In:Dynamism in Metaphor and Beyond
Edited by Herbert L. Colston, Teenie Matlock and Gerard J. Steen
[Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 9] 2022
► pp. 131–142
Extended CMT and the dynamic systems theory of metaphor
A comparison
Published online: 9 September 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.9.07kov
https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.9.07kov
Abstract
In the paper, I try to systematically compare what Gibbs calls the “dynamic systems view” of
metaphor with what I call “extended conceptual metaphor theory.” I suggest that both views share the assumption that
the totality of our experiences can contribute to metaphor production and comprehension. The two views also assume
that any of the experiences can prime the use of metaphors as discourse progresses. Given such similarities, I propose
that both views work well in accounting for metaphorical creativity and context-sensitivity. The most noteworthy
difference between them seems to be that while extended CMT is based on the integration of conceptual metaphors on
various levels of schematicity (such as image schemas, domains, frames), the dynamic systems view operates primarily
on the mental space level of metaphorical conceptualization.
Article outline
- Embodied metaphor versus discourse metaphor
- An informal process model
- The extended view and other theories
- Extended CMT and the dynamic systems view
- Conclusion
References
References (16)
Cameron, Lynne. (2008). Metaphor
and talk. In R. Gibbs, ed., The
Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
. (2010). The
discourse dynamics framework for metaphor. In Cameron, Lynne and Robert Maslen, eds., Metaphor
Analysis: Research Practice in Applied Linguistics, Social Sciences and the
Humanities, 77–96. London: Equinox.
Dancigyer, Barbara and Eve Sweetser. (2014). Figurative
language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gentner, Dedre. (1983). Structure-mapping:
a theoretical framework of analogy. Cognitive
Science, 7, 145–170.
Gibbs, Raymond. (2013). Metaphoric
cognition as social activity: Dissolving the divide between metaphor in thought and
communication. Metaphor and the Social
World, 3, 54–76.
. (2017a). The
embodied and discourse views of metaphor: Why these are not so different and how they can be brought closer
together. In Beate Hampe (ed.), Metaphor.
Embodied cognition and
discourse, 319–335. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. (2017b). Metaphor
wars. Conceptual metaphors in human life. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs, Raymond and Lynne Cameron. (2007). Social-cognitive
dynamics of metaphor performance. Cognitive Systems
Research, 9: 64–75.
Kövecses, Zoltán. (2015). Where
metaphors come from. Reconsidering context in metaphor. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Landau, Mark. (2017). Conceptual
metaphor in social psychology. The poetics of everyday life. New York and London: Routledge.
Quinn, Naomi. (1991). The
cultural basis of metaphor. In J. Fernandez, ed., Beyond
Metaphor. The Theory of Tropes in
Anthropology, 56–93. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Steen, Gerard. (2008). The
paradox of metaphor. Why we need a three-dimensional model of
metaphor. Metaphor and
Symbol, 23(4), 213–241.
. (2011). The
contemporary theory of metaphor – Now new and improved! Review of Cognitive
Linguistics 9(1):26–64.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Boieblan, Mostafa
2024. Grounded cognition and the role of musical expertise in shaping synesthetic metaphors among a music speech
community. International Journal of Language and Culture 11:2 ► pp. 180 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.