Chapter in:
Figurativity and Human Ecology
Edited by Alexandra Bagasheva, Bozhil Hristov and Nelly Tincheva
[Figurative Thought and Language 17] 2022
► pp. 123148
References
Cameron, L.
(2018) From metaphor to metaphorizing: How cinematic metaphor opens up metaphor studies. In S. Greifenstein, D. Horst, T. Scherer, C. Schmitt, H. Kappelhoff, & C. Müller (Eds.), Cinematic metaphor in perspective. Reflections on a transdisciplinary framework (pp. 17–35). Berlin: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L., Maslen, R., Todd, Z., Maule, J., Stratton, P., & Stanley, N.
(2009) The discourse dynamics approach to metaphor and metaphor-led discourse analysis. Metaphor and Symbol, 24 (2), 63–89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clausner, T. C., & Croft, W.
(1997) Productivity and schematicity in metaphors. Cognitive science, 21 (3), 247–282. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coseriu, E.
(1985) Linguistic competence: what is it really? The Modern Language Review, xxv–xxxv, n.pag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W. & Cruse, A.
(2004) Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Devylder, S., & Zlatev, J.
(2020) Cutting and Breaking Metaphors of the Self and the Motivation and Sedimentation Model. In A. Baicchi (Ed.), Figurative meaning construction in thought and language. (pp. 254–281). [Figurative Thought and Language, 9]. Philadelphia & Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, D.
(1993) Vagueness’s puzzles, polysemy’s vagaries. Cogntive Linguistics, 4(3), 223–272. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W.
(2017) Metaphor wars. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grady, J. E.
(1997) Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Greve, L.
(2018) Review of R. W. Gibbs, Jr. (2017) Metaphor Wars: Conceptual Metaphors in Human Life. Metaphor and the Social World, 8 (2), 312 – 318. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heidegger, M.
(1996) Being and time, A translation of Sein und Zeit (Vol. Translated by Joan Stambough). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Husserl, E.
(1970 [1900]) Logical Investigations.: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Itkonen, E.
(2005) Analogy as structure and process: Approaches in linguistics, cognitive psychology and philosophy of science. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, T. W.
(2017) Doing metaphor. An ecological perspective on metaphoricity in discourse. In B. Hampe (Ed.), Metaphor: Embodied cognition & discourse (pp. 257–276). Cambrdige: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M.
(2010) Metaphor and cognition. In S. Gallagher & D. Schmicking (Eds.), Handbook of Phenomenology and Cognitive Sciences (pp. 401–414). Berlin: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krathwohl, D. R.
(2009) Methods of educational and social science research: The logic of methods. Longgrove, IL: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
Krennmayr, T.
(2008) Using dictionaries in linguistic metaphor identification. In N.-L. Johannesson & D. C. Minugh (Eds.), Selected Papers from the 2006 and 2007 Stockholm Metaphor Festivals (pp. 109–127). Stockholm: Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z.
(2021) Standard and extended conceptual metaphor theory. In Xu Wen & John R. Taylor (Eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 191–203). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1993) The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought, Second Edition (pp. 202–251). Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) The neural theory of metaphor. Available at SSRN 1437794 . 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
McGlone, M. S.
(2007) What is the explanatory value of a conceptual metaphor? Language & Communication, 27 (2), 109–126. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M.
(1962) Phenomenology of perception (Taylor and Francis e-Library, 2005. ed.). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
(1968) The visible and the invisible. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Moskaluk, K., Zlatev, J.; & van de Weijer, J.
(in press). “Dizziness of freedom”: Anxiety disorders and metaphorical meaning-making. Metaphor and Symbol, 37 (4),2022.Google Scholar
Müller, C.
(2008) Metaphors dead and alive, sleeping and waking: A dynamic view. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pragglejaz
(2007) MIP: A method for finding metaphorically-used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22 , 1–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reijnierse, W. G., Burgers, C., Krennmayr, T., & Steen, G. J.
(2018) DMIP: A method for identifying potentially deliberate metaphor in language use. Corpus Pragmatics, 2 (2), 129–147. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sartre, J.-P.
(1956) Being and nothingness. New York: Gramercy Books.Google Scholar
Schmid, H.-J.
(2020) The dynamics of the linguistic system: Usage, conventionalization, and entrenchment. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Slife, B. D., Wright, C. D., & Yanchar, S. C.
(2016) Using operational definitions in research: A best-practices approach. The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 119–139.Google Scholar
Sokolowski, R.
(2000) Introduction to phenomenology. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sonesson, G.
(2019) Two models of metaphoricity and three dilemmas of metaphor research. Cognitive Semiotics, 12(1), 1–17. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Šorm, E., & Steen, G.
(2018) VISMIP: Towards a method for visual metaphor identification. In G. Steen (Ed.), Visual Metaphor: Structure and process (pp. 47–88). Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stampoulidis, G.
(2021) Street artivism on Athenian walls: A cognitive semiotic analysis of metaphor and narrative in street art. Lund: Lund University.Google Scholar
Stampoulidis, G., & Bolognesi, M.
(2019) Bringing metaphors back to the streets: A corpus-based study for the identification and interpretation of rhetorical figures in street art. Visual communication, 1–35. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stampoulidis, G., Bolognesi, M., & Zlatev, J.
(2019) A cognitive semiotic exploration of metaphors in Greek street art. Cognitive Semiotics, 12 (1) Special Issue: The rhetoric of contemporary metaphor theory edited by Göran Sonesson and Peer F. Bundgaard (pp. 1–20). 20192008. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Steen, G.
(2011) The contemporary theory of metaphor – now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9 (1), 26–64. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2017) Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues. Intercultural Pragmatics, 14 (1), 1–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Torstensson, B.
(2019) Metaphors and their Making: Bodily, conventionally and contextually motivated metaphors in inter- and intra-generational conversations. (MA), Lund: Lund University.Google Scholar
Watt, J., & Van Den Berg, S.
(2002) Elements of scientific theories: concepts and definitions. Research methods for communication science. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 11–22.Google Scholar
Zlatev, J.
(2010) Phenomenology and cognitive linguistics. In S. Gallagher & D. Schmicking (Eds.), Handbook of phenomenology and cognitive science (pp. 415–443). Berlin: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2015) Cognitive semiotics. In P. Trifonas (Ed.), International handbook of semiotics (pp. 1043–1067). Springer: Dordrecht. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2018) Meaning making from life to language: The semiotic hierarchy and phenomenology. Cognitive Semiotics, 11 (1), 20180001. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zlatev, J., & Blomberg, J.
(2016) Embodied intersubjectivity, sedimentation and non-actual motion expressions. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 39 (2), 185–208. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zlatev, J., Jacobsson, G., & Paju, L.
(2021) Desiderata for metaphor theory, the Motivation & Sedimentation Model and motion-emotion metaphoremes In A. S. D. Silva (Ed.), Figurative Language – Intersubjectivity and Usage. (pp. 41–74). [Figurative Thought and Language, 11]. Philadelphia & Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zlatev, J., Zywiczynski, P., & Wacewicz, S.
(2020) Pantomime as the original human-specific communicative system. Journal of Language Evolution, 1–19. CrossrefGoogle Scholar