Cover not available
Part of
Perspectives on Abstract Concepts: Cognition, language and communication
Edited by Marianna Bolognesi and Gerard J. Steen
[Human Cognitive Processing 65] 2019
► pp. 215–238

Chapter 10
Metaphor in action

Action verbs and abstract meaning

Embodiment plays an essential role in both concrete and abstract semantic representation. As a consequence, action verbs are extensively involved in the conceptualization and linguistic encoding of figurative meanings. In the light of several theoretical frameworks, this chapter aims to investigate the mechanisms that enable verbs to acquire new abstract meanings. The analysis we present focuses specifically on the metaphorical variation of a cohesive group of five Italian action verbs codifying a movement along the vertical axis (alzare, abbassare, salire, scendere, sollevare). The results confirm the Invariance Principle worked out by Lakoff: the metaphorical mapping of an action verb is strictly constrained by the image schemas involved in its core and concrete meaning.

Keywords: image schema, invariance principle, semantic variation, verticality
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.IMAGACT: Ontology of actions
    • 2.1General verbs and their semantic representation in IMAGACT
    • 2.2Marked variation and starting data
  • 3.Metaphors: Theoretical frameworks
    • 3.1Conceptual metaphor theory
    • 3.2Image schema theory
  • 4.Abstraction processes along the vertical axis: Three case studies
    • 4.1Centrality of the vertical axis
    • 4.2Common orientational metaphors
    • 4.3The case of sollevare : Image schema constraints
    • 4.4Fictive vs. factive motion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgment
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 6 June 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.65.11pan
References
Aziz-Zadeh, L., & Damasio, A.
2008 Embodied semantics for actions: Findings from functional brain imaging. Journal of Physiology-Paris 102 (1), 35–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barsalou, L. W.
2008 Grounded cognition. Annual Review Psychology 59, 617–645. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Can cognition be reduced to action? Processes that mediate stimuli and responses make human action possible. In A. K. Engel, K. J. Friston and D. Kragic, (Eds.), The Pragmatic Turn: Toward Action-Oriented Views in Cognitive Science. Series: Strüngmann forum reports, 18. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brown, S. W.
2014 From visual prototype of action to metaphors extending the IMAGACT ontology of action to secondary meanings (ISO-10). In H. Bunt (Ed.), Proceedings 10th Joint ISO – ACL SIGSEM, Workshop on Interoperable Semantic Annotation, Reykjavik, Iceland, 26 May 2014 (53–56).Google Scholar
Brugman, C.
1988 The Story of over. Polysemy, Semantics and the Structure of the Lexicon. New York: Garland [originally : M.A. thesis at the University of California, Berkeley 1981].Google Scholar
Cienki, A.
1997 Some properties and groupings of image schemas. In M. Verspoor, K. Lee, and E. Sweetser (Eds.), Lexical and syntactical constructions and the construction of meaning: proceedings of the bi-annual ICLA meeting in Albuquerque July 1995 (3–15). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998 STRAIGHT: An image schema and its metaphorical extensions. Cognitive Linguistics 9 (2), 107–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clausner, T. C., & Croft, W.
1999 Domains and image schemas, Cognitive Linguistics, 10, 1, 1–31.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Desai, R. H., Binder, J. R., Conant, L. L., Mano, Q. R., & Seidenberg, M. S.
2011 The neural career of sensory-motor metaphors. Journal of cognitive neuroscience 23 (9), 2376–2386. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ekberg, L.
1995 The mental manipulation of the vertical axis: How to go from “up” to “out” or from “above” to “behind”. In M. Verspoor, K. Dong, and E. Sweetser (Eds.), Lexical and syntactical constructions and the construction of meaning: proceedings of the bi-annual ICLA meeting in Albuquerque July 1995 (69–88). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Feldman, J., & Narayanan, S.
2004 Embodied meaning in a neural theory of language. Brain and Language 89, 385–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G.
2005 The Brain’s concepts: the role of the Sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology 22 (3/4), 455–479. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr., & Colston, H. L.
1995 The cognitive psychological reality of image schemas and their transformations. Cognitive Linguistics 6, 347–378. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W.
2006 Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hampe, B.
2005 When down is not bad, and up not good enough: A usage-based assessment of the plus–minus parameter in image-schema theory. Cognitive Linguistics 16 (1), 81–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hampe, B., & Grady, J.
2005 From Perception to Meaning Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics.Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle 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
Kiefer, M., & Pulvermüller, F.
2011 Conceptual representations in mind and brain: theoretical developments, current evidence and future directions. Cortex 48 (7), 805–825. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kopecka, A., & Narasimhan, B.
(Eds.) 2012 Events of Putting and Taking. A Crosslinguistic Perspective. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z.
2000 Metaphor and Emotion. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2015 Where Metaphors Come from: Reconsidering Context in Metaphor. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krzeszowski, T. P.
1993 The axiological parameter in preconceptual image schemata. In R. A. Geiger, and B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Eds.), Conceptualizations and Mental Processing in Language (307–329). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997 Angels and devils in hell: Elements of axiology in semantics. Warsaw: Wydawn.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
1987 Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1990 The Invariance Hypothesis: is abstract reason based on image-schemas? Cognitive Linguistics 1 (1), 39–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1993 The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (203–249). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., Swenson, J., & Schwartz, A.
1991 Master Metaphor List (2nd ed.). Technical report, University of California at Berkeley.Google 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
Langacker, R. W.
1986 Abstract motion. Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, (455–471). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
1987 Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Majid, A., & Bowerman, M.
(Eds.) 2007  Cutting and breaking events: A crosslinguistic perspective [Special Issue]. Cognitive Linguistics 18(2). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mandler, J. M.
1992 How to build a baby: ii. Conceptual primitives. Psychological Review 99, 597–604. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mandler, J. M., & Canovas, C. P.
2014 On defining image schemas. Language and Cognition 6, 510–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matlock, T.
2004 The conceptual motivation of fictive motion. In G. Radden and K. Panther (Eds.), Studies in Linguistic Motivation (221–248). New York/Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, Y.
1996 Subjective motion and English and Japanese verbs. Cognitive Linguistics 7, 183–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moneglia, M.
1998 Teoria empirica del senso e partizione semantica del lessico. Studi di grammatica italiana 17, 363–398.Google Scholar
2014 Natural language ontology of action, a gap with huge consequences for natural language understanding and machine translation. In: Z. Vetulani and J. Mariani (Eds.), Human Language Technology Challenges for Computer Science and Linguistics (379–395). Berlin and New York: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Moneglia, M., Monachini, M., Calabrese, O., Panunzi, A., Frontini, F., Gagliardi, G., & Russo, I.
2012 The IMAGACT Cross-linguistic Ontology of Action. A new infrastructure for natural language disambiguation. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, M. Uğur Doğan, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, J. Odijk, & S. Piperidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eight International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (948–955). Paris: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Google Scholar
Moneglia, M.
2014 The Semantic variation of action verbs in multilingual spontaneous speech corpora. In T. Raso and H. Mello (Eds.), Spoken Corpora and Linguistics Studies (152–190). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oakley, T.
2010 Image schemas. In D. Geeraerts, and H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (214–235). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Panunzi, A., & Moneglia, M.
2004 La Variazione Primaria del verbo nel lessico dei corpora di parlato. In F. Albano Leoni, F. Cutugno, M. Pettorino and R. Savy (Eds.), Atti del Convegno Il Parlato Italiano, volume CD-ROM, C4 (1–24). Napoli: D’Aura Edizioni.Google Scholar
Panunzi, A., De Felice, I., Gregori, L., Jacoviello, S., Monachini, M., Moneglia, M., & Quochi, V.
2014 Translating action verbs using a dictionary of images: the IMAGACT ontology. In A. Abel, C. Vettori, and N. Ralli (Eds.), Proceedings of the XVI EURALEX International Congress: The user in focus (1163–1170). Bolzano: EURAC research.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F.
2005 Brain mechanisms linking language and action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 6, 576–582. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinn, N.
1991 The cultural basis of metaphor. In J. W. Fernandez (Ed.), Beyond Tropes: The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology (56–93). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Rohrer, T.
2006 Image Schemata in the Brain. In B. Hampe (Ed.), From Perception to Meaning: Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics (165–196), Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Talmy, L.
1983 How language structures space. In H. L. Pick and L. P. Acredolo (Eds.), Spatial Orientation: Theory, Research, and Application, (225–282). New York/London: Plenum Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996 Fictive motion in language and ‘ception’. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel and M. F. Garrett (Eds.), Language and Space, (211–276). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Turner, M.
1991 Reading minds: The study of English in the age of cognitive science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Vernillo, P.
2015 La variazione marcata di verbi di azione generali ad alta frequenza. MA diss, University of Florence.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L.
1953 Philosophische Untersuchungen. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Cai, Tianyuan, Ho Hung Lim, John S. Y. Lee & Meichun Liu
2022. 2022 International Conference on Asian Language Processing (IALP), ► pp. 413 ff. DOI logo
Vernillo, Paola
2021. Grounding Abstract Concepts in Action. In Concepts in Action [Language, Cognition, and Mind, 9], ► pp. 167 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 march 2024. 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.