briefly described Curtin’s fundamental belief that artistic performance was “mediated by the mental idea that leads it” (p. 30), and came away from her short visit with the understanding that metaphorical thinking helped facilitate and reinforce the connection between technical exercises and artistic feelings and ideas. Ohrenstein (2003) discussed the function of metaphoric language in reference to knowledge of results (KR), Schmidt’s (1975) schema theory, and the use of schemas as they relate to different aspects of singing (e.g., subglottal pressure, registration, and chiaroscuro). In discussing metaphoric descriptions and their usefulness in training aural and kinaesthetic  36 awareness, she contended that these were “not meant to be scientific descriptions and should not be denigrated for that reason” (p. 4). Rather, she argued that singers use a “salient feature of the kinaesthetic sensation metaphorically [which] then becomes part of the perceptual feedback, providing the student with accurate KR, and used to guide subsequent trials” (Ohrenstein, 2003, p. 32). For instance, in addressing the concept of legato, she noted that it became clear to the student in several different ways, including “a cognitive concept . . . an aural quality . . . and as a kinesthetic sensation, a stored sensory image of how the body feels” (Ohrenstein, 2003, p. 33, emphasis added). Ohrenstein (2003) also contended that although imagistic expressions such as “space in the back” and “buzz in the front” have evoked scepticism from outsiders, they continue to be employed by voice teachers because of their capacity to induce desirable coordinations, to describe the sensations the teacher desires, and for their use as “tracking devices” during performance (p. 33). Importantly, she also recognised that a singer can develop “[a] global concept [which] is capable . . . of acting as a stimulus to induce a multilevel coordinated response involving many muscles and perceptions” (Ohrenstein, 2003, p. 33, emphasis added). She noted, however, that such an approach is capable of development only after sufficient training involving behavioural responses. This is an important insight, given that the findings in this study show the beginnings of an underlying conceptual metaphor involving the ability to think globally (i.e., metacognitively) about many actions in close succession as well as simultaneously. Patenaude-Yarnell (2003a) discussed imagery related to preparation of the vocal instrument, phonation and onset of tone, breath management, dynamic control and tonal modulation (vocal weight, color, and texture), vowel purity and blending, vowel modification, and flexibility. As a supporter of  37 metaphorical imagery use in the voice studio, she contended that the imagination plays an especially useful role for the singer, but that its role can easily be overlooked because of the increase in technical and scientific information. She discussed wrong uses of imagery (e.g., the teacher who has everyone use the same images even though their problems were quite different), as well as images which paradoxically defied reasoning (e.g., Joan Sutherland’s success at achieving a forward sound by imagining a hole further back in the top of her head whenever she produced her highest notes). Although noting that such images were unlikely to work for everyone, Patenaude-Yarnell (2003a) nevertheless contended that the imagination which creates such imagery should be stimulated rather than neglected, since young singers often experience confusion when given physical directives alone (e.g., being told to “release the jaw,” “lift the soft palate,” and “release the tongue”). Instead, by having students mimic everyday actions (e.g., beginning to yawn, smiling inwardly, breathing in steam, taking in a surprise breath), they sing more easily, since such actions naturally coordinate necessary functions (e.g., the resonators are prepared, the larynx lowers, the jaw and tongue release naturally, and the upper face is properly prepared). In a later article the same year, Patenaude-Yarnell (2003b) presented a short glossary and brief explanations concerning forty-three accepted figures of speech, including well-known maxims, descriptions, and images. Since many of them have been circulating in the voice teacher’s repertoire of expressions for a very long time, she was not always able to identify the source, but did so whenever possible. This is the only article I found to date which laid out such a list. The only in-depth research that I have located to date concerning the specific use of mental imagery and/or metaphor used by voice teachers and singers for pedagogical purposes has been in the form of two dissertations. Carter’s (1993) doctoral dissertation appears to  38 have been the first systematic empirical study focused on imagery use in the field of singing. She explored its use by interviewing eleven professional singers with the aim of determining the role of imagery in their careers, the importance (scope and depth) of imagery pertaining to the development and maintenance of technique, as well as its role in conveying the interpretive elements associated with singing. The singers in Carter’s sample not only viewed the use of imagery in a positive light, but judging by the number of images they offered (employing all three modalities) and regardless of the area into which they inserted imagery (e.g., pedagogy, interpretation), it appeared that most of them were “habitual imagizers” (Carter, 1993, p. 312). As for its importance as a teaching methodology, mental imagery was viewed as an “externalization of internal processes” (p. 291). Seminal imagery experiences as well as the important influence of mentors were shared by the singers with the researcher. Carter’s respondents vividly remembered examples of imagery their teachers used when they explained and expanded on various vocal processes, examples they contended made the process of learning voice more personal (Carter, 1993, pp. 168-169). One singer rejected the notion that the imagery his teachers used amounted to “magic,” “quackery,” or “mental gymnastics,” claiming instead that they were always “tied to particular sensory response” (Carter, 1993, p. 169). Of the three modalities most commonly used by singers, kinaesthetic or body imagery was predominant and seemingly paramount, issuing as “organic to all areas of the singing process in all interviews” (Carter, 1993, p. 203). Body imagery incorporated not only visual imagery but other sensory modalities by which the singers were able to employ more “dynamic” imagery (Carter, 1993, p. 314). Visual and aural imagery were not referred to nearly as often as kinaesthetic imagery, and less importance was  39 given them. When visual imagery was used, it was primarily used to transmit either the mechanics of singing or for interpretive purposes. Moreover, the visual aspects were not ends in themselves but rather means for inducing kinaesthetic sensations. When aural imagery was used, it was often to do with retaining necessary pitches or creating a desired timbre. Carter’s analysis suggested that multiple modalities (two and even three) were used simultaneously rather than in a “pure” form (i.e., a single modality) (Carter, 1993, p. 293). Some imagery used by the respondents appeared to begin in one sensory modality but then shifted or became fused internally with another sensory modality. The need for transmitting information in multiple sensory modalities to give students plenty of opportunity to comprehend what the teacher wanted to convey was confirmed in Carter’s study. Having specialised in concert ix and oratorio singing, I was not surprised Carter’s (1993) study revealed that concert singing “provided the largest area for mental restructuring and recombining of remembered persons, places, or events,” followed by similar findings with oratorio or orchestral performances (Carter, 1993, p. 294). In keeping with the musical genre, the concert recital setting is relatively intimate, allowing for little if any distraction. Oratorio (a musical composition for voices and orchestra based on a religious text) is similarly intimate, although there can be limited contact between singers. Acting such as that found in opera is uncommon on the concert and oratorio stage, allowing the singer to focus intensely on the singing itself. As for opera singing, Carter’s respondents often prepared roles using powerful images, but during performances the potential for including visual imagery was decreased due to the complexities of costumes, props, the chorus, and other performers. Despite recognising the limited time they had while performing opera to analyse the imagery they did use, the three primary modalities nevertheless remained of central importance to them for use with opera.  40 Carter felt that possibly the most striking finding was the ongoing concern of the singers bringing to conscious awareness internal physical sensations, visceral movements, and an external awareness of the body in space (Carter, 1993). There were significant data indicating that “imagery strategies used by these singers triggered new and more appropriate vocal responses” (p. 315). Moreover, imagery was used as a trigger to initiate “more integrated cognitive functioning and an ability to move beyond perceived vocal limitations” (Carter, 1993, p. 314). It was felt that the inexperienced singers needed to have exposure to an abundance of imagery from which they could select the suitable examples for whatever task lay before them. Dunbar-Wells’s (1997) study investigating Ernest G. White’s controversial theory that tone was created in the cranial sinuses (see Section 2.3.2) also appeared to be the first empirical investigation into the relevance of metaphor as a strategy used in vocal pedagogy, a topic she approached by comparing the general use of metaphor by both groups of teachers (STP and VCT) who participated in her study. She was aware from the outset of her study that influential vocal cord theory teachers questioned the suitability of metaphor in general to convey the processes involved in tone production, in addition to questioning the relevance of White’s sinus tone production theory in particular. Ironically, findings from her study suggested very strongly that “metaphor may be indispensable, especially when complex scientific explanations called for clarification” (p. 199, emphasis added). All of the teachers in Dunbar-Wells’s (1997) study used metaphors to explain or clarify their procedures during voice lessons. Even those who claimed they did not use metaphor did in fact use it, leading the researcher to presume those participants were simply unaware of using such descriptors. Those who claimed metaphor was “an obsolete form of teaching that  41 ought to be rejected” often used it in conversation (p. 174). Surprisingly (and paradoxically), the teacher most outspoken against the use of metaphor had the highest score, and the teacher who strongly maintained that metaphor was a vital tool for teaching voice had the lowest score. Results from the survey involving both groups of teachers indicated that neither group used experiential metaphor (metaphors based on everyday experiences as opposed to abstract or highly imaginative metaphors) designed to elicit explicit imagery. Neither did it seem that any one consciously used or taught a particular strategy aimed at awakening and developing awareness of sensory perception encoding and decoding strategies. Nor were visual, auditory and kinaesthetic reinforcement procedures presented from a number of different perspectives (p. 227, emphasis added). The present study attempted to increase voice teachers’ understanding of metaphoricallybased imagery by explicitly showing the underlying structuring of three constructs voice teachers often use, albeit unconsciously. These alternative perspectives meet students’ differing learning styles and are in keeping with Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980a, 1980b) conceptual metaphor theory which holds that metaphor is grounded in bodily experiences.  2.4  Research on imagery theories A vast amount of research has been and continues to be undertaken by researchers from  many different disciplines (e.g., cognitive neuroscience, cognitive psychology, educational psychology) concerning a host of issues related to the nature and purpose of metaphor and imagery. I investigated a number of theories which largely focused on cognitive functioning and drew upon neurophysiological evidence to help explain how imagery helps learners transform, reduce, elaborate, store, and recall sensory input. These theories posited that  42 learners take an active role in the generating, constructing and processing of percepts and concepts (Wittrock, 1979). Although none of them were useful for my particular purpose, each of them held important implications concerning imagery use for voice training. It is beyond the scope of this dissertation to discuss these imagery theories in any detail. However, a brief look into what each of these theories proposed is warranted because some of their findings relate to this study. A brief overview of the theoretical constructs associated with each of these theories may be viewed in Appendix B.  2.4.1 Symbolic learning theory. Originally proposed by Robert Sackett (1934), the symbolic learning theory holds that highly cognitive skills (e.g., sequencing, timing, planning) are helped by using imagery and are more easily coded than skills that are more purely motoric (e.g., strength skills) in nature (Janssen & Sheikh, 1994; Morris, Spittle, & Watt, 2005). This theory held implications for vocal pedagogy in its support of imagery use for novices who have not established a consistent vocal technique.  2.4.2 Dual code theory. Allan Paivio developed a very influential theory concerning imagery effects known as the dual code theory in which he hypothesised that our cognitive apparatus was split into two independent processing channels, a verbal discursive system and a nonverbal symbolic system (Jeannerod, 1995; Paivio, 1971, 1974, 1975, 1979, 1985, 1986a, 1986b; Paivio, Clark, & Lambert, 1988; Paivio & Csapo, 1973). Findings from one of Paivio’s studies (1965) involving concrete and abstract word pairing suggested that one was better off using imagery if the stimuli were concrete, and verbal instructions were more appropriate when stimuli were  43 abstract. Such use of imagery when the subject matter is concrete pointed to something singers engage in frequently, namely, the metaphorical superimposing of a concrete image on a concrete body part (e.g., a parachute sail full of wind mapped onto the stretched soft palate). Paivio also believed that symbols and images were more efficiently processed than discourse (cf. Vekiri, 2002), as singers have often contended (see Section 2.2.4). Moreover, he supported the use of multiple modalities (e.g., visual, auditory, kinaesthetic), another thing that singers have acknowledged engaging in to a large degree (Carter, 1993; Dunbar-Wells, 2007; Ohrenstein, 2003).  2.4.3 Gross framework theory. John Lawther’s (1968) gross framework theory emerged from Gestalt psychology, a predecessor to cognitive psychology. Lawther contended that for optimal motor learning to occur, learners needed to be able to conceptualise the total picture (gestalt) of a task. The emphasis was placed on seeing the whole task (overall general impression) rather than the parts or details of it (Grouios, 1992; Hale, 1994; Morris, Spittle, & Watt, 2005). This theory is applicable to the conceptual image A Singer’s Body Is An Expanding Container which I have shown as underlying some of the expressions offered by the voice teachers in this study (see Chapter 7). Thus, this theory holds implications for enabling voice students to think about an array of actions simultaneously.  2.4.4  Functional equivalence hypothesis.  Extensive research has been done concerning both visual imagery and motor imagery and the neural mechanisms they share in common with brain activity. Stephen Kosslyn (1973, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1983, 1988, 1994) hypothesised that visual imagery and visual perception  44 were generated in the same neural substrates of the brain, hence the name of this hypothesis. His findings revealed that the subjects in his studies serially scanned images just like actual pictures (e.g., their attention shifted up, down, left, and right). They also treated imagery in proportion to the difficulty of the task (e.g., while imaging, subjects took longer to drive through a narrow gate than to drive through a wide gate, actions which parallel the cautionary approach they used when actually driving through a narrow gate). He also found that subjects zoomed in to inspect small details or parts of the image, and were also able to generate novel combinations of objects (Kosslyn, Behrmann, & Jeannerod, 1995). Kosslyn’s functional equivalence hypothesis supports voice teachers’ use of imagery that foregrounds salient features (e.g., arch-like attributes of a stretched soft palate), and imagery which is evident in many conceptualisations singers have about sound production based on notions of proportion (e.g., imagining a tone “going through the eye of a needle”). In much the same way Kosslyn and other pictorialists demonstrated that visual imagery and actual visual perception share common neural structures, Marc Jeannerod’s (1994, 1995, 1999) research also revealed that motor imagery and motor preparation shared common neural mechanisms. Locations in the brain which were activated during an imaginary movement were similar to those that fired during the actual movement (Finke, 1985, 1989). Although Jeannerod (1995) considered motor images more difficult to describe than visual images, he nevertheless claimed that motor performance was reflected by motor images which matched mental movements with imaged movements. Kosslyn’s (1994) claim that the serial ordering of dynamic imagery steered the process of transformation from one particular state to another intended state supports the imagery singers use which matches the dynamic movements of various body parts which can be directly manipulated (e.g., soft palate, abdominal muscles).  45 2.4.5  Tacit learning theory.  Zenon Pylyshyn (1979, 1981, 2002, 2003) challenged the picture theory held by pictorialists such as Kosslyn, arguing that the underlying cognitive component to imagery involved implicitly-held knowledge. His tacit learning theory put forward the claim that many phenomena (but not all) concerned with the “picture theory” of mental imagery put forth by Kosslyn and others are “due to the fact that the task of “imaging” invites people to simulate what they believe would happen if they were looking at the actual situation being visualized” (Pylyshyn, 2002, p. 158). Pylyshyn (1981) also contended that the capturing of regularities argued for by other researchers with regard to perceptual metaphor is largely “illusory . . . parasitic upon our informal commonsense knowledge of psychology and our tacit knowledge of the natural world” and that “things [happen] more or less the way that they actually do happen in the world . . . simply because I know how things generally happen—because I have been told, or have induced, what some of the general principles are” (p. 41). In other words, he argued that people “use their tacit knowledge of the imaged situation to cause the transformation to proceed as they believe it would have proceeded in reality (Pylyshyn, 1981, p. 16). Importantly, Pylyshyn’s theory appeared to support the fact that singers often rely on implicit or tacit knowledge, since music itself is clearly non-pictorial and abstract and therefore cannot be described using the normal visual/spatial parameters or dynamic properties. Instead, he believed that the human being is capable of making the necessary associations when called to do so. Domingo’s earlier comment (see Section 2.2.2) in which he stated that it was sheer association which often helped him colour the voice is a case in point in support of Pylyshyn’s theory.  46 2.5  Cognitive instruction and skill acquisition 2.5.1  Perspectives and modalities.  Over the past two to three decades, many researchers have been interested in the study of imagery and its effect upon motor performance and skill acquisition (e.g., Feltz & Landers, 1983; Hall, Schmidt, Durand, & Buckolz, 1994; Harris & Robinson, 1986; Hinshaw, 1991; Mahoney & Avener, 1977; Richardson, 1967a, 1967b; Sackett, 1934). In the field of sports, for instance, there has been a great deal of interest in imagery where it is used in several different ways. More than a decade ago, Martin, Moritz, and Hall (1999) noted that over 200 studies examining the relationship between mental imagery and sport performance had been conducted. Imagery use has always been of great interest in fields such as sport and singing because it acts as a meeting place which integrates visual and kinaesthetic information, holistically connecting and synthesising a vast range of visceral-cognitive interactions. The visual perception of structural elements and a kinaesthetic awareness of motional elements are particularly relevant to voice education. Many examples are provided in this study showing that visual aspects of an image (e.g., shapes of objects) are directly related to the sensorial goal of a task. Knowing how singers internalise imagery is important for understanding the expressions offered in this study. To begin with, mental imagery has been clearly categorised into two approaches, namely, an internal perspective and an external perspective x (Mahoney & Avener, 1977; White & Hardy, 1995). An internal perspective involves viewing the execution of a task from a first-person perspective and can include both a visual imagery orientation as well as a kinaesthetic imagery orientation (Annett, 1995a; Hall, 1985; Mumford & Hall, 1985; Sheikh &  47 Korn, 1994; Taktek, Zinsser, & St. John, 2008). An external perspective is predominantly visual and requires the performer to view him- or herself—and by extension parts of the body—from a third-person perspective, much as an observer would watch a film. Perspective use is task-dependent. Many athletic sports are considered open skills xi that require the constant surveillance of a changing field and therefore often employ an external perspective which relies on visual cues (Hardy & Callow, 1999; White & Hardy, 1995). Singing, however, is a closed skill. xii Despite the lack of outwardly observable movement, a lot of complex muscular actions are in fact taking place internally. Whenever a singer feels himor herself executing actions pertaining to either the whole body (e.g., entire process of singing) or just a part of it (e.g., soft palate), he or she is engaging in what is known as motor imagery. Research has shown that greater physiological responses occur using an internal rather than an external perspective (Hale, 1982), so it should not be surprising that singers operate from an internal perspective. Researchers are well aware of the polysensory (i.e., multimodal) aspect of imagery (Suinn, 1983; Vealey & Greenleaf, 1998), agreeing that although motor imagery is performed from an internal orientation which is primarily kinaesthetic, it can co-occur with other task specific modalities xiii (Holmes & Collins, 2001; Jeannerod, 1994). Different sensory modalities are able to assist one another in conveying information (L. E. Marks, 1978). For singers, the most salient modes of perception—visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic—mutually assist each other in conveying information and are thus considered functionally inseparable. It has been suggested that learners commonly attend to visual factors before kinaesthetic ones, estimating how an image may feel after receiving the visual information (Holmes & Collins, 2001). In that case, a singer would likely begin by isolating a particular visual feature  48 (e.g., an arch) using an externally-perceived object-as-image representing the action s/he is executing. Other variables (e.g., temporal and force dynamic aspects inherent in the image itself) may also be inferred from the perceived object-as-image. Based on this information, an internally-perceived kinaesthetic image would then be constructed based on the corresponding feelings that result from the executed movement. White and Hardy (1998) supported this kind of experience when they described the act of imaging as not only visualising an image but “feeling movements as an image” (p. 389). In short, an external image is used as a visual reference which initiates a process that corresponds with internally-perceived kinaesthetic sensations. This process may be reversed, with the singer first sensing a movement and then relating it to a corresponding visual image. Such switching of perspectives is a common strategy among athletes as well (Hall et al., 1994; Holmes & Collins, 2001). Insofar as dynamic movement is concerned, Denis (1985) contended that imagery use was “not restricted to recollection of the appearance of static objects, but [extended] to moving objects, objects undergoing transformations . . . to dynamic events. . . . [and allowed] people to anticipate future (or even purely theoretical) events” (pp. 4S, 5S). In addition, visual mental images may also be introspectively deconstructed into parts (i.e., a small portion of a global image is extracted) and these parts (e.g., arches, angles) may subsequently be superimposed over other images which exhibit similar parts (Brandimonte, Hitch, & Bishop, 1992).  2.5.2  Combining approaches.  The real dispute appears to deal with the opaqueness of the metaphorical imagery used to convey vocal principles and concepts. However, misunderstandings need not occur if teachers would utilise as many communicative avenues as possible, thereby ensuring that what is being conveyed is likely to be understood by as wide an audience as possible (Carter, 1993; Dunbar-  49 Wells, 1997, 2003). Surprisingly, the voice teachers in Dunbar-Wells (1997) study often took the position that metaphor and literal descriptions were “mutually exclusive propositions” (p. 224). Despite the fact that both groups of voice teachers in her study often combined the two approaches themselves, they strenuously held to the notion that the approaches were separate. There was with little acknowledgement that students could comprehend and remember concepts better if the two approaches were combined. Moorcroft (2002), echoing DunbarWells’s sentiments, argued that maximum efficiency in teaching and performance will only be attained through an eclectic combination of scientific and traditional (i.e., pictorial) methodologies and “a return of ostrasised [sic] vocal imagery into the arena of scientific research” (pp. 653, 654). As a corollary to verbal and pictorial approaches, singers can use many practical visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic devices to help clarify obscure concepts as well (e.g., Caldwell & Wall, 2001a, 2001b; Dunbar-Wells, 1997; Lawson, n.d.; Lehmann, 1908; Leyerle, 1977). In this regard, Dunbar-Wells (2003) developed a number of practical visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic devices to help clarify obscure concepts.  2.6  The call for a solution That the field of teaching voice is badly in need of clarification has been admitted by  voice teachers for many years (Fields, 1947). In 1908, Taylor (as cited in Freed, 2000) stated that there were so many methods used to teach voice that “[a]bsolutely no uniformity can be found on any topic. . . . neither rule nor reason determines what materials shall be embodied in any one method. There is no coherence whatever in the matter” (p. 7). Seventy-five years later, Daniels (1983) declared that the task of finding knowledge that can be translated into practical studio applications may be “an exercise in futility” (p. 36).  50 There is no denying that the highly subjective nature of singing makes articulating ideas in ways that are easily replicable more often the exception than the rule (Dunbar-Wells, 1997; Hines, 1983). Dunbar-Wells’s (1997) research revealed, for instance, that the 28 voice teachers involved in her study had difficulty articulating their techniques regardless of whether they tried explaining it scientifically or psychologically, and many were unable to effectively communicate something even as basic as breath management. xiv In exploring the literature, I came across a number of statements by those in the vocal community as to what they felt should be done in order to advance language use in the voice studio. As previously noted, a major step forward would be accomplished if more exact language either replaced or augmented subjective expressions (Miller, 1996a). However, with scattered exceptions (e.g., Leyerle, 1977), no one says exactly how this might be accomplished. Fields (1947) felt that the main priority in launching a pioneering effort regarding these issues would have to involve rational thinking. Appelman (1967) assumed it would necessarily have to involve the interpretation of scientific facts in such a way that they could become realistic pedagogical tools for the voice studio. Günter (1992a) felt that the greatest need was for a “scientific orientation to the psychological aspects of singing” (p. 4). Field (1947) felt that the multiplicity of teaching approaches and their associated problems have arisen because individual teachers were developing their procedures “without reference to the broader pedagogical principles underlying them” (p. 3). Wyke (as cited in Miller, 1996a) stated that voice teachers needed to focus globally on the “entire neuromuscular control system of his pupil, and not merely that of one or more specific components of that system” (p. 200). Sell (2005) stated that teachers often presented isolated bits of information and quick fixes, a situation she argued could be avoided if a systematic way of organising  51 information was established which would be presented around “integrated themes” (p. 55). Miller (2001) felt a systematic approach to vocal pedagogy was not only appealing but necessary, claiming that “without a structured learning system (an orderly arrangement), there seldom can be a harmonious adjustment of the parts and elements that produce the singing instrument” (p. 49). Wilson Spillane (1989), whose research ascertained the effectiveness and accuracy of directives regarding physiological functioning, suggested that something had to be done about “codifying terminology” (p. 18). Cleveland (1989) declared there was a great need for serious research into mental imaging and hoped that the results of any objective research would result in or at least come close to a “common vocabulary” for voice education (p. 41). This study addresses these writers’ concerns by the three constructs underlying the expressions offered. In the field of singing there are different needs depending on the singer’s level of advancement. Miller (1989) contended that imagery was of some value in unifying the functions necessary for creating freedom in singing, but that it should only be used after a singer has learned to coordinate a variety of essential elements in singing, since he claimed it could otherwise cause confusion (Miller, 1996b). Given that even the staunchest advocates of the science-based technical-mechanical approach do not completely discount the use of imagery as a pedagogical strategy, and considering the need for serious research into mental imaging related to vocal pedagogy, this study aims to contribute to these emerging fields of inquiry by presenting heuristic, body-based constructs to help systematise vocal pedagogy. I discuss these constructs in the next chapter.  52 Chapter 3. Cognitive organisational strategies In this chapter I explain three cognitive approaches or constructs which I contend underlie the metaphoric and image-based expressions the voice teachers in this study employed. Two of the three constructs which I draw upon—image metaphors and image schemas—are components of linguist George Lakoff’s and philosopher/linguist Mark Johnson’s conceptual metaphor theory. The third underlying construct—a conceptual image— though not technically a conceptual metaphor (another component of the conceptual metaphor theory), can however be understood in light of that particular construct. I have used these constructs to analyze the metaphoric and imagistic expressions elicited by the voice teachers during their interviews. Given my previous experience as a professional singer, I intuited that these constructs could serve to articulate the different approaches the voice teachers in this study used concerning the non-literal language they offered. I am confident that these underlying constructs, arising from our everyday embodied experiences and perceptual interactions and then mapped onto both concrete and abstract events, can serve as bases for reasoning, thus providing some solutions regarding language use that the vocal community has long sought to establish (see Chapter 2, Section 2.7.1). This chapter includes explanations concerning the nature and functioning of these three cognitive approaches in conceptualizing abstract information. I also provide a working definition for the term metaphorical imagery which is used in describing many of the expressions examined in this dissertation. I discuss Lakoff and Johnson’s conceptual metaphor theory as well as embodied and experiential cognition, music as a metaphorical language, gestalt structures, conceptual metaphors, and a conceptual image which was formed by combining a number of metaphoric expressions offered in this study. In addition, I argue that  53 the metaphoric and imagistic expressions offered by the voice teachers are not random or arbitrary but constrained by our embodied experiences and thus able to be shared with students, given that human beings inhabit similar bodies and share similar reasoning capacities. In keeping with the Lakoffian-Johnsonian cognitive linguistic tradition from which I am drawing, SMALL CAPS are used throughout the dissertation for presenting the 10 gestalt structures (e.g., EQUILIBRIUM), the 55 image schemas associated with them (e.g., FORWARDBACKWARD)  as well as the conceptual metaphors ARGUMENT IS WAR and LOVE IS A JOURNEY.  This is in contradistinction to the conventional approach within the broader field of linguistics where LARGE CAPS are used to distinguish conceptual metaphors from conventional metaphors (Todd & Harrison, 2008). The “expanding container” conceptual image, a construct formed in this study by combining a number of metaphoric expressions, is presented in italics and with each word capitalised (i.e., A Singer’s Body Is An Expanding Container).  3.1  Metaphorical imagery In this thesis, I argue that the term metaphorical imagery best represents many of the  expressions offered by the voice teachers in explaining some of their pedagogical approaches. To begin with, common definitions for metaphor invariably contain references to the transfer or carrying over of ideas or features of one object or concept from one domain to another object or concept in a different domain in order to suggest a likeness or analogy between them (Feinstein, 1982). A basic metaphor seeks to liken or compare the implicit and explicit attributes of one typically abstract conceptual target domain in terms of a more familiar and typically more concrete source domain (Kövecses, 2002). Although metaphorical language commonly involves the recognition of literal similarities (i.e., one-to-one correspondences) between tangible objects (e.g., the arch of a cathedral ↔ the arch of a rainbow), in Lakoff  54 and Johnson’s (1999) conceptual metaphor theory it also includes cross-domain reasoning processes where no pre-existing similarities are seemingly evident (e.g., ARGUMENT IS WAR; LOVE IS A JOURNEY).  In my reading of the literature I have not found any explicit descriptions of metaphor treated as inextricably combined with or related to the formation of mental imagery. Instead, these two subjects were normally discussed as separate means of representation. However, Dunbar Wells (1997), a former professional singer who pursued a Ph.D. upon her retirement, appears to have made the connection between metaphor and mental imagery when she stated that “voice teachers use metaphor to generate . . . visual, auditory and kinaesthetic imagery” (p. 3, emphasis added). Her description of the process involving metaphorical language leading to the construction of imagery is depicted in Figure 3.1.  Metaphor  Sensorybased imagery  Neural responses  Physical adjustments  Tone outcome  Figure 3.1. The metaphor process between the teacher’s metaphor and the student’s tone outcome (Dunbar-Wells, 1997, p. 152). It is clear from the above figure that metaphor (box 1) begins a process which leads to the formation of imagery (box 2), thereby highlighting the inseparability of metaphorical language from the mental images which accompany it. Because the metaphoric expressions offered by the voice teachers in this study accord with a combinatorial construct, I have deliberately chosen to use the term metaphorical imagery. It should be noted that Dunbar-Wells’s figure is the top-down portion which is offered to students. The bottom-up portion—from experience to conceptualization—is what gives rise to the metaphors that teachers use.  55 3.2 Conceptual metaphor theory Although the metaphorical nature of music conceptualization can make it difficult to articulate one’s ideas, it has clearly not stopped educators from searching for and employing different approaches to help convey such abstract knowledge more effectively. The theory I am drawing on in this study was first extensively explored by Lakoff and Johnson (1980a) in Metaphors We Live By. Initially named the contemporary theory of metaphor (Lakoff, 1993), it is now generally referred to in the literature as the conceptual metaphor theory (Johnson, 1997; Ureña & Faber, 2010). Breaking from long-held beliefs that metaphor was largely a figure of speech confined to language use, Lakoff and Johnson (1980a) claimed that metaphor was not just a fanciful way of saying what could otherwise be said literally. They believed that the pervasive use of metaphor by human beings is because our thoughts are largely metaphoric (Lakoff, 1993; Lakoff & Johnson, 2003). By analysing conventional expressions used in our everyday lives, Lakoff and Johnson (1980a, 1980b) discovered multitudes of conceptual metaphors which systematically underlay our thinking processes. If the conceptual metaphor theory is valid, metaphor should thus manifest itself via multiple modes of communication and not just language alone (Forceville, 2009a; Forceville & Urios-Aparisi, 2009). The present study provides evidence which supports this claim. It is well beyond the realm and scope of this dissertation to delve into the details of this theory which has been growing exponentially in recent years. Anyone interested in the subject, however, will quickly discover that researchers in dozens of academic fields and dozens of languages have applied the theory within their fields of enquiry (e.g., Gibbs, 2008; Kövecses, 2006; Lakoff & Nuñez, 2000; Yu, 1999, 2009). Growing number of researchers in music have employed the conceptual metaphor theory as a primary tool in their investigations (e.g.,  56 Aksnes, 1998, 2001; Brower, 1997-1998, 2000, 2008; Cox, 1999; Eitan & Granot, 2006; Gur, 2008; Saslaw, 1996, 1997-1998; Saslaw & Walsh (1996), and Zbikowski, 1997, 1997-1998, 1998, 2002/2003, 2006, 2008, 2009). To my knowledge, my study is the first time components of this theory have been intensively examined and applied to vocal pedagogy.  3.3  Embodied and experiential cognition 3.3.1  Embodiment: Definition and overview.  Scholars from a variety of fields agree that it is important to understand how embodiment influences our cognition (Gallagher, 2005). Within education, for instance, the concept of embodiment is now a familiar concept (Hocking, Haskell, & Linds, 2001; Varela, Thompson, & Rosch, 1991), although its relationship to language is still a “central, if ambiguous, notion” within cognitive linguistics, the neuroscience of consciousness, (neuro)phenomenology, cognitive science, and even developmental psychology (Zlatev, 2007, pp. 297, 298). What embodiment actually means is very different not only between fields but also within fields (Zlatev, 2007). Despite the growing research, there is “no unified theory of embodiment, only many different uses of the term, each presupposing different assumptions and conceptual frameworks” (Violi, 2007, p. 53). Consequently, it is not always easy to find a straightforward definition of embodiment. Hocking, Haskell, and Linds (2001) described it not only as an “integration of the physical or biological body and the phenomenal or experiential body” but also suggested it was “a seamless though often-elusive matrix of bodymind-world, a web that integrates thinking, being, doing and interacting within worlds” (p. xviii, emphasis added). Gibbs (2005) described it simply as encompassing “the total interactions of the brain, body, and world as a self-organized, dynamical system” (p. 226, emphasis added).  57 There are some common assumptions found in most embodied cognition theories. One of the most prevalent of these is the claim that the mind is inherently embodied, a core belief of the Lakoffian-Johnsonian theory: Reason is not disembodied . . . but arises from the nature of our brains, bodies, and bodily experience. . . . [T]he very structure of reason itself comes from the details of our embodiment. . . . [R]eason is not, in any way, a transcendent feature of the universe or of disembodied mind. Instead, it is shaped crucially by the peculiarities of our human bodies, by the remarkable details of the neural structure of our brains, and the specifics of our everyday functioning in the world (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 4). Researchers agree that one of the primary ways we are able to comprehend and reason about our experiences is because repeatable structures and patterns order our perceptions, actions, and conceptions. Various studies have provided evidence that “the body, through its motor abilities, its actual movements, and its posture, informs and shapes cognition” (Gallagher, 2005, p. 8). Thus, our everyday realities “structure what we perceive” (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003, p. 3). This understanding plays a critically important role in the present study as it supports my contention that the metaphorical and non-metaphorical imagery employed by voice teachers is not random or arbitrary but instead grounded by our bodily experiences. Our ability to understand one another is the result of sharing the same capacities confined within the borders imposed by the human frame (Johnson, 1987).  3.3.2  Evidence of neural mechanisms.  With the resurgence of interest in imagery in the 1980s came a wave of researchers who studied the role it played, inter alia, in skill acquisition and abstract reasoning (e.g., Kosslyn,  58 Behrmann, & Jeannerod, 1995). In this regard, a growing body of neuroscientific studies regarding motor imagery and its link to brain processes have been undertaken over the past few decades (e.g., Barsalou, 1999; Flohr & Hodges, 2002; Gallese & Lakoff, 2005; Jeannerod, 1995; Lakoff, 2006, 2008). Discovering the functional relationship between motor imagery (i.e., imagined motor actions) and the subliminal activation of actual executed motor system actions has been the focus of much research (e.g., Decety, 1996a, 1996b; Jeannerod, 1994; Jeannerod & Frak, 1999; Munzert, Lorey, & Zentgraf, 2009; Svensson, Lindblom, & Ziemke, 2007; Willingham, 1998). Researchers have shown that the biomechanical factors which constrain real movements similarly limit imagined representations of the human body in motion (Kourtzi & Shiffrar, 1999). Researchers who embrace the embodied approach to perception maintain that the mind and body are inseparable, all cognition has a material basis, and corporeal experience as it relates to all human knowledge is indispensable (Bowman, 2004; Rohrer, 2007). Many conclusions concerning embodied cognition have been so strikingly obvious that Rinck (1999) wondered “why it should have been controversial in the first place” (p. 89). In considering the way we monitor and interpret environmental stimuli to maintain good bodily functioning, Cox (1999) similarly commented on the reasonableness of an embodied cognition as it applied to the field of music when he stated that we should expect to find the same tacit cognition and interpretation of musical stimuli, and that this would shape musical experience, cognition, and meaning. In fact, it would be strange if this were not the case—if our embodied minds worked one way in everyday experience and then worked a wholly different way in musical experience (p. 12, emphasis added).  59  Such commonsense understanding also serves to underscore the validity of motor imagery for voice training purposes, given that singing is an unavoidably embodied activity.  3.3.3  Objectivism/Subjectivism.  The importance of an embodied cognition perspective cannot be understated, since it is tied to Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980a, 1980b) theory of experientialism, a middle way which I believe can conceivably accommodate the two seemingly irreconcilable positions within the vocal community concerning the use of metaphoric and imagistic expressions in vocal pedagogy. Interestingly, the beliefs held by the two camps in the imagery debate discussed in Chapters 1 and 2 seem to be aligned with objectivism and subjectivism, two well-known knowledge paradigms that Lakoff and Johnson (1980a, 2003) claimed were outmoded ideologies unable to suitably account for how humans make sense of their world. It is therefore important to briefly comment on these two philosophies as these men understand them prior to presenting their alternative account. In objectivist accounts of meaning, Johnson (1987) pointed out that “reason has been thought to be abstract and transcendent, that is, not tied to any of the bodily aspects of human understanding. The body has been ignored because it seems to have no role in our reasoning about abstract subject matters” (p. xiv). Moreover, nowhere in the objectivist account is anything about the human being’s capacity for understanding and use of the imagination mentioned (Johnson (1987), leading Johnson to question whether it was not a case of “overintellectualizing knowledge as though there could be no connection between our bodily understanding and alleged ‘higher’ cognitive functions” (Johnson, 1991, p. 5).  60 In arguing against the notion that higher functions were somehow discontinuous with lower functions, Churchland (1988) exclaimed, “Surely there is something bizarre about the idea that a theory of meaning that has nothing whatever to do with human psychology or neurophysiology can explain the meaningfulness of language and how representational structures relate to the world” (p. 545). Given recent supportive developments in cognitive neuroscience, it is more natural to assume Johnson’s (as cited in Pires de Oliveira & de Souza Bittencourt, 2007) contention that “our human embodiment shapes both what and how we  think” (p. 22). If human experience is, as Lakoff and Johnson (1980a) have claimed, structured holistically by gestalts which are not arbitrary but grounded experientially, it follows that rigidly separating the language of science from other kinds of discourse is “no longer tenable” (Spitzer, 2004, p. 15). In addition to addressing the long-standing objectivist paradigm, Lakoff and Johnson (2003) also addressed several inadequacies in the subjectivist account of reality. On that account they noted that (1) meaning is private, (2) experience is purely holistic, (3) meanings have no natural structure, (4) context is unstructured, and (5) meaning cannot be naturally or adequately represented (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003). The subjectivist account holds that meaning is significant to the individual having the experience, but “what something means to one individual can never be fully known or communicated to anyone else [since there are] no natural external constraints upon meaning and truth” (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003, p. 224, emphasis added). By contrast, Lakoff and Johnson’s experientialist account holds that natural constraints tied to an embodied cognition perspective ground our ability to reason and are thus more valid than the objectivist and subjectivist accounts.  61 The Lakoffian-Johnsonian accounts concerning objectivism and subjectivism bring to mind the polarised positions within the vocal community concerning the pedagogical use of imagery. Vocal science’s literal descriptions of how tone is created have presumably “dispelled the mystery” surrounding its creation, thereby enabling voice teachers to “tell their students ‘what really happens’” (Chapman, as cited in Dunbar-Wells, 1997, p. 90). In other words, vocal science has finally unearthed the truth formerly unknown to voice teachers and singers prior to the scientific inventions now used to examine the vocal mechanism. Vocal science has added significantly to our knowledge of the human voice, but it has unfortunately led to the perception that metaphor is now “obsolete” (Chapman, as cited in Dunbar-Wells, 1997, p. 90). I argue that the science-based approach is in effect aligned with two primary objectivist assumptions about meaning and truth, namely, that “the world exists independent of our cognition” and that “metaphor [plays] no crucial role either in how the world is or in how we know it” (Johnson, 2010, p. 403). However, paradoxical findings such as those revealed in Dunbar-Wells’s (1997) study in which imagery associated with a disproven theory brought about positive results (see chapter 2, Section 2.3.2) highlight the fact that some conceptual events simply defy the objectivist account of logic and truth. Those in the opposing camp who favour the incorporation of metaphoric language in their voice studios have occasionally been known to use personal expressions they understand but which may be incomprehensible to some of their students (see Chapter 2, Sections 2.1.4 and 2.2.2). Miller (1989) used these kinds of examples as a springboard for encouraging voice teachers to replace subjective descriptions (i.e., empirically-based introspective reports concerning sensations) with objective (i.e., science-based) terminology, believing it more effectively served a broad range of singers. However, since both approaches have been shown  62 to be fallible, it begs the question as to whether there is an alternative approach which would act as an alternative or as a bridge in unifying them.  3.3.4  Experientialism: An alternative.  Believing that neither objectivism nor subjectivism adequately served as accounts reflecting truth and meaning-making, Lakoff and Johnson (1980a, 2003) favoured a third approach which they termed experientialism. This theory serves the purpose of bridging objectivist and subjectivist ideologies by maintaining that human beings acquire image schemas during their lifetime that can be shared through the “natural structure” of gestalts derived from bodily experiences which provide the opportunity to communicate experiences which are unshared (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980a, p. 225). Thus, instead of abandoning the natural proclivity to use the imagination, the experientialist account ultimately empowers voice teachers, voice students, and singers everywhere by providing an approach which enables them to fruitfully use their imagination within the constraints of an embodied cognition perspective. Exposing the weaknesses behind the traditional arguments regarding objectivism and subjectivism is necessary to help readers understand why increasing numbers of researchers believe the theory of experientialism offers the best approach to understanding how we make sense of our world. Since the findings in this study have been analysed from an experientialist perspective, it is important to understand Johnson and Lakoff’s (2002) position that “[m]eaning comes, not just from “internal” structures of the organism (the “subject”), nor solely from “external” inputs (the “objects”), but rather from recurring patterns of engagement between organism and environment” (p. 248). The habitual patterns acquired in our daily lives—not our individualistic preferences (subjectivism) nor a belief that truth lies outside of ourselves (objectivism)—are what help us communicate with others. Grounding the metaphoric language  63 used in the voice studio within an embodied cognition perspective should thus help constrain how expressions are formulated, which in turn will help voice teachers avoid an unconstrained imagination that can lead to incomprehensible language for which some have been criticized. In discussing the shift from the traditional Cartesian paradigm to an embodied, experientialist perspective, Bowman (2004) made significant points which are relevant to this study, since changing an ingrained mindset concerning mind-body dualism has not been easy and is still causing trouble (Johnson, 2008b). His comments are thus worth quoting at length: Breaking free of Cartesianism requires decisive action, not casual denial. We must somehow confront and neutralize the assumptions [sic] at its core: that, on the one hand, sensation and agency (sensing and acting in the world) are not cognitive achievements; and that, on the other, the higher-order abstractions characteristic of language comprise the quintessential (ideal) core of cognition. We need theories that grant both the necessity and the trustworthiness of corporeal experience, of bodily-constituted knowledge. To settle for less is to trade away knowledge for mere certainty, and to reduce reality to an epiphenomenon (Bowman, 2004, p. 34, emphasis added). Experientialism preserves certain things from Lakoff and Johnson’s (2003) accounts of objectivism and subjectivism, although the objectivist claim that there is an “absolute truth” (pp. 226‒228) concerning how the human experience can be experienced is not part of this account, nor is the subjective claim that the “imaginative understanding is completely unconstrained” (p. 228). In contrasting their beliefs against those two accounts of reality, Lakoff and Johnson (2003) argued that metaphor was “a matter of imaginative rationality [permitting] an understanding of one kind of experience in terms of another, creating  64 coherences by virtue of imposing gestalts that are structured by natural dimensions of experience” (p. 235, emphasis added). I argue that a proper understanding of Lakoff and Johnson’s theory of experientialism is the catalyst which will lead to the “pedagogical tolerance” which has been trumpeted for so long within the vocal community (Moorcroft, 2002, p. 651). The reader will find ample evidence in the data findings chapters that the metaphorically-based imagery offered by the voice teachers in this study was in fact grounded in our bodily experiences, confirmatory evidence which should help refute many of the criticisms aimed at its usage.  3.4  Music as a metaphorical language xv Music has long been studied as a metaphorical language grounded in bodily experiences.  Just exactly how it communicates in this way has led researchers in various directions and spawned a growing literature on the subject of music and metaphor (e.g., Barten, 1992, 1998; Bowman, 2004; Cox, 1999; Krumhansl, 1992; Reisberg, 1992; Spitzer, 2004; Woody, 2002, 2004; Zbikowski, 1998, 2002, 2002/2003, 2006, 2008, 2009). According to Zbikowski 2006), we rely on metaphorical mappings from other domains in describing virtually every aspect of music (e.g., pitch, rhythm, musical form, musical structure). The way musicians perceive and describe musical pitches, rhythms, melodies, and harmonies are necessarily multimodal, oftentimes “informed by spatial concepts understood metaphorically” (Budd, 2003, p. 209). Foundational to this study which involves visualising sound moving through horizontal and vertical space is understanding that when we are engaged in listening to a piece of music, “the object heard is never actually there” (Carpenter 1967, p. 59). In other words, music is actually imaginary and moves in an imaginary space, even though tones are not a property of  65 music itself and thus do not actually move in such a space. Despite the fact that music cannot literally be seen, musicians nevertheless conceive of individual tones as though they were real objects moving in space (Brower, 2008; Cox, 1999; Larson, 1997). In that regard, music becomes “spatialized” (Carpenter, 1967, p. 65). Musicians construe musical sound as stable by transferring schemas (patterns) obtained through concrete experiences onto sound as it moves through imaginary space. For classically trained musicians, part of the tendency to visualise music as a moving entity likely stems from learning to read from a musical staff. In Western musical notation, musical notes are written upon a staff comprised of five horizontal lines and four spaces, each representing a different musical pitch. Just as the English language is written starting on the left hand side of a piece of paper and moving to the right, musical notes move spatially from left to right on a music staff. Cox’s (1999) doctoral dissertation utilised Lakoff and Johnson’s theory of metaphor to examine the logic of how we get the horizontal dimension of music, the concept of verticality, as well as notions of anticipation, presence, and memory. Cox pointed out that these nonmetaphoric components of experience motivated the conceptualization of temporal motion and musical motion. For instance, although musical motion and space are imaginary, he concluded that the logic involved in mapping various musical events (e.g., anticipation, the passing of time) was motivated by identical experiences involving the changing of states which take place in our basic embodied experiences. His extensive analysis led him to argue that although “musical motion is imaginary . . . such imagination is [not] illogical; it is eminently logical!” (p. 256). He showed that describing music in positional, motional, and spatial terms make up “part of the web of meaning made possible by the logic of metaphoric thought. Remove the logic of metaphor and there is no basis for the majority of claims that we make about music” (p. 258).  66 Although sound is something belonging to the material world, music belongs “to the order of phenomenal embodiment” (Pelinski, 2005, p. 11). Many kinds of associations help show that musical meaning is grounded in our embodied experiences as human beings (Doğantan-Dack, 2006). Even before acquiring the ability to conceptualise our experiences, we are developing an understanding of patterns and structures. For instance, we learn to differentiate the rhythmic patterns and intensities of sound produced by woodpeckers, as well as jackhammers and pile drivers we hear as we pass by construction sites. Composers have historically juxtaposed the structures they have come to associate with embodied experiences onto the felt qualities of their musical compositions. The temporal flow of music (e.g., rhythm/meter) as well as its shape and pitch are juxtaposed with felt patterns experienced in our bodies and our environment (Brower, 2000, 2008; Johnson, 2007; Johnson & Larson, 2003). It would be difficult to disagree that melody and rhythm are somehow not associated with our muscular movements. In fact, people become so imaginatively involved in listening to music that they feel the movement(s) kinaesthetically (Langer, 1957), sensations ranging from jerky to fluid that give rise to the different ways motion in music is described. Music is often described in motional terms such as dragging, dying away, erupting, falling, floating, hopping, pushing, soaring, subsiding, sweeping, and tripping along (Langer, 1957; Swanwick, 1994). Music has also been known to lurch, be hesitant, and soothe, all qualities normally associated with animate beings (Barten, 1998). Other descriptors could easily be added, such as climbing, drifting, marching, and twirling. A line of music has also been described as “‘going somewhere,’ ‘arriving,’ getting ‘more insistent’” (Barten, 1998, p. 91). The human’s capacity to visualise music as ebbing and flowing, another descriptor of musical sound, is particularly helpful to singers since the imagery related to the voicing of  67 tone, its continuation, and subsequent release is often related to the flow as well as the blockage of water. xvi Musicians also speak of music in terms of higher and lower musical pitches by mapping the spatial structure from one domain of knowledge onto another domain (Cox, 1999). In fact, it is only through metaphor that humans are able to conceive of sound rising and falling, since those events do not happen in physical reality (Scruton, 1999). Musical pitches are commonly construed as situated in vertical space, a fact which was likely the motivation behind the conceptual metaphor PITCH RELATIONSHIPS ARE RELATIONSHIPS IN PHYSICAL SPACE (see Lakoff, 1993). For instance, in terms of high and low pitches, Zbikowski (2009) noted how Christ’s descent from heaven from the Credo of Palestrina’s Pope Marcellus Mass was represented by “a cascading fall through musical space, a series of overlapping movements ‘down’ the musical scale [thereby exploiting] the . . . characterization of pitches as ‘high’ or ‘low’” (p. 360). The metaphorical aspect of sound moving through space is particularly relevant in this study, since voice teachers often encourage their students to imagine tone moving in particular directions (e.g., forward, upward). Music has also been described in terms of color. Whole sections of music can “‘become warmer,’ . . . or ‘transparent’” (Barten, 1998, p. 91). This is an important insight, since many images offered in this study possessed scalar quantities (i.e., directionless magnitude) pertaining to the timbre (i.e., color) of a singer’s tone. Musicians often go beyond simply remembering such actions and feelings to the point where “[e]xperientially, these descriptions are as direct and immediate as references to loudness, pitch, and tempo” (Barten, 1998, p. 91). In this sense, the dramatic tension created in a work of art becomes “the direct presentation of a feeling, not a sign that points to it” (Langer, as cited in Johnson, 2007, pp. 238, 239).  68 There are many ways music has been examined concerning the way it is cognitively processed. At a conscious level, Zbikowski (2006) contended that music is understood in three different ways—“categorization, cross-domain mapping, and the use of conceptual models” (p. 116). Interestingly, this study’s findings showed that the metaphoric and imagistic expressions elicited from the voice teachers who participated in this study were able to be described by all three of these approaches.  3.5 Image metaphors A major kind of metaphor in which one conventional or concrete image from one domain is mapped onto another conventional or concrete image from another domain is referred to as an image metaphor (Lakoff, 1993; Gibbs, 1994a, 1994b; Gibbs & Bogdonovich, 1999; Gleason, 2009). The term itself was coined by Lakoff (1987b, 1993) and subsequently used by Lakoff and Turner (1989), Gibbs (1994a) and Gibbs and Bogdonovich (1999) among others. Image metaphors are also referred to as “one shot” metaphors (Lakoff & Turner, 1989, p. 229) because they map only one image onto one other image, and as such do not persist in how we ordinarily conceptualise our experiences (Gibbs, 1999; Lakoff, 1993; Lakoff & Turner, 1989). It is the topological aspects of image metaphors tied in with their homeomorphic functioning which makes them valuable as a mapping device. The distinctive characteristic of image metaphors is that they serve to isolate distinguishable properties (e.g., shapes) which are similar to both images (Lakoff, 1987b). They function primarily by superimposing or mapping “aspects of the part-whole structure of one image onto aspects of the part-whole structure of another . . . [thereby preserving] image-schematic structure, mapping parts onto parts and wholes onto wholes, containers onto containers, paths onto paths, and so on” (Lakoff, 1993, p.  69 231). The process of mapping one conventional image onto another is an example of metaphorical projection in which one thing is depicted in terms of another thing that bears a resemblance to it. The source domain image need only exhibit a general enough shape, a specific geometric shape, or be otherwise flexible enough that a portion of it can be mapped topologically onto the target image. Lakoff and Johnson (2003) contend that such mappings can result in “systematic metaphorical correspondences” that help us understand our world (p. 136). According to Lakoff (1987b), in this sense only can image metaphors be generalised. As noted in Chapter 2, Section 2.2.4, one of the reasons imagery use is still widespread among singers is because images are the quickest medium by which insights are transmitted. In contrast to often lengthier verbal instructions, images have the advantage of parsimoniously presenting information, particularly if the teacher takes advantage of the image’s analog format (Goldstone & Barsalou, 1998). According to Pani (1996), referring to images as analog is to say that there are “representations in working memory that have the same form as perceptions of the things represented” (p. 289, emphasis added). This statement supports Lakoff’s description of an image metaphor, particularly in light of the definition of a percept, namely, “an impression of an object obtained by use of the senses” (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary). Poetry furnishes many rich, image-provoking metaphors. Lakoff and Turner 1989) noted an example from the Navaho, namely, “My horse with a mane made of short rainbows” (p. 92). Most people would instantly recognise that the rainbow’s arch-like structure has been mapped onto the mane covering the horse’s arched neck. Another example of mapping one image on to another can be seen in a line from Surrealist poet Andre Breton’s Free Union, “My wife . . . whose waist is an hourglass” (as cited in Gibbs & Bogdonovich, 1999, p. 37). Although the  70 words in this image metaphor do not tell us what aspects from each image are meant to correspond, we intuitively understand which of the salient features should be foregrounded by virtue of their common shape (in this case the central narrow portion of the hourglass corresponded to the wife’s waist). These examples were given to show that image metaphors are particularly valuable for conveying information because they are “flexible enough to fit in an image mapping . . . in a manner that is more topological than picture-like, topological in the sense of generalizing over specific geometric shapes” (Lakoff, 1987b, p. 220, emphasis added). This description is relevant to the present study, as the salient features of the source images are not always exactly the same as the shape in the target images. Such superimposing of images is somewhat similar to Rothenberg’s (1980) “homospatial thinking” in which a metaphor is created through the inter-animation or fusion of routine objects or images “occupying the same space” (p. 17). This approach, though not synonymous with analogic thinking, consists of superimposing “whole entities rather than a side by side consideration of their aspects or parts” (Rothenberg, 1979, pp. 69‒70, emphasis added). W. B. Yeats’ poetic image metaphor, “An aged man is but a paltry thing, a tattered coat upon a stick” is an example of this kind of superimposition or fusion (Keehley, 1979, p. 582). In a few cases in the present study, metaphorical imagery was offered in which two objects were fused together in this way (e.g., big oak tree and roots superimposed on singer’s trunk and legs). Ultimately, an image metaphor may be viewed as a shortcut that substitutes for long explanations. Because image metaphors often employ concrete images, they are particularly helpful with students in the early stages of learning how to sing. They also serve as easily remembered cues for singers at more advanced levels of achievement. In light of this study, it  71 is very important to point out that image metaphors do not only map physical part-whole relationships but also dynamical ones. The following lines from The Peacock’s Egg, a poem cited by Lakoff and Turner (1989), are a case in point: Slowly slowly rivers in autumn show Sand banks Bashful in first love woman Showing things (p. 90). Several different attributes have been mapped in this example: Color (sand bank ↔ flesh), quality of light (wet sand ↔ reflectiveness of skin), light touch (grazing of water as it recedes down the bank ↔ the light grazing of clothing along the skin, the water covering the bank ↔ clothing covering the body) (Lakoff & Turner, 1989, p. 91). The voice teachers in this study offered numerous image metaphors which were dynamical in nature (e.g., the downward sensation felt during expansion was likened to the sensation felt when pushing one’s hands into a large piece of foam).  3.6  Image schemas In contrast to the expressions offered examined in this study and articulated via concrete  image metaphors, there were also many abstract expressions offered which could only be analysed via image-schematic patterns. Johnson (1987) termed these underlying patterns image schemas “because they function primarily as abstract structures of images” (p. xix). Cognitive psychology increasingly supports the belief that learning is a constructive process and one that relies on the structuring of knowledge. The use of schemata as mental frameworks in order to organise knowledge is considered to be among the most potent concepts of cognitive psych-  72 ology (Bruning, Schraw, & Ronning, 1999). There have been many definitions of what a schema is since the name was first introduced by Sir Frederic Bartlett in 1932. Kemmer and Barlow (as cited in Oakley, 2007) defined a schema as “a cognitive representation comprising a generalization over perceived similarities among instances of usage” (p. 216). Snyder (2000) similarly defined image schemas as “large patterns of generalized associations in memory that determine how whole situations are processed” (p. 96). Oakley (2000) simply described image schemas as behaving like “‘distillers’ of spatial and temporal experiences” (p. 215). The foregoing definitions are easily apprehended when one considers the many different situations encountered which have aspects in common. When averaged together they help create an abstract memory framework. Since it is simply not possible to remember all the details of every encounter (a feat which would require enormous memory reserves which we do not possess), abstract models are necessarily formed based on the invariant aspects of these encounters. In this regard, the recurring structure of image schemas makes them particularly amenable to a variety of situations. Moreover, since no two situations are ever quite alike, a schema must be a flexible construct (Johnson, 1987; Snyder, 2000). Image schemata conceptualised nonpropositionally can, in Johnson’s (1987) words, “take on any number of specific instantiations in varying contexts. . . . so that it can be modified to fit many similar, but different, situations that manifest a recurring underlying structure” (p. 30). Moreover, they can dynamically unify many different experiences that reflect the recurring structure inherent in images, thereby generating patterns of meaning which fit coherently within a system that is constrained by our bodily experiences (Johnson, 1987). Of particular relevance to this study was Johnson’s (1987) definition of an image schema as “a recurring, dynamic pattern of our perceptual interactions and motor programs that gives  73 coherence and structure to our experience” (p. xiv). Johnson’s (1987) primary aim was “to show that these image schemata are pervasive, well-defined, and full of sufficient internal structure to constrain our understanding and reasoning” (p. 126). He argued that without such recurring patterns, our daily lives would be “chaotic and incomprehensible” (p. xix). Image schemas not only establish sensory-motor patterns which help us understand and organise our bodily experiences (Johnson, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993; Lakoff, 1987a), but the meaning that emerges from such patterns also gives rise to our ability for engaging in abstract thought (Johnson, 2005). That is because meaningful structures experienced in our day-to-day living give rise to the abstract image-schematic structures that emerge from them, and which are then metaphorically projected onto dissimilar domains. Image schemas which first emerge from our bodily interactions may then be “figuratively developed and extended as a structure around which meaning is organized at more abstract levels of cognition” (Johnson, 1987, p. xx). It is in this way that image schemas allow relatively abstract, inherently unstructured subject matter to be understood in terms that are more concrete and structured (Arnheim, 1969; Johnson, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993, 2005, 2007, 2008a, 2008b; Johnson & Rohrer, 2007; Lakoff, 1987a, 1987b, 1993). The fact that we can cognitively elaborate these structures in order to help us comprehend nonphysical or nonspatial situations is particularly important in this study, given that the singing tone is invisible and thus abstract. Since image schemas are sufficiently structured internally to support our reasoning and logic, the so-called ‘higher’ rational processes are actually experientially grounded and do not “[drop] down a priori from some transcendental heaven” (Johnson, 1991, pp. 7, 12). Image schemas usually involve cognitively transforming and projecting such pre-existing concepts which have emerged from our concrete embodied experiences onto more abstract target  74 domains. Johnson (1987) maintained that an image schema is “not an image [but] a means of structuring particular experiences schematically, so as to give order and connectedness to our perceptions and conceptions” (Johnson, 1987, p. 75). In this regard, Oakley’s (2007) definition of an image schema as “a condensed redescription of perceptual experience for the purpose of mapping spatial structure onto conceptual structure” was particularly appropriate (p. 215). Image schemas are especially relevant for conceptualising processes pertaining to particular sensorimotor activities involved in singing because they mesh well with the embodied cognition view concerned with our human experience of reasoning and meaning (Markman & Gentner, 2001). Learning how to sing involves coordinating many musclesystems in order to maintain the singing mechanism’s functional structure (Husler & RoddMarling, 1965). It should be noted that although an expert singer may give the impression that singing is easy, it is the rare singer who can reach an expert level in less than 10 years of training (Ericsson, 1996; Ericsson & Charness, 1994; Ericsson, Krampe, & Tesch-Römer, 1993). Johnson (1987) noted the particularly important role that image schemas play in relation to the acquisition of physical skills: [P]hysical skills involve structured motor programs [which] involve image schemata and gestalt structures that recur over and over again in various related skillful performances. These structured movements, in turn, depend on schemata for perceptual interactions. If there were not such regular, recurring schemata, we could never recognize the structure of situations such that we could skillfully interact with them. . . . Our ability to make such semantic connections depends on our ability to grasp structure in our skillful activities” (p. 186, emphasis added).  75 Not only are the discrete tasks involved in learning how to sing governed by image schemas, but also the dovetailing of one with another. This necessarily involves the simultaneous co-occurrence of several image schemas. Johnson (1987) recognised this fact when he stated that it was “by superimposition of schematic structures . . . metaphorically understood at a number of different levels, we develop a host of complex meaning structures central to our experience and understanding” (p. 125, emphasis added). In this study, the majority of expressions examined were structured by the layering (i.e., superimposing) of a number of image-schematic structures arising from our bodily experiences. The fact that a schema is not rigid or fixed is a most useful characteristic regarding the investigation at hand, since voice teachers who employ non-literal language may use as many as fifteen or twenty expressions to help convey one particular action (Carter, 1993). Moreover, their malleability has important implications related to the crafting of imagery used in vocal pedagogy.  3.7  Gestalt structures Johnson (1987) defined image schemas as gestalt structures which “consist of parts  standing in relations and organized into unified wholes, by means of which our experience manifests discernible order” (pp. xix). According to him, all image schemas are gestalt structures which are “an organized, unified whole within our experience and understanding that manifests a repeatable pattern or structure. . . . [E]xperiential gestalts have internal structure that connects up aspects of our experience and leads to inferences in our conceptual system” (Johnson, 1987, p. 44). In this study, I have identified 10 of these higher-order categories which I subsequently referred to as gestalt structures. These served to holistically summarise the meaning of associated groups of image schemas which also function as gestalt structures.  76 For instance, VERTICALITY was associated with all the image schemas grouped within it (i.e., STRAIGHT-CURVED, UP-DOWN, HIGH-LOW, TOP-BOTTOM, OVER-UNDER, IN-UP,  and DOWN-OUT).  I identified 55 of such underlying image schemas in this study. Although all of the image schemas identified in this study also function as gestalt structures, I used the term gestalt structures for classification purposes in order to distinguish between the higher-order structures around which image schemas have been organised (e.g., VERTICALITY; CONTAINER; SOURCEPATH-GOAL)  and the more specific image schematic structures underlying the expressions  offered in this study (e.g., UP-DOWN; IN-OUT; NEAR-FAR). Identifying the gestalt structures is discussed further in Chapter 4, Sections 4.4.3 ‒ 4.4.5. Table 3.1 below displays the 10 gestalt structures and 55 image schemas identified in this study, repositioned from their vertical placement in Appendix G to a horizontal placement to make their initial reading much easier. Table 3.1. Underlying gestalt structures and image schemas pertaining to the data  77 It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss all 55 image schemas underlying the expressions offered. I have instead briefly explained the gestalt structures associated with them. The final two SCALE schemas (TIMBRE and CLARITY/BRILLIANCE) are discussed together in Section 3.7.9 under the term SCALARITY, and thus only nine gestalt structures (rather than the actual 10 displayed in the Excel worksheets, bar graphs, and microanalysis) are listed, making this subsection proportionally longer than the others.  3.7.1  Equilibrium.  When one thinks of equilibrium, the first thing which likely comes to mind is the closely related bodily experience of balance, an activity so pervasive in our lives that it is only when something has caused our world to spin out of control (e.g., being extremely intoxicated) that we become acutely aware of its presence and effect—or lack thereof. There are numerous daily occurrences by which we learn the meaning of balance, such as “too much acid in the stomach, the hands are too cold, the head is too hot, the bladder is distended, the sinuses are swollen, the mouth is dry” (Johnson, 1987, p. 75). Thus, our different senses of what balance means actually emerge through repeated kinds of experiential events involving balance which we then extend metaphorically via the EQUILIBRIUM gestalt structures we have developed. Balance is of course relevant to singers both literally and metaphorically. In the present study, this particular gestalt structure involved expressions related to the equilibrium of the external body-container interpreted metaphorically. For instance, the lack of EQUILIBRIUM was evident in expressions related to a forward head position (e.g., “sticking one’s head out like a chicken”). Expressions were offered to help restore BALANCE, including the layering of VERTICALITY  schemas (e.g., “suspending one’s head like a puppet on a string” = STRAIGHT-  78 CURVED; UP-DOWN; OVER-UNDER).  A secondary focus on EQUILIBRIUM was in relation to the  treatment of air involving the internal body-container (e.g., air blockages).  3.7.2  Verticality.  VERTICALITY  is a gestalt structure which is both literally relevant to singers (e.g.,  positioning of the physical body in space) as well as metaphorically and imagistically relevant to them (e.g., preparing for upward and downward leaps). There are likely thousands of ways that we experience the VERTICALITY gestalt structure every day of our lives. Johnson (1987) noted a handful of ways, including “perceiving a tree, our felt sense of standing upright, the activity of climbing stairs, forming a mental image of a flagpole, measuring our children’s heights, and experiencing the level of water rising in the bathtub” (p. xiv). One thing that all of these examples have in common is that they employ an UP-DOWN orientation. Repeated exposure to VERTICALITY perceptions, images, and experiences helps us develop the abstract structure of VERTICALITY. There are, of course, several structures related to this gestalt structure. For instance, we automatically apply the UP-DOWN, STRAIGHT-CURVED, and TOPBOTTOM image  schemas (in which VERTICALITY inheres) to many physical events in our lives  (e.g., climbing a ladder, general posture). We eventually learn to map or project the basic UP-DOWN internal structuring of the experientially-based VERTICALITY schema onto abstract domains in our lives. One voice teacher helped her students connect the air when going for a high note by having them think of “a line or thread stretching to the top note.” In this case,