Chapter published in:
Figurative Meaning Construction in Thought and Language
Edited by Annalisa Baicchi
[Figurative Thought and Language 9] 2020
► pp. 91106
Athanasiadou, A.
(2007) On the subjectivity of intensifiers. Language Sciences 29, 554–565. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2017) Irony has a metonymic basis. In A. Athanasiadou, & H. Colston (Eds.), Irony in Language Use and Communication (pp. 201–216). Figurative Thought and Language Series 1. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
ms. Cultural conceptualizations of irony versus arrogance and their figurative expression. Paper presented in The 1st International Conference of Cultural Linguistics, 20–02/7/2016, Prato, Italy.
Athanasiadou, A., & Dirven, R.
(2000) Pragmatic Conditionals. In A. Foolen, & F. van der Leek (Eds.), Constructions in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 1–26). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barnden, J. A.
(2008) Unparalleled creativity in metaphor. Creative Intelligent Systems: Papers from 2008 AAAI Spring Symposium. (Dan Ventura, Mary Lou Maher & Simon Colton, Cochairs).Google Scholar
Brdar-Szabó, R., & Brdar, M.
(2010) “Mummy, I love you like a thousand ladybirds”: Reflections on the emergence of hyperbolic effects and the truth of hyperboles. In A. Burkhardt, & B. Nerlich (Eds.), Tropical Truth(s). The Epistemology of Metaphor and Other Tropes (pp. 383–427). Berlin/New York, Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Camp, E.
(2012) Sarcasm, Pretense, and The Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction. Noûs, 46:4, 587–634. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2015) Why metaphors make good insults: perspectives, presupposition, and pragmatics. Philosophical Studies, 1–18.Google Scholar
Carston, R., & Wearing, C.
(2011) Metaphor, hyperbole and simile: A pragmatic approach. Language and Cognition, 3–3, 283–312. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Casasanto, D.
(2014) Development of Metaphorical Thinking: The Role of Language. In M. Borkent, J. Hinnell, & B. Dancygier (Eds.), Language and the Creative Mind (pp. 3–18). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Colston, H., & Gibbs, R. W.
(2002) Are Irony and Metaphor Understood Differently? Metaphor and Symbol, 17:1, 57–80. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E.
(2014) Figurative Language. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., & Bowdle, B.
(2001) Convention, form, and figurative language processing. Metaphor and Symbol, 16: 3–3, 223–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, S.
(2001) Understanding Figurative Language. Oxford, Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goossens, L.
(1990) Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(3), 323–340. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grice, P. H.
(1989) Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kittay, E. F.
(1987) Metaphor: Its cognitive force and linguistic structure. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z.
(2009) Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1987) Women, fire and dangerous things. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
(1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
(1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. I. Stanford, Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(1999) Losing control: grammaticization, subjectification, and transparency. In A. Blank, & P. Koch (Eds.), Historical Semantics and Cognition (pp. 147–175). Berlin/New York, Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J.
(2015) Metonymy. Hidden Shortcuts in Language, Thought and Communication. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moder, C.
(2008) It’s like making a soup: Metaphors and similes in spoken news discourse. In A. Tyler, Y. Kim & M. Takada (Eds.), Language in the Context of Use. Discourse and Cognitive Approaches to Language (pp. 301–320). Berlin/New York, Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(2010) Two puzzle pieces: fitting discourse context and constructions into Cognitive Metaphor Theory. English Text Construction, 3(2), 294–320. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L.
(2009) Introduction. On figuration in grammar. In K.-U. Panther, L. L. Thornburg & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and Metaphor in Grammar (pp. 1–44). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Antonymy in language structure and use. In M. Brdar, I. Raffaelli & M. Z. Fuchs (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics between universality and variation (pp. 159–186). Newcastle upon Tyne, Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Popa, M.
(2010) Ironic Metaphor Interpretation. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics (TWPL), vol. 33.Google Scholar
Radden, G., & Dirven, R.
(2007) Cognitive English Grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Radden, G., Köpcke, K.-M., Berg, Th. & Siemund, P.
(2007) Introduction: The construction of meaning in language. In G. Radden, K.-M. Köpcke, Th. Berg, P. Siemund, (Eds.), Aspects of Meaning Construction (pp. 1–15). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F., & Galera, A.
(2014) Cognitive Modeling. A linguistic perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, Benjamins.Google Scholar
Stern, J.
(2000) Metaphor in Context. Cambridge, Massachusetts/London, England. The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sullivan, K.
(2013) Frames and Constructions in Metaphoric Language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vosshagen, Chr
(1999) Opposition as a Metonymic Principle. In K.-U. Panther, & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought (pp. 289–308). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar