Cover not available

In:Metaphor and Metonymy in the Digital Age: Theory and methods for building repositories of figurative language
Edited by Marianna Bolognesi, Mario Brdar and Kristina Š. Despot
[Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 8] 2019
► pp. 1–20

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

Fantastic metaphors and where to find them

 | University of Oxford
 | Institute of Croatian Language and Linguistics
Published online: 6 August 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.8.01bol
Article outline
  • 1.Metaphor and metonymy repositories
  • 2.A preview of this volume
    • 2.1New methods and digital resources for mining metaphor and metonymy in thought, language, and images
    • 2.2Reflecting on the risks and challenges involved in building and using repositories of figurative language
  • 3.Summary
  • Notes
  • References
References (51)
References
Ahrens, K., Chung, S. F., & Huang, C. (2003). Conceptual metaphors: Ontology-based representation and corpora driven mapping principles. In Proceedings of the ACL 2003 workshop on lexicon and figurative language (Volume 14, pp. 35–41). Association for Computational Linguistics. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barcelona, A., & Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. (2015). Bibliography of metaphor and metonymy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barnden, J. A. (1997). Consciousness and common-sense metaphors of mind. In S. O’Nuallain, P. McKevitt, & E. Mac Aogain (Eds.), Two sciences of mind: Readings in cognitive science and consciousness (pp. 311–340). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bogdanova, D. (2010). A framework for figurative language detection based on sense differentiation. In Proceedings of the ACL 2010 student research workshop (pp. 67–72). Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolognesi, M., van den Heerik, R., van den Berg, E. (2018). VisMet: A corpus of visual metaphors. In G. J. Steen (Ed.), Visual metaphor: Structure and process. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.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
Bowdle, B. F., & Gentner, D. (2005). The Career of Metaphor. Psychological Review, 112(1), 193–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cameron, L., Maslen, R., Todd, Z., Maule, J., Stratton, P., & Stanley, N. (2009) The discourse dynamics approach to metaphor and metaphor-led discourse analysis. Metaphor and Symbol, 24(2), 63–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cardillo, E. R., Schmidt, G. L., Kranjec, A., & Chatterjee, A. (2010). Stimulus design is an obstacle course: 560 matched literal and metaphorical sentences for testing neural hypotheses about metaphor. Behavior Research Methods, 42(3), 651–664. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Casasanto, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2008). Time in the mind: Using space to think about time. Cognition, 106, 579–593. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E. (2014). Cambridge textbooks in linguistics. Figurative language. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
David, O., Lakoff, G., & Stickles, E. (2016). Cascades in metaphor and grammar. A case study of metaphors in the gun debate. Constructions and Frames, 8(2), 214–255. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Vignemont, F., Majid, A., Jola, C., & Haggard, P. (2009). Segmenting the body into parts: evidence from biases in tactile perception. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(3), 500–512. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dodge, E. K., Hong, J., & Stickles, E. (2015). MetaNet: Deep semantic automatic metaphor analysis. In E. Shutova, B. B. Klebanov, & P. Lichtenstein (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on metaphor in NLP (pp. 40–49). NAACL HLT. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eilts, C., & Lönneker, B. (2002). The Hamburg Metaphor Database. Metaphorik.de, 03(2002), 100–110.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fass, D. (1991). Met*: A method for discriminating metonymy and metaphor by computer. Computational Linguistics, 17(1), 49–90.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feldman, J. (2006). From molecule to metaphor. A neural theory of language. MIT Press, A Bradford Book. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraser, B. (1975). Hedged performatives. In P. Cole, & J. Morgan (Eds.), Speech acts [Syntax and Semantics 3] (pp. 44–68). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (1984). The poetics of mind. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Embodiment in cognitive science. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future? Journal of Pragmatics, 90(December 2015), 73–76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. T. (2014). Corpus and quantitative methods. In J. Taylor, & J. Littlemore (Eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to cognitive linguistics (pp. 279–300). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harmon-Jones, E., Gable, P. A., & Price, T. F. (2011). Leaning embodies desire: Evidence that leaning forward increases relative left frontal cortical activation to appetitive stimuli. Biological Psychology, 87(31), 1–313. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jostmann, N. B., Lakens, D., Schubert, T. W. (2009). Weight as an embodiment of importance. Psychological Science, 1(September), 1169–1174. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2015). Surprise as a conceptual category. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 13(2), 270–290. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krennmayr, T., & Steen, G. J. (2017). VU Amsterdam Metaphor Corpus. In N. Ide, & J. Pustejovsky (Eds.), Handbook of linguistic annotation. Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought. New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). The neural theory of metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 17–38). [Online]. Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. [Updated version, 2002]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., Espenson, J., & Schwartz, A. (1991). Master metaphor list, second draft copy. Berkeley, CA: Cognitive Linguistics Group, University of California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, L., & Sporleder, C. (2010). Using gaussian mixture models to detect figurative language in context. In Human language technologies. The 2010 annual conference of the North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 297–300). Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mason, Z. J. (2004). CorMet: A computational, corpus based conventional metaphor extraction system. Computational Linguistics, 30(1), 23–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matlock, T. (2004). Fictive motion as cognitive simulation. Memory & Cognition, 32, 1389–1400. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McGlone, M. S. (1996). Conceptual metaphors and figurative language interpretation: Food for thought? Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 544–565. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panther, K.-U. (2015). Metonymic relationships among actuality, modality, evaluation, and emotion. In J. Daems, E. Zenner, K. Heylen, D. Speelman, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Change of paradigms – new paradoxes: Recontextualizing language and linguistics (pp. 129–146). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). How to encode and infer linguistic actions. Chinese Semiotic Studies, 12(2), 177–214. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L. (2017). Metaphor and metonymy in language and thought: A cognitive linguistic approach. Synthesis Philosophica, 64, 271–294. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pasanek, B. (2015). Metaphors of mind: An eighteenth-century dictionary. Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peirsman, Y., & Geeraerts, D. (2006). Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(3), 269–316. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peters, W., & Wilks, Y. (2003). Data-driven detection of figurative language use in electronic language resources. Metaphor and Symbol, 18(3), 161–173. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22(1), 1–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shutova, E. (2010). Models of metaphor in NLP. In Proceedings of the 48th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 688–697). Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Computational approaches to figurative language. Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge
(2015). Developing, testing and interpreting deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 90(December 2015), 67–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Veale, T., Shutova, E., & Beigman Klebanov, B. (2016). Metaphor: A computational perspective. Morgan Claypool, Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Vignemont, F. (2011). Embodiment, ownership and disownership. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(1), 82–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, L. E., & Bargh, J. A. (2008). Experiencing physical warmth promotes interpersonal warmth. Science, 322, 606–607. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wolff, P., & Gentner, D. (2000). Evidence for role-neutral initial processing of metaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 529–541. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhong, C. B., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2008). Cold and lonely: Does social exclusion feel literally cold? Psychological Science, 19, 838–842. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue