Article published In: Metaphor and metonymy revisited beyond the Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: Recent developments and applications
Edited by Francisco Gonzálvez-García, María Sandra Peña-Cervel and Lorena Pérez-Hernández
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 9:1] 2011
► pp. 11–25
Recent developments in metaphor theory
Are the new views rival ones?
Published online: 6 July 2011
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.9.1.02kov
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.9.1.02kov
Several scholars have proposed alternative views to conceptual metaphor theory (see, for example, Ortony, 1993; Barnden, 2006; Wilson and Carston, 2006, 2008; Vega, 2007; Gibbs, 2008). How are the modified, refined, and alternative theories related to each other and standard conceptual metaphor theory, and which theory provides the best account of the phenomenon of metaphor? The particular approaches I will consider in this paper include the theory of metaphor as categorization, standard conceptual metaphor theory, blending theory, the neural theory of metaphor, conceptual metaphor theory as based on the idea of main meaning focus, and relevance theory. I will present the various theories through the analysis of a single metaphorical sentence: This surgeon is a butcher. I will propose that conceptual metaphor theory as based on the idea of the main meaning focus gives us a good way of characterizing the emergence of the sentence’s meaning. This characterization consists of a four-stage process. First, there exist two independent conceptual categories: BUTCHERY and SURGERY. Second, due to the similarity between the two, a metaphorical relationship is established between them. Third, the property of incompetence emerges in the concept of BUTCHERY in light of and against the background of the concept of SURGERY. Fourth, this property is projected into the blend, in which the property will now characterize the surgeon. I will point out that this approach is compatible with several other views, such as Ruiz de Mendoza’s Combined Input Hypothesis and with aspects of relevance theory.
Cited by (33)
Cited by 33 other publications
Ahmad, Mashhood, Roslina Mamat, Afida Mohamad Ali & Muslim Shah Abaseen Yousafzai
Boukhennoufa, Soussen & Hanane Saihi
Altakhaineh, Abdel Rahman M. & Aseel Zibin
Nikolaienko, Valeriia
Nikolaienko, Valeriia
Ananieva, Nika
Lemghari, El Mustapha
Lemghari, El Mustapha
Lemghari, El Mustapha
Lemghari, El Mustapha
2024. Contradiction in proverbs. In Proverbs within Cognitive Linguistics [Cognitive Linguistic Studies in Cultural Contexts, 16], ► pp. 65 ff.
Lemghari, El Mustapha
Li, Heng
Li, Heng
Zibin, Aseel
2021. Blood metaphors and metonymies in Jordanian Arabic and English. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 19:1 ► pp. 26 ff.
Lemghari, El Mustapha, F. Neveu, B. Harmegnies, L. Hriba, S. Prévost & A. Steuckardt
Herrero Ruiz, Javier
2019. Metaphor and metonymy in jokes. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 32:2 ► pp. 650 ff.
Herrero-Ruiz, Javier
Herrero-Ruiz, Javier
Szokolszky, Agnes
Takashima, Yufuko
2019. Metaphors of perception in Japanese Sign Language. In Perception Metaphors [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research, 19], ► pp. 303 ff.
Miró-Sastre, Ignasi
Berberović, Sanja & Mersina Mujagić
Massey, Gary & Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow
Els, Carla
2015. De- and recontextualising xenophobia. In Singing, Speaking and Writing Politics [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 65], ► pp. 87 ff.
Galera Masegosa, Alicia & Aneider Iza Erviti
2015. Conceptual complexity in metaphorical resemblance operations revisited. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 28:1 ► pp. 97 ff.
Crespo-Fernández, Eliecer
Szwedek, Aleksander
2014. The nature of domains and the relationships between them in metaphorization. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 12:2 ► pp. 342 ff.
Iza Ervitia, Aneider
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
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.
