Cover not available

Review published In: Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Volume 7
Edited by Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
[Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 7] 2009
► pp. 334–344

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required
Book review

R. E. Vega Moreno. Creativity and Convention: The pragmatics of everyday figurative speech. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2007. 249 pp. https://​doi​.org​/10​.1075​/pbns​.156

Reviewed by
 | Jaume I University
Published online: 19 November 2009
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.7.16ota
References (26)
References
Black, M. (1979). More about metaphor. In A. Ortony, (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (pp. 19–43). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75(1), 1–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Does language shape thought? English and Mandarin speakers’ conceptions of time. Cognitive Psychology, 43(1), 1–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boroditsky, L. & M. Ramscar. (2002). The roles of body and mind in abstract thought. Psychological Science, 13(2), 185–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cienki, A. & C. Muller. (Eds.). (2008). Metaphor and Gesture. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G. & M. Turner. (1998). Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 22(2), 133–187. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2002). The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. (1994). The Poetics of Mind. Figurative Thought, Language and Understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glucksberg, S. & B. Keysar. (1990). Understanding metaphorical comparisons: beyond similarity. Psychological Review, 11, 3–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grady, J. (1999). A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: correlation vs. resemblance. In R. Gibbs & G. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 79–100). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kovecses, Z. & G. Radden. (1998). Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics, 91, 37–77. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. (1980). Metaphors We Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 1. Stanford: CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1999). Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Otal, J. L. (2001). On high-level conceptual structure and discourse. RESLA, 141, 325–336.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Otal, J. L. & F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza. (2007). Modelling thought in language use: At the crossroads between discourse, pragmatics, and cognition. Jezikoslovije, 8(2), 115–167.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rohrer, T. (2006). The body in space: Dimensions of embodiment. In J. Zlatev, T. Ziemke, R. Frank and R. Dirven (Eds.), Body, Language and Mind, vol. 21. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. & L. Perez. (2003). Cognitive operations and pragmatic implication. In K. U. Panther & L. Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy and Pragmatics (pp. 23–50). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. & J. L. Otal. (2002). Metonymy, Grammar, and Communication. Granada: Comares.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. & R. Mairal. (2007). High-level metaphor and metonymy in meaning construction. In G. Radden, K-M. Kopcke, T. Berg & P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects of Meaning Construction (pp. 33–49). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. & S. Pena. (2005). Conceptual interaction, cognitive operations and projection spaces. In F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza & S. Pena (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Internal Dynamics and Interdisciplinary Interaction (pp. 254–280). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D. & D. Wilson. (1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics: Vol. 1: Concept Structuring System. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tendahl, M. & R. W. Gibbs. (2008). Complementary perspectives on metaphor: Cognitive Linguistics and Relevance Theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(11), 1823–1864. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, D. & R. Carston. (2008). Metaphor and the ‘emergent property’ problem: A relevancetheoretic treatment. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication, 31, 1–40.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue