Article published in:
Multimodality and Cognitive Linguistics
Edited by María Jesús Pinar Sanz
[Benjamins Current Topics 78] 2015
► pp. 6178
Clausner, T.C., & Croft, W
(1999) Domains and image schemas. Cognitive Linguistics, 10, 1–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cortés de los Ríos, M.E
(2001) Nuevas perspectivas lingüísticas en la publicidad impresa anglo sajona. Almería: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Almería.Google Scholar
Damasio, A
(1994) Descartes’ error. New York: GrossetPutnam.Google Scholar
Felices Lago, A., & Cortés de los Ríos, M.E
(2009) A cognitiveaxiological approach to print ecoadvertisements in the economist: the energy sector under scrutiny. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas, 4, 59–78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Finke, R., Pinker, S., & Farah, M
(1989) Reinterpreting visual patterns in mental imagery. Cognitive Science, 13, 41–78.Google Scholar
Forceville, C
(1998) Pictorial metaphor in advertising. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2007) Multimodal metaphor in ten Dutch TV commercials. Public Journal of Semiotics, 1, 19–51.Google Scholar
(2008) Pictorial and multimodal metaphor in commercials. In E.F. Mc Quarrie, & B.J. Phillips (Eds.), Go figure!: New directions in advertising rhetoric (pp. 272–310).Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R.W
(1999) Taking metaphor out of our heads and putting it into the cultural world. In R. Gibbs & G. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in cognitive linguistics (pp. 145–166). Philadelphia/ Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, J
(1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
Grady, J
(1997) Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. Ph.D. dissertation at the University of Berkeley.Google Scholar
(2005) Image schemas and perception. In B. Hampe (Ed.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 35–56). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hidalgo-Downing, L., & Kraljevic-Mujic, B
(2011) Multimodal metonymy and metaphor as complex discourse resources for creativity in ICT advertising discourse. In F. Gonzálvez García, S. Peña Cervel & L. Pérez Hernández (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy revisited beyond the Contemporary Theory of Metaphor (pp. 153–178). Special issue of Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M
(1987) The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2005) The philosophical significance of image schemas. In B. Hampe (Ed.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 15–34). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kimmel, M
(2005) Culture regained: Situated and compound image schemas. In B. Hampe (Ed.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 285–312). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Properties of cultural embodiment: Lessons from the anthropology of the body. In M.F. Roslyn, R. Dirven, T. Ziemke & E. Bernardez (Eds.), Body, language and mind. Vol. 2. Socio-cultural situatedness (pp. 77–108). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Klink, R.R
(2001) Creating meaningful new brand names: A study of Semantics and sound symbolism. Journal of Marketing: Theory and Practice, 9, 27–34.Google Scholar
Koller, V
(2009) Brand images: multimodal metaphors in corporate branding. In C.J. Forceville & E. UriosAparisi (Eds.), Multimodal metaphor(pp. 45–73). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G
(1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M
(1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(1999) Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R
(2000) Where Mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings Mathematics into being. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lowrey, T.M., & Shrum, L.J
(2007) Phonetic symbolism and brand name preference. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 406–414. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Núñez Perucha, B
(2003) Esquemas de imágenes y modelos populares: An estudio del lenguaje dela victimización en textos narrativos en lengua inglesa. Logroño: AESLA.Google Scholar
Ortiz, M.J
(2010) Visual rhetoric: Primary metaphors and symmetric object alignment. Metaphor and Symbol, 25(3), 162–180. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peña Cervel, M.S
(2000) A cognitive approach to the image schematic component in the metaphorical expression of emotions in English. PhD Dissertation. Universidad de La Rioja.Google Scholar
Pereltsvaig, A
(2011) “What’s in a name?”. Languages of the World (October 6 2011) http://​languagesoftheworld​.info​/etymology​/whatsinaname​.html.Google Scholar
Pérez Hernández, L
(2011) Cognitive tools for successful branding. Applied Linguistics, 32, 369–388. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J
(2011) Metonymy and cognitive operations. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona & F.J. Ruiz de Mendoza (Eds.), What is metonymy?: An attempt at building a consensus view on the delimitation of the notion of metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 45–76). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sinha, C., & Jensen de Lopez, K
(2000) Language, culture and the embodiment of spatial cognition. Cognitive Linguistics, 11, 17–41.Google Scholar
Sweetser, E
(1990) From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Turner, M
(1991) Reading minds: The study of English in the age of Cognitive Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Umiker-Sebeok, J
(1996) Power and the construction of gendered spaces. International Review of Sociology, 6(3), 389–403. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Velasco Sacristán, M.S., & Cortés de los Ríos, M.E
(2009) Persuasive nature of image schematic devices in advertising: Their use for introducing sexisms. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 22, 239–270.Google Scholar