Review published In: Beyond Corpus Data — Complementary and Alternative Methods in Cognitive Linguistics
Edited by Anton Granvik, Veera Hatakka, Olli O. Silvennoinen, Riku Erkkilä and Eveliina Mäntylä
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 23:2] 2025
► pp. 676–683
Book review
. Aspects of cognitive terminology studies. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2024.
Reviewed by
Published online: 15 September 2025
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00232.paz
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00232.paz
References (26)
(2000). Elements for a theory of terminology. Towards an alternative paradigm. Terminology 6(1). 35–57.
(2003). Theories of terminology: their description, prescription and explanation. Terminology, 9(2), 163–200.
Dubuc, R. (1985). Manuel pratique de terminologie. Paris: Conseil international de la langue française.
Faber, P., Márquez Linares, C., & Vega Expósito, M. (2005). Framing terminology: A process-oriented approach. Meta: Journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators’ Journal, 50(4).
Faber, P. (2009). The cognitive shift in terminology and specialized translation. MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación, (1), 107–134.
(Ed.). (2012). A cognitive linguistics view of terminology and specialized language. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
(2022). Frame-based terminology. In P. Faber & M.-C. L’Homme (Eds.), Theoretical perspectives on terminology: Explaining terms, concepts and specialized knowledge (pp. 353–376). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fillmore, C. J. (1976). Frame semantics and the nature of language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Conference on the origin and development of language and speech, 280(1), 20–32.
(1982). Frame Semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111–137). Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Co.
Gaudin, P. (1993). Socioterminologie: des problèmes semantiques aux pratiques institutionnelles. Rouen: Presses universitaires.
L’Homme, M.-C. (2020). Revisiting polysemy in terminology. In Z. Gavriilidou, M. Mitsiaki & A. Fliatouras (Eds.), Proceedings of XIX EURALEX Congress: Lexicography for inclusion. Vol. I (pp. 415–424). Democritus University of Thrace.
(2024). Managing polysemy in terminological resources. Terminology, 31(1).
Martín Mingorance, L. (1984). Lexical Fields and Stepwise Lexical Decomposition in a Contrastive English-Spanish Verb Valency Dictionary. In R. R. K. Hartmann (Ed.), LEXeter ‘83 Proceedings. Papers from the International Conference on Lexicography at Exeter, 9–12 September, 19831 (pp. 226–236). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
Lu, W., Shurma, S., & Kemmer, S. (2020). Delivering the unconventional across languages: A Cognitive Grammar analysis of nonce words in “Jabberwocky” and its Ukrainian renditions. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 18(1), 244–274.
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39.
Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 27–48). Hillsdale & N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Steen, G. (2004). Can discourse properties of metaphor affect metaphor recognition? Journal of Pragmatics, 36(7). 295–313.
Steen, G., 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: John Benjamins.
Temmerman, R. (2000). Towards new ways of terminology description: The sociocognitive-approach. (Terminology and lexicography research and practice 3). Amsterdam & New York: John Benjamins.
