Article published in:
Elicited Metaphor Analysis in Educational Discourse
Edited by Wan Wan and Graham Low
[Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 3] 2015
► pp. 65–92

A hybrid methodology of linguistic metaphor identification in elicited data and its conceptual implications

| Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland

This chapter develops a hybrid methodology of linguistic metaphor identification in elicited data, which is a tentative solution to two related problems inherent in much of the research into elicited A is B metaphors, namely definitions of metaphoricity which are based solely on conceptual criteria and approaches to the stability of concepts (possibly) underlying linguistic metaphors which neglect the impact of sentence-level context on categorisation. In order to reveal the idea behind the hybrid model, the chapter is divided into three sections. First, criteria for simple and complex procedures are proposed, which then serve as parameters along which representative methodologies for linguistic metaphor recognition are compared. These juxtapositions make it evident that approaches to metaphor classification form a family-resemblance category, where the multiplicity of perspectives is a norm. To meet this standard, a hybrid approach to elicited data related to educational research is developed. The methodology enables the classification of linguistic examples into five categories, whose stability is taken as an indicator of the informants’ convictions (Low, Chap. 1 this volume, Sec. 4.1). Finally, extrapolations from the linguistic to the conceptual highlight the unique role of attenuated lexico-grammatical categories and the arguable position of conceptual metaphors in motivating people’s beliefs about education.

Keywords: conceptual metaphor, context, educational research, elicited data, elicited metaphor, hybrid model, linguistic metaphor, metaphor, metaphor recognition procedures
Published online: 02 July 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.3.03str
References
Armstrong, S.L., Davis, H., & Paulson, E.J
(2011) The subjectivity problem: Improving triangulation approaches in metaphor analysis studies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 10(2), 151–163.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L.W
(2003) Abstraction in perceptual symbol systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Biological Sciences, 358, 1177–1187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowdle, B., & Gentner, D
(2005) The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 112(1), 193–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L
(2003) Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
(2008) Metaphor shifting in the dynamics of talk. In M.S. Zanotto, L. Cameron, & M. Cavalcanti (Eds.), Confronting metaphor in use (pp. 45–62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) Confrontation or complementarity? Metaphor in language and cognitive metaphor theory. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 5, 107–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L., & Low, G.D
(1999) Metaphor. Language Teaching, 32, 77–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cortazzi, M., & Jin, L
(1999) Bridges to learning: Metaphors of teaching, learning and language. In L. Cameron & G.D. Low (Eds.), Researching and applying metaphor (pp. 149–176). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S
(2008) Metaphor comprehension and the brain. In R.W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 177–194). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deignan, A
(2005) Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) The grammar of linguistic metaphors. In A. Stefanowitsch & S. Th. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy (pp. 106–122). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Evans, V
(2006) Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning-construction. Cognitive Linguistics, 17, 491–534. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evans, V., & Zinken, J
(2005) Imagining for speaking: A lexically based theory of conceptual projection. Retrieved from https://​www​.sussex​.ac​.uk​/webteam​/gateway​/file​.php​?name​=ve​-imagining​.pdf​&site​=1
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M
(2002) The way we think. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., & Jeziorski, M
(1993) The shift from metaphor to analogy in western science. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed.) (pp. 447–480). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R.W
(2011) Evaluating conceptual metaphor theory. Discourse Processes, 48(8), 529–562. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, T
(2005) Context as other minds: The pragmatics of sociality, cognition, and communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, S
(2001) Understanding figurative language: From metaphors to idioms. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, S., & McGlone, M.S
(1999) When love is not a journey: What metaphors mean. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 1541–1558. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, S., & Haught, C
(2006) On the relation between metaphor and simile: When comparison fails. Mind and Language, 21, 360–378. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grady, J
(2005) Primary metaphors as inputs to conceptual integration. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1595–1614. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guerrero, M.C.M. de, & Villamil, O.S
(2002) Metaphorical conceptualizations of ESL teaching and learning. Language and Teaching Research, 6, 95–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kertész, A., & Rákosi, C
(2009) Cyclic vs. circular argumentation in the conceptual metaphor theory. Cognitive Linguistics, 20(4), 703–732. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z
(2002) Metaphor. A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2008) Metaphor and emotion. In R.W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 380–396). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M
(1980/2003) Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R.W
(2008) Cognitive grammar. A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martinez, A.M., Sauleda, N., & Huber, L.G
(2001) Metaphors as blueprints of thinking about teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 965–977. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murphy, G.L
(1996) On metaphoric representations. Cognition, 60, 173–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Semino, E., Heywood, J., & Short, M
(2004) Methodological problems in the analysis of metaphors in a corpus of conversations about cancer. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1271–1294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, G.J
(1999) From linguistic to conceptual metaphor in five steps. In R.W. Gibbs & G.J. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in cognitive linguistics (pp. 57–77). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Towards a procedure for metaphor identification. Language and Literature, 11(1), 17–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) Finding metaphor in grammar and usage: A methodological analysis of theory and research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) Is metaphor always a matter of thought? Issues in collecting converging evidence. In D. Schönefeld (Ed.), Converging evidence in linguistics. Methodological and theoretical issues for linguistic research (pp. 33–54 ). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, G.J., Dorst, L., Herrmann, B., Kaal, A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T
(2010) A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A
(2006) Words and their metaphors: A corpus-based approach. In A. Stefanowitsch & S. Th. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy (pp. 61–105). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stern, J
(2000) Metaphor in context. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Strugielska, A
(2008) Coherence relations and concept dynamics in learners’ personal theories. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5, 107–129.Google Scholar
Zinken, J., Hellsten, I., & Nerlich, B
(2008) Discourse metaphors. In R. Dirven, R. Frank, T. Ziemke, & J. Zlatev (Eds.), Body, language, and mind. Vol. 2: Sociocultural situatedness (pp. 363–387). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Ventura Olivet, Yoselis & Paola Alarcón Hernández
2022. La representación del trastorno del espectro autista: una mirada desde la teoría de la metáfora conceptual. Lengua y Sociedad 21:2 ► pp. 27 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 08 january 2023. 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.