The Experts below are selected from a list of 248574 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ariel Cohen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Metaphor in Sign Languages
Frontiers in Psychology, 2018Co-Authors: Irit Meir, Ariel CohenAbstract:Metaphor abounds in both sign and spoken languages. However, in sign languages, languages in the visual-manual modality, Metaphors work a bit differently than they do in spoken languages. In this paper we explore some of the ways in which Metaphors in sign languages differ from Metaphors in spoken languages. We address three differences: (a) Some Metaphors are very common in spoken languages yet are infelicitous in sign languages; (b) Body-part terms are possible in very specific types of Metaphors in sign languages, but are not so restricted in spoken languages; (c) Similes in some sign languages are dispreferred in predicative positions in which Metaphors are fine, in contrast to spoken languages where both can appear in these environments. We argue that these differences can be explained by two seemingly unrelated principles: the Double Mapping Constraint (Meir 2010), which accounts for the interaction between metaphor and iconicity in languages, and Croft's (2003) constraint regarding the autonomy and dependency of elements in metaphorical constructions. We further argue that the study of metaphor in the signed modality offers novel insights concerning the nature of metaphor in general, and the role of figurative speech in language.
Irit Meir - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Metaphor in Sign Languages
Frontiers in Psychology, 2018Co-Authors: Irit Meir, Ariel CohenAbstract:Metaphor abounds in both sign and spoken languages. However, in sign languages, languages in the visual-manual modality, Metaphors work a bit differently than they do in spoken languages. In this paper we explore some of the ways in which Metaphors in sign languages differ from Metaphors in spoken languages. We address three differences: (a) Some Metaphors are very common in spoken languages yet are infelicitous in sign languages; (b) Body-part terms are possible in very specific types of Metaphors in sign languages, but are not so restricted in spoken languages; (c) Similes in some sign languages are dispreferred in predicative positions in which Metaphors are fine, in contrast to spoken languages where both can appear in these environments. We argue that these differences can be explained by two seemingly unrelated principles: the Double Mapping Constraint (Meir 2010), which accounts for the interaction between metaphor and iconicity in languages, and Croft's (2003) constraint regarding the autonomy and dependency of elements in metaphorical constructions. We further argue that the study of metaphor in the signed modality offers novel insights concerning the nature of metaphor in general, and the role of figurative speech in language.
Raymond W. Gibbs - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Evaluating Conceptual Metaphor Theory
Discourse Processes, 2011Co-Authors: Raymond W. GibbsAbstract:A major revolution in the study of metaphor occurred 30 years ago with the introduction of “conceptual metaphor theory” (CMT). Unlike previous theories of metaphor and metaphorical meaning, CMT proposed that metaphor is not just an aspect of language, but a fundamental part of human thought. Indeed, most metaphorical language arises from preexisting patterns of metaphorical thought or conceptual Metaphors. This article provides an evaluation of the linguistic and psychological evidence supporting CMT, and responds to some of the criticisms of CMT offered by scholars within cognitive science. Some new ways of thinking of conceptual Metaphors from the perspective of embodied simulations and dynamical systems theory are also presented.
-
metaphor in cognitive linguistics selected papers from the fifth international cognitive linguistics conference amsterdam july 1997
1999Co-Authors: Raymond W. Gibbs, Gerard J. SteenAbstract:1. Introduction (by Steen, Gerard J.) 2. Kant, Blumenberg, Weinrich: Some forgotten contributions to the cognitive theory of metaphor (by Jakel, Olaf) 3. Metaphorical mappings in the sense of smell (by Ibarretxe-Antunano, Iraide) 4. The joy of counting Metaphors: Relativity in the socio-economic domain (by Boers, Frank) 5. From linguistic to conceptual metaphor in five steps (by Steen, Gerard J.) 6. A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: correlation vs. resemblance (by Grady, Joseph) 7. Blending and metaphor (by Grady, Joseph) 8. Self and agency in religious discourse: Perceptual Metaphors for knowledge at a Marian apparition site (by Balaban, Victor) 9. Taking metaphor out of our heads and putting it into the cultural world (by Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W.) 10. Metaphor: Does it constitute or reflect cultural models? (by Kovecses, Zoltan) 11. Metaphors and cultural models as profiles and bases (by Cienki, Alan) 12. Congruence by degree: On the relation between metaphor and cultural models (by Emanatian, Michele) 13. Subject Index 14. Name Index
Gerard J. Steen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
metaphor in communication the distribution of potentially deliberate metaphor across register and word class
Corpora, 2019Co-Authors: Gudrun W Reijnierse, Christian Burgers, Tina Krennmayr, Gerard J. SteenAbstract:There is renewed interest in the special role that metaphor can have in its communicative status as metaphor between language users. This paper investigates the occurrence of such deliberate Metaphors in comparison with non-deliberate Metaphors. To this end, a corpus of 24,762 Metaphors was analysed for the presence of potentially deliberate (versus non-deliberate) metaphor use across registers and word classes. Results show that 4.36 percent of Metaphors in the corpus are identified as potentially deliberate Metaphors. News and fiction contain significantly more potentially deliberate Metaphors, while academic texts and conversations exhibit significantly fewer potentially deliberate Metaphors than expected. Moreover, nouns and adjectives are used relatively more frequently as potentially deliberate Metaphors, while adverbs, verbs and prepositions are used relatively less frequently as potentially deliberate Metaphors. These results can be explained by referring to the overall communicative properties of the registers concerned, as well as to the role of the different word classes in those registers.
-
Mixed metaphor is a case of deliberate metaphor
2016Co-Authors: Gerard J. SteenAbstract:This paper aims to explore the interaction between mixed metaphor and deliberateness in order to throw some new light on the nature of mixed metaphor. The basic claim is that the typical or strongest experience of mixed metaphor arises when two Metaphors conflict that are both used deliberately as Metaphors. It is likely that all other cases of conceptual clashes between adjacent Metaphors do not get recognized as mixed metaphor because their components are not used deliberately as Metaphors. Whether the clash between one deliberate and one non-deliberate metaphor can elicit the experience of mixed metaphor is an in-between case that is also discussed. The gist of the paper is, then, that research on mixed metaphor needs to take into account the variable communicative status of each of the presumably clashing Metaphors, making a distinction between their deliberate or non-deliberate use as Metaphors.
-
metaphor in cognitive linguistics selected papers from the fifth international cognitive linguistics conference amsterdam july 1997
1999Co-Authors: Raymond W. Gibbs, Gerard J. SteenAbstract:1. Introduction (by Steen, Gerard J.) 2. Kant, Blumenberg, Weinrich: Some forgotten contributions to the cognitive theory of metaphor (by Jakel, Olaf) 3. Metaphorical mappings in the sense of smell (by Ibarretxe-Antunano, Iraide) 4. The joy of counting Metaphors: Relativity in the socio-economic domain (by Boers, Frank) 5. From linguistic to conceptual metaphor in five steps (by Steen, Gerard J.) 6. A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: correlation vs. resemblance (by Grady, Joseph) 7. Blending and metaphor (by Grady, Joseph) 8. Self and agency in religious discourse: Perceptual Metaphors for knowledge at a Marian apparition site (by Balaban, Victor) 9. Taking metaphor out of our heads and putting it into the cultural world (by Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W.) 10. Metaphor: Does it constitute or reflect cultural models? (by Kovecses, Zoltan) 11. Metaphors and cultural models as profiles and bases (by Cienki, Alan) 12. Congruence by degree: On the relation between metaphor and cultural models (by Emanatian, Michele) 13. Subject Index 14. Name Index
Markus Tendahl - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a hybrid theory of metaphor relevance theory and cognitive linguistics
2009Co-Authors: Markus TendahlAbstract:Why do we talk in Metaphors? What is systematic about Metaphors? How do we process Metaphors? In the past cognitive linguistics and relevance theorists have answered these questions in very different ways and have therefore been perceived as being radically different. The differences concerning goals and working assumptions are so great, in fact, that few metaphor scholars have tried to systematically compare these two theories to understand how and why they differ. Markus Tendahl shows that cognitive linguistic and relevance theory perspectives on metaphor may be complementary. Drawing from research in pragmatics, cognitive linguistics and psycholinguistics this work is the first that compares and contrasts relevance theory positions and cognitive linguistic positions on metaphor in a systematic way. The outcome is a broader and more realistic hybrid theory of metaphor that forces metaphor research into a new direction.
-
A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor - A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor
2009Co-Authors: Markus TendahlAbstract:Why do we talk in Metaphors? What is systematic about Metaphors? How do we process Metaphors? In the past cognitive linguistics and relevance theorists have answered these questions in very different ways and have therefore been perceived as being radically different. The differences concerning goals and working assumptions are so great, in fact, that few metaphor scholars have tried to systematically compare these two theories to understand how and why they differ. Markus Tendahl shows that cognitive linguistic and relevance theory perspectives on metaphor may be complementary. Drawing from research in pragmatics, cognitive linguistics and psycholinguistics this work is the first that compares and contrasts relevance theory positions and cognitive linguistic positions on metaphor in a systematic way. The outcome is a broader and more realistic hybrid theory of metaphor that forces metaphor research into a new direction.
