Article published In: Metaphor and the Social World
Vol. 5:1 (2015) ► pp.137–144
A dictionary gives definitions, not decisions
On using a dictionary to identify the basic senses of words
Published online: 10 July 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.5.1.08dor
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.5.1.08dor
The use of a dictionary in metaphor identification may lead to conflicts between sense descriptions in the dictionary and analysts’ (native speaker) intuitions about word meanings. This paper offers suggestions for dealing with these conflicts by focusing on the descriptive rather than prescriptive role of the dictionary and the autonomy of the researcher. We argue that whether researchers decide to follow the dictionary or favour their own intuitions and specific interests is ultimately up to them, but they should aim to make their decisions as systematic and explicit as possible.
Keywords: metaphor identification, dictionaries, MIP(VU)
References (20)
Boom, T. den, & Geeraerts, D. (Eds.). (2005). Van Dale Groot woordenboek van de Nederlandse Taal. Utrecht & Antwerpen: Van Dale Lexicografie. (Electronic version).
Dorst, A.G. (2011). Personification in discourse: Linguistic forms, conceptual structures and communicative functions. Language and Literature, 20(2), 113–135.
Dorst, A.G., Reijnierse, W.G., & Venhuizen, G. (2013). One small step for MIP towards automated metaphor identification? Formulating general rules to determine basic meanings in large-scale approaches to metaphor. Metaphor and the Social World, 3(1), 77–99.
Durand, M. (Dir.). (2009). Le Grand Robert & Collins: dictionnaire français-anglais, anglais-français. Paris: Dictionnaires Le Robert. (Electronic version).
Krennmayr, T. (2008). Using dictionaries in linguistic metaphor identification. In N.L. Johannesson & D.C. Minugh (Eds.), Selected Papers from the 2006 and 2007 Stockholm Metaphor Festivals (pp. 97–115). Stockholm: Department of English, Stockholm University.
Meer, G. van der. (1997). Four English learner’s dictionaries and their treatment of figurative meanings. English Studies, 78(6), 556–571.
. (1999). Metaphors and dictionaries: The morass of meaning, or how to get two ideas for one. International Journal of Lexicography, 12(3), 195–208.
Pasma, T. (2011). Metaphor and register variation: The personalization of Dutch news discourse. Oisterwijk, NL: Uitgeverij BOXPress.
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39.
Reijnierse, W.G. (2011). The consequences of using one dictionary (and not another) for metaphor identification in French. Unpublished Master’s dissertation, VU University, Amsterdam.
Rey-Debove, J., & Rey, A. (Dir.). (2009). Le Nouveau Petit Robert, dictionnaire alphabétique et analogique de la langue française. Paris: Dictionnaires Le Robert. (Electronic version).
Rundell, M., & Fox, G. (Eds.). (2002). Macmillan English dictionary for advanced learners. Oxford: Macmillan Education.
Steen, G.J. (2008). The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 23(4), 213–241.
Steen, G.J., Dorst, A.G., Herrmann, J.B., Kaal, A.A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English ([URL]), ‘Longman’.
Macmillan Dictionary ([URL]), ‘Macmillan’.
Merriam Webster dictionary ([URL]), ‘Merriam Webster’.
Oxford dictionaries ([URL]), ‘Oxford’.
Oxford English dictionary ([URL]), ‘OED’.
Cited by (10)
Cited by ten other publications
Julich-Warpakowski, Nina & Paula Pérez Sobrino
Pehlivanović, Alma & Mersina Mujagić
Skoufaki, Sophia & Bojana Petrić
Nacey, Susan, Tina Krennmayr, Aletta G. Dorst & W. Gudrun Reijnierse
2019. What the MIPVU protocol doesn’t tell you (even though it mostly
does). In Metaphor Identification in Multiple Languages [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research, 22], ► pp. 41 ff.
Reijnierse, W. Gudrun
2019. Linguistic metaphor identification in French. In Metaphor Identification in Multiple Languages [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research, 22], ► pp. 69 ff.
Semino, Elena
2019. Afterword: Some reflections on MIPVU across languages. In Metaphor Identification in Multiple Languages [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research, 22], ► pp. 313 ff.
Reijnierse, W. Gudrun, Christian Burgers, Tina Krennmayr & Gerard J. Steen
2018. On metaphorical views, dynamite, and doodlings. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 16:2 ► pp. 431 ff.
Bogetić, Ksenija
2017. Language is a ‘Beautiful Creature’, not an ‘Old Fridge’
. Metaphor and the Social World 7:2 ► pp. 190 ff.
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
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.