Article published in:
Metaphor and Communication
Edited by Elisabetta Gola and Francesca Ervas
[Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 5] 2016
► pp. 6178


Brandt, L., & Brandt, P.A.
(2005) Making sense of a blend. A cognitive-semiotic approach to metaphor. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 3, 216–249. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deignan, A.
(2005) Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M.
(1998) Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 22(2), 133–187. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2002) The way we think. Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C.C.
(1977) Topics in lexical semantics. In R.W. Cole (Ed.), Current Issues in linguistic theory (pp. 76–138). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Gilquin, G.
(2006) The place of prototypicality in corpus linguistics: Causation in the hot seat. In S.T. Gries & A. Stefanowitsch (Eds.), Corpora in cognitive linguistics: Corpus-based approaches to syntax and lexis (pp. 159–191). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Handl, S.
(2011) The conventionality of figurative language. A usage-based study. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, S.
(2004) Are low-frequency complex prepositions grammaticalized? On the limits of corpus data – and the importance of intuition. In H. Lindquist & C. Mair (Eds.), Corpus approaches to grammaticalization in English (pp. 171-210). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hogaboam, T.W., & Perfetti, C.A.
(1975) Lexical ambiguity and sentence comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 265–274. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z.
(2002) Metaphor. A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1990) The invariance hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on image schemas? Cognitive Linguistics, 1(1), 39–74. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., Espenson, J., & Schwartz, A.
(1991) Master metaphor list. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Turner, M.
(1989) More than cool reason. A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R.W.
(1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford/CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Nunberg, G., Sag, I.A., & Wasow, T.
(1994) Idioms. Language, 70(3), 491–538. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pearsall, J.
(Ed.) (1998) The new Oxford Dictionary of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schmid, H.J.
(2010) Does frequency in text really instantiate entrenchment in the cognitive system? In D. Glynn & K. Fischer (Eds.), Quantitative methods in cognitive semantics. Corpus-driven approaches (pp. 101–133). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Simpson, G.B.
(1981) Meaning dominance and semantic context in the processing of lexical ambiguity. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 120–136. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Summers, D.
(Ed.) (2003) Longman dictionary of contemporary English. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Verhagen, A.
(2005) Constructions of intersubjectivity. Discourse, syntax, and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wiley, J., & Rayner, K.
(2001) Effects of titles on the processing of text and lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye movements. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1011–1021. CrossrefGoogle Scholar