In:Linguistic Approaches to Emotions in Context
Edited by Fabienne H. Baider and Georgeta Cislaru
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 241] 2014
► pp. 159–188
Conceptual metaphors of anger in popularized scientific texts
A contrastive (English/Greek/French) cognitive-discursive approach
Published online: 13 March 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.241.10con
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.241.10con
Metaphors conceptualizing emotions represent a well-researched area within the framework of a cognitive theory of metaphor. However, very few studies focus on emotion metaphors from a discursive and cross-linguistic perspective. The present paper sets out to investigate from a cognitive and discursive point of view conceptual metaphors in the target domain of ANGER in English, French, and Greek. The research is based on comparable corpora written by experts in psychology, psychiatry, and psychotherapy that are freely available on the Internet. The analysis of the corpora points out that conceptual metaphors are a powerful tool for experts who try to offer their readership a new and scientific perspective on the abstract concept of ANGER, while bringing out both differences and similarities, as identified in the three sub corpora.
References (25)
Barcelona, Antonio. 2000. “Introduction. The cognitive theory of metaphor and metonymy.” In Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads, ed. by Antonio Barcelona, 1–28. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Baider, Fabienne. This volume. “Bad feelings in context.”
Baider, Fabienne and Gesuato, Sara. “Burning with desire in English and French: cross-linguistic lexical restrictions on the LOVE IS FIRE metaphor.” Presentation at the 8th International Pragmatics Conference,Toronto, Canada, 13–18 July 2002. [URL]
Beger, Anke. 2011. “Deliberate metaphors? An exploration of the choice and functions of metaphors in US-American college lectures”. Metaphorik.de 20/2011. [URL]
Beger, Anke, and Olaf Jäkel. 2009. “ANGER, LOVE and SADNESS revisited: Differences in emotion metaphors between experts and laypersons in the genre psychology guides.” Metaphorik.de 16/2009. [URL]
Ekman, Paul. 1971. Universal and Cultural Differences in Facial Expressions of Emotion. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Esenova, Orazgozel. 2009. “Anger metaphors in the English language.” VARIENG: Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 3 [URL]
Goeuriot, Lorraine, Emmanuelle Morin, and Béatrice Daille. 2009. “Reconnaissance du type de discours dans des corpus comparables spécialisés.” CORIA. [URL]
Kövecses, Zoltán. 1986. Metaphors of Anger, Pride and Love: A Lexical Approach to the Structure of Concepts (Pragmatics & Beyond, VII: 8). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
1995a. “
Anger: Its language, conceptualization, and physiology in the light of cross-cultural evidence.” In Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World, ed. by John R. Taylor, and Robert E. Maclaury, 181–196. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
1995b. “Metaphor and the folk understanding of anger.” In Everyday Conceptions of Emotion, ed. by John A. Russell, 49–71. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Lakoff, George. 1993. “The contemporary theory of metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought ed. by Andrew Ortony (2nd edition), 202–251. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George, and Zoltán Kövecses. 1987. “The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English.” In Cultural Models in Language and Thought, ed. by Dorothy Holland and Naomi Quinn, 195–221. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Loos, Eugene E., Susan Anderson, Dwight H. Day, Paul C. Jordan, and J. Douglas Wingate. (eds). 1999. “What is a body-as-container-for-emotions metaphor?” Metaphors In English. LinguaLinks Library, Version 4.0. Dallas: SIL International. 19 Sept. 2008.[URL]
Parker Hall, Sue. 2008. Anger, Rage and Relationship: An Empathic Approach to Anger Management, London: Routledge.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
AGİŞ, Fazıla Derya
Tran, Ba Tien
Reali, Florencia
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 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.
