Cover not available

Article published In: Review of Cognitive Linguistics
Vol. 14:2 (2016) ► pp.442–473

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Communicating flexibly with metaphor

A complex of strengthening, elaboration, replacement, compounding and unrealism

 | University of Birmingham, UK
Published online: 10 January 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.14.2.07bar
This article argues that certain phenomena concerning metaphor that have been studied largely separately are in fact strongly interrelated, to the extent of forming an indivisible complex that should ideally be addressed in a unified way. The phenomena addressed here are metaphor compounding, metaphor elaboration (often called metaphor extension), metaphor replacement, metaphor strength-modification, and unrealistic source-domain situations. The interrelationships between phenomena that the article discusses include: the potential for unrealism and partial forms of replacement to be implicated in compounding; the way strength-modification can arise from compounding and replacement; and the affinity between elaboration and weak forms of replacement. The article also sketches how the author’s ATT-Meta approach to metaphor, which has previously been presented as handling elaboration and compounding, and hence some types of strengthening, is suitable also for handling the other phenomena.
References (45)
References
Aisenman, R.A. (1999). Structure-mapping and the simile-metaphor preference. Metaphor and Symbol, 14(1), 45–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Allbritton, D.W. (1995). When metaphors function as schemas: Some cognitive effects of conceptual metaphors. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10 (1), 33–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asher, N., & Lascarides, A. (2001). Metaphor in discourse. In P. Bouillon & F. Busa (Eds.), The language of word meaning (pp. 263–287). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barnden, J.A. (2001). Uncertainty and conflict handling in the ATT-Meta context-based system for metaphorical reasoning. In V. Akman, P. Bouquet, R. Thomason, & R.A. Young (Eds.), Modeling and using context: Third international and interdisciplinary conference (CONTEXT 2001) (pp. 15–29). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2006). Consequences for language learning of an AI approach to metaphor. In J. Salazar, M. Amengual, & M. Juan (Eds.), Usos sociales del lenguaje y aspectos psicolingüísticos: Perspectivas aplicadas (pp. 15–57). Palma de Mallorca: Universitat de les Illes Baleares.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2008). Metaphor and artificial intelligence: Why they matter to each other. In R.W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 311–338). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2010). Metaphor and metonymy: Making their connections more slippery. Cognitive Linguistics, 21(1), 1–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2012). Metaphor and simile: Fallacies concerning comparison, ellipsis and inter-paraphrase. Metaphor and Symbol, 27(4), 265–282. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2015a). Metaphor, simile, and the exaggeration of likeness. Metaphor and Symbol, 30(1), 41–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2015b). Open-ended elaborations in creative metaphor. In T.R. Besold, 
M. Schorlemmer, & A. Smaill (Eds.), Computational creativity research: Towards creative machines (pp. 217–242). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2016). Mixed metaphor: Its depth, its breadth, and a pretence-based approach. In R.W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), Mixing metaphor (pp. 73–112). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barnden, J.A., & Lee, M.G. (2002). An artificial intelligence approach to metaphor understanding. In T. Komendzinski (Ed.), Metaphor: A multidisciplinary approach. Special issue. Theoria et Historia Scientiarum, 6(1), 399–412. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carston, R. (1996). Metalinguistic negation and echoic use. Journal of Pragmatics, 25(3), 309–330. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carston, R., & Wearing, C. (2011). Metaphor, hyperbole and simile: A pragmatic approach. Language and Cognition, 3(2), 283–312. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chiappe, D.L., & Kennedy, J.M. (2000). Are metaphors elliptical similes? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(4), 371–398. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2008). Rethinking metaphor. In R.W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 53–66). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fogelin, R.J. (2011). Figuratively speaking (Revised ed.). New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7(2), 95–119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gentner, D., & Bowdle, B. (2008). Metaphor as structure-mapping. In R.W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 109–128). Cambridge, U.K.: 
Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R.W., Jr. (Ed.). (2016). Mixing metaphor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R.W., Jr. & Santa Cruz, M.J. (2012). Temporal unfolding of conceptual metaphoric experience. Metaphor and Symbol, 27(4), 299–311. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glucksberg, S. (2001). Understanding figurative language: From metaphors to idioms. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2008). How metaphors create categories – quickly. In R.W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 67–83). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2011). Understanding metaphors: The paradox of unlike things compared. In K. Ahmad (Ed.), Affective computing and sentiment analysis: Emotion, metaphor and terminology (pp. 1–12). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glucksberg, S., & Haught, C. (2006). Can Florida become like the next Florida?: When metaphoric comparisons fail. Psychological Science, 17(11), 935–938. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grady, J.E. (1997). Theories are buildings revisited. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(4), 267–290. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grossman, Z. (2002). Afghanistan is Vietnam ... and Yugoslavia, Colombia, and Somalia, all rolled into one. In R. Burbach & B. Clark (Eds.), September 11 and the U.S. war: Beyond the curtain of smoke (pp. 61–64). San Francisco: City Lights Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hobbs, J.R. (1992). Metaphor and abduction. In A. Ortony, J. Slack, & O. Stock (Eds.), Communication from an artificial intelligence perspective: Theoretical and applied issues (pp. 35–58). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, L.R. (1985). Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity. Language, 61(1), 121–174. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kimmel, M. (2010). Why we mix metaphors (and mix them well): Discourse coherence, conceptual metaphor, and beyond. Journal of Pragmatics, 421, 97–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kittay, E.F. (1989). Metaphor: Its cognitive force and linguistic structure. Oxford, U.K.: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 202–251). New York/Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, M.G., & Barnden, J.A. (2001). Reasoning about mixed metaphors with an implemented AI system. Metaphor and Symbol, 16(1/2), 29–42. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Littlemore, J., & Low, G.D. (2006). Figurative thinking and foreign language learning. 
Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave, Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mann, W., & Thompson, S. (1988). Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text, 81, 243–281. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Musolff, A. (2007). Popular science concepts and their use in creative metaphors in media discourse. metaphorik.de, 131, 67–85.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oates, J.C. (2002). I’ll take you there. London/New York: Fourth Estate.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2008). A deflationary account of metaphor. In R.W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 84–105). Cambridge, U.K.: 
Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Turner, M., & Fauconnier, G. (1995). Conceptual integration and formal expression. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10(3), 183–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walton, K. (2004)[1993]. Metaphor and prop oriented make-believe. In E. John & D.M. Lopes (Eds.), Philosophy of literature – Contemporary and classic readings: An anthology (pp. 239–247). Oxford: Blackwell. Reprinted with abridgement from European Journal of Philosophy, 1, 39–57.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wee, L. (2003). A new look at novelty in metaphor: Implications for metaphor comprehension and production. Talk given at 5th International conference on researching and applying metaphor (RAAM V) , University of Paris 13, France, 2–5 September 2003.
White, R.M. (1996). The structure of metaphor: The way the language of metaphor works. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, D., & Carston, R. (2006). Metaphor, relevance and the ‘emergent property’ issue. Mind and Language, 21(3), 404–433. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (10)

Cited by ten other publications

Fuoli, Matteo & Samantha Ford
2025. One Hundred Ways to Resist Corporate Branding: Figurative Subversion in Visual and Multimodal Communication. Metaphor and Symbol 40:3 ► pp. 222 ff. DOI logo
Fawzy, Rania Magdi
2024. BIOMETRIC CITIZENS in smart cities. Journal of Language and Politics 23:2 ► pp. 283 ff. DOI logo
Despot, Kristina Š., Ana Ostroški Anić & Tony Veale
2023. “Somewhere along your pedigree, a bitch got over the wall!” A proposal of implicitly offensive language typology. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 19:2 ► pp. 385 ff. DOI logo
Jódar-Sánchez, Jose Antonio
2023.  Urban Sexuality and Geological Erotism in Antagonía by Luis Goytisolo . Romance Studies 41:3 ► pp. 224 ff. DOI logo
Barnden, John A.
2022. Metonymy, reflexive hyperbole and broadly reflexive relationships. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 20:1 ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo
Wackers, Dunja Y. M. & H. José Plug
2022. Countering Undesirable Implications of Violence Metaphors for Cancer through Metaphor Extension. Metaphor and Symbol 37:1 ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo
Werkmann Horvat, Ana, Marianna Bolognesi, Jeannette Littlemore & John Barnden
2022. Comprehension of different types of novel metaphors in monolinguals and multilinguals. Language and Cognition 14:3 ► pp. 401 ff. DOI logo
Ervas, Francesca
2021. Metaphor, ignorance and the sentiment of (ir)rationality. Synthese 198:7 ► pp. 6789 ff. DOI logo
Barnden, John
2020. Metaphor thoughtfully. In Figurative Meaning Construction in Thought and Language [Figurative Thought and Language, 9], ► pp. 13 ff. DOI logo
Kuiken, Don & Shawn Douglas
2018. Living metaphor as the site of bidirectional literary engagement. Scientific Study of Literature 8:1 ► pp. 47 ff. DOI logo

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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue