Article published In: Review of Cognitive Linguistics
Vol. 20:2 (2022) ► pp.305–329
From usage patterns to meaning construction
Evidence from ear and eye figurative constructions
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 8 December 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00113.tho
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00113.tho
Abstract
The present study investigates the meaning construction emerging from figurative constructions involving
ear and eye in Modern Greek. The study concerns authentic language data retrieved from a
corpus search. Analysis takes into consideration the embodiment hypothesis, the development of chained metonymies and the
interaction of metaphor and metonymy as the motivation for the usage patterns under investigation. The constructions analyzed
reveal that the sense of vision is prioritized over hearing. Furthermore, constructional parameters of meaning show how
ears and eyes are perceived in MG language and culture. Eye is attributed
the agent role in the constructions, while ear is the entity acted upon. Moreover, eyes are
mainly perceived as reflections of different dimensions of the selfhood, while ears are perceived as containers.
A broader polysemy thus emerges for the eye than for the ear.
Keywords: corpus-based study, usage pattern, construction, ear, eye, metaphor, metonymy, embodiment, polysemy, culture, Greek
Article outline
- 1.Introduction and background
- 1.1Metaphor and metonymy and their interaction in figurative language
- 1.2Experiential basis of metaphor and metonymy and their interaction in figurative language
- 1.2.1Body parts and chained metonymies
- 2.Corpus studies and methodology
- 2.1Methodology
- 3.Meaning construction in usage patterns with body part terms
- 3.1Metaphor-metonymy and their interaction in ear usage patterns
- 3.1.1Constructional parameters of meaning in ear usage patterns
- 3.2Metaphor-metonymy and their interaction in eye usage patterns
- 3.2.1Constructional parameters of meaning in eye usage patterns
- 3.3Overall discussion and comparison
- 3.1Metaphor-metonymy and their interaction in ear usage patterns
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (54)
Athanasiadou, A. (2014). Metaphors
and metonymies for the (conceptualization and expression of the) state of no emotion in English and
Greek. Revista Española de Lingüística
Aplicada, 27(1), 1–22.
Barcelona, A. (2002). Clarifying
and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within Cognitive Linguistics: An
update. In R. Dirven & R. Porings (Eds.), Metaphor
and metonymy in comparison and
contrast (pp. 207–277). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
(2007). The
role of metonymy in meaning construction at discourse level. In G. Radden, K-M. Köpcke, T. Berg & P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects
of meaning
construction (pp. 51–75). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
(2010). Metonymic
inferencing and second language acquisition. In J. Littlemore & C. Juchem-Grundmann (Eds.), Applied
Cognitive Linguistics in second language learning and teaching. AILA
Review, 231, 134–154.
(2011). Reviewing
the properties and prototype structure of metonymy. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona & F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza (Eds.), Defining
metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: Towards a consensus
view (pp. 7–57). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Bergen, B. (2015). Embodiment. In E. Dabrovska & D. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook
of Cognitive
Linguistics (pp. 10–30). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cienki, A. (2007). Frames,
Idealized Cognitive Models, and Domains. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens. (Eds), The
Oxford handbook of Cognitive
Linguistics (pp. 170–187). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Croft, W. (1993). The
role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. Cognitive
Linguistics, 4(4), 335–370.
Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor
and Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Deignan, A., & Potter, L. (2004). A
corpus study of metaphors and metonymies in English and Italian. Journal of
Pragmatics, 361, 1231–1252.
Foolen, A. (2017). The
hand in figurative thought and language. In A. Athanasiadou (Ed.). Studies
in figurative thought and
language (pp. 179–198). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gibbs, R. W. Jr. (1999). Taking
metaphor out of our heads and putting it into the cultural
world. In R. W. Jr. Gibbs, & G. J. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor
in Cognitive
Linguistics (pp. 145–166). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Goldberg, A. (2006). Constructions
at work: The nature of generalization in
language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goossens, L. (1995). Metaphtonymy:
The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in figurative expressions for linguistic
action. In L. Goossens, P. Pawels, B. Rudzka-Ostyn, A. M. Simon-Vandenbergen & J. Vanparys (Eds), By
word of mouth: Metaphor, metonymy and linguistic action in a cognitive
perspective (pp.159–174). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Grady, J. (2007). Metaphor. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds), The
Oxford handbook of Cognitive
Linguistics (pp. 188–213). Oxford University Press.
Granger, S., & Paquot, M. (2008). Disentangling
the phraseological web. In S. Granger, & F. Meunier (Eds.), Phraseology:
an interdisciplinary
perspective (pp. 27–49). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Hilpert, M. (2006). Keeping
an eye on the data: Metonymies and their pattern. In A. Stefanowitch & S. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based
approaches to metaphor and
metonymy (pp. 123–151). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
(2007). Chained
metonymies in lexicon and grammar. A cross – linguistic perspective on body part
terms. In G. Radden, K. M. Köpke, T. Berg, & P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects
of meaning
construction (pp. 77–98). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Johnson, M. (1987). The
body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and
reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kraska-Szlenk, I. (2014). Semantic
extension of body part terms: Common patterns and their interpretation. Language
Sciences, 441, 15–39.
Lakoff, G. (1993). The
contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Εd.), Metaphor
and
thought (pp. 202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lindquist, H., & Levin, M. (2008). Foot
and mouth: The phrasal patterns of two frequent nouns. In S. Granger & F. Meunier (Eds.), Phraseology:
An interdisciplinary
perspective (pp. 143–158). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Littlemore, J., & Taylor, J. (2014). Introduction. In J. Littlemore & J. Taylor (Εds.), The
Bloomsbury companion to Cognitive
Linguistics (pp. 1–26). London: Bloomsbury.
Marmaridou, S. (2006). On
the conceptual, cultural and discursive motivation of Greek pain lexicalizations. Cognitive
Linguistics, 17(3), 393–434.
(2010). Cognitive,
cultural, and constructional motivations of polysemy and semantic change: The case of the Greek
ψυχή. Pragmatics and
Cognition, 18(1), 68–110.
(2011). The
relevance of embodiment to lexical and collocational meaning: The case of prosopo ‘face’ in Modern
Greek. In A. Zouheir & N. Yu (Εds.), Embodiment
via body parts: Studies from various languages and
cultures (pp. 23–40). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Mel΄čuk, I. (1998). Collocations
and lexical functions. In A. P. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology:
Theory, analysis and
applications (pp. 23–54). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Niemeier, S. (2000). Straight
from the heart – metonymic and metaphorical explorations. In A. Barcelona (Εd.), Metaphor
and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive
perspective (pp. 196–213). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Oakley, T. (2007). Image
schemas. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Εds), The
Oxford handbook of Cognitive
Linguistics. (pp. 214–235). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Panther, K. W., & Thornburg, L. (2007). Metonymy. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Εds), The
Oxford handbook of Cognitive
Linguistics (pp. 236–263). Oxford University Press.
Radden, G. (2002). How
metonymic are metaphors? In R. Dirven & R. Porings (Εds), Metaphor
and Metonymy in Comparison and
Contrast (pp. 407–434). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
(2018). Molly
married money: Reflections on conceptual metonymy. In O. Blanco-Carrión, A. Barcelona & R. Pannain (Eds.), Conceptual
metonymy: Methodological, theoretical and descriptive
issues (pp. 161–182). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Rohrer, T. (2007). Embodiment
and experientialism. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds), The
Oxford Handbook of Cognitive
Linguistics. (pp. 25–47). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2000). The
role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor
and metonymy at the
crossroads (pp. 109–132). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Galera-Masegosa, A. (2011). Going
beyond metaphtonymy: Metaphoric and metonymic complexes in phrasal verb
interpretation. Language
Value, 3(1), 1–29.
Stefanowitsch, A. (2006). Corpus-based
approaches to metaphor and metonymy. In A. Stefanowitch & S. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based
approaches to metaphor and
metonymy (pp. 1–16). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sweetser, E. (1990). From
etymology to pragmatics. Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic
structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Theodoropoulou, M. (2012). Metaphor-metonymies
of joy and happiness in Greek. Review of Cognitive
Linguistics, 10(1), 156–183.
Θώμου, Π. (2008). Η μεταφορά (metaphor) στην Ονοματική Φράση (ΕΠΙΘΕΤΟ + ΟΥΣΙΑΣΤΙΚΟ). ΑΡΙΑΔΝΗ 141, 273–291. [Thomou, P. (2008). Metaphor in the Noun Phrase (ADJECTIVE + NOUN). ARIADNE 141, 273–291] (in
Greek).
(2010). Εκδοχές της μεταφοράς (metaphor) σε σχολικά βιβλία και η κατανόησή τους από
μαθητές, Αριάδνη, 161, 217–238. [Thomou, P. (2010). Comprehension of options of Metaphor in Schoolbooks. ARIADNE, 161, 217–238] (in
Greek).
Thomou, P. (2013). Verbal
collocations in Modern Greek and English: Common
patterns. GLOSSOLOGIA, 211, 19–38.
(2016). Metaphor
and metonymy interaction patterns in Modern Greek. Cognitive Linguistic
Studies, 3(2), 300–316.
(2017). Conceptual
and lexical aspects influencing metaphor realization in Modern
Greek. In T. Georgakopoulos, T.-S. Pavlidou, M. Pechlivanos, A. Alexiadou, J. Androutsopoulos, A. Kalokerinos, S. Spopeteas & K. Stathi (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 12th International Conference on Greek
Linguistics (pp. 993–1006). Edition Romiosini/CeMoG, Freie Universitat Berlin. ([URL])
(2019). Locatives
and their metaphorical conceptualization in multi-word units retrieved from a corpus
search. In M. Chondrogianni, S. Courtenage, G. Horrocks, A. Arvaniti & I. Tsimpli (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 13th International Conference on Greek
Linguistics (pp. 248–255). London: University of Westminster. ([URL])
(2020). Towards
a constructional account of multi-word units in Modern Greek: a corpus-based
study. In S. Markantonatou & A. Christofidou (Eds.), Multi-word
expressions: Drawing on data from Modern Greek and other
languages (pp. 305–331). Athens: Academy of Athens.
Βελούδης, Γ. (2005). Η σημασία πριν, κατά και μετά τη
γλώσσα. Αθήνα: Κριτική. [Veloudis, G. (2005). Meaning in and beyond
language. Athens: Kritiki] (in
Greek)
Xioufis, T. (2017). The
pattern of the metaphor within metonymy in the figurative language of romantic love in Modern
Greek. In T.-S. Pavlidou, M. Pechlivanos, A. Alexiadou, J. Androutsopoulos, A. Kalokerinos, S. Spopeteas & K. Stathi (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 12th International Conference on Greek
Linguistics (pp. 1275–1287) Edition Romiosini/CeMoG, Freie Universitat Berlin.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Thomou, Paraskevi
2025. Animal-related proverbs in a cognitive and cultural perspective. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 12:1 ► pp. 107 ff.
Christodoulakis, Christos & Paraskevi Thomou
2024. Investigating metaphor comprehension strategies of young Second Language students of Greek. Review of Cognitive Linguistics
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 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.
