219-7677 10 7500817 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 201705011130 ONIX title feed eng 01 EUR
715016542 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code MiLCC 6 Eb 15 9789027267504 06 10.1075/milcc.6 13 2015050863 DG 002 02 01 MiLCC 02 2210-4836 Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Mixing Metaphor</TitleText> 01 milcc.6 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/milcc.6 1 B01 Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W. Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. University of California, Santa Cruz 01 eng 283 xiv 269 LAN009000 v.2006 CFK 2 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.COGN Cognition and language 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.COGPSY Cognitive linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 06 01 Mixing metaphors in speech, writing, and even gesture, is traditionally viewed as a sign of inconsistency in thought and language. Despite the prominence of mixed metaphors, there have been surprisingly few attempts to comprehensively explain why people mix their metaphors so frequently and in the particular ways they do. This volume brings together a distinguished group of linguists, psychologists and computer scientists, who tackle the issue of how and why mixed metaphors arise and what communicative purposes they may serve. These scholars, almost unanimously, argue that mixing metaphors is a natural consequence of common metaphorical thought processes, highlighting important complexities of the metaphorical mind. <i>Mixing Metaphor</i>, for the first time, offers new, critical empirical and theoretical insights on a topic that has long been ignored within interdisciplinary metaphor studies. 05 Overall, we found the engaging and thought-provoking book has provided a plethora of fertile starting points for future research in this emergent interdisciplinary area of metaphor studies. It has remarkably input food for thought to prompt and facilitate new tasks and discussions on mixed metaphors that otherwise would have remained blurred and indistinct and opened an inviting and intriguing pathway for dominant but often bombarded CMT as an outlet. Yi Sun and Yang Bai, Xi’an International Studies University, in Review of Cognitive Linguistics 16:1 (2018) 05 <i>Mixing Metaphor</i> is a compilation of 12 chapters by prominent researchers, introduced by Raymond Gibbs, one of the main actors in the field of metaphor studies. It is a highly timely contribution that fills a gap between the pre-theoretical notion of ‘mixed metaphors’, largely known to the (English-speaking) public as something to be avoided as it reflects poor style or even sloppy thinking, and scholarly research on metaphor, where the topic has received little attention. Jordan Zlatev and Georgios Stampoulidis, Lund University, in Metaphor and the Social World Vol. 8:2 (2018) 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/milcc.6.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027202109.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027202109.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/milcc.6.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/milcc.6.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/milcc.6.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/milcc.6.hb.png 10 01 JB code milcc.6.s1 Section header 1 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Introduction</TitleText> 10 01 JB code milcc.6.001int vii xiv 8 Article 2 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Introduction</TitleText> 1 A01 Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W. Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. University of California 10 01 JB code milcc.6.s2 Section header 3 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part I. Is Mixed Metaphor a Problem?</TitleText> 10 01 JB code milcc.6.01kov 1 16 16 Article 4 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 1. A view of &#8220;mixed metaphor&#8221; within a conceptual metaphor theory framework</TitleText> 1 A01 Zoltán Kövecses Kövecses, Zoltán Zoltán Kövecses Eötvös Loránd University 01 How does conceptual metaphor theory handle mixed metaphors&#63; Several metaphor scholars argue that mixed metaphor is a phenomenon that conceptual metaphor theory cannot handle. Their argument is that, given the claims of conceptual metaphor theory, mixed metaphors should not occur at all. This is because once a conceptual metaphor is activated in discourse by means of a linguistic metaphor, that conceptual metaphor should lead to and support the use of further linguistic examples of the same conceptual metaphor. However, in real discourse, the argument goes, most metaphors are mixed, which indicates that conceptual metaphors are not activated and thus do not lead to further consistent linguistic metaphors of the same conceptual metaphor. In the paper, I will argue that the idea of the production of consistent and homogeneous linguistic examples does not necessarily follow from conceptual metaphor theory and that, as a matter of fact, the opposite is the case: given conceptual metaphor theory, we should expect the use of mixed metaphors in natural discourse. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.02cam 17 30 14 Article 5 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 2. Mixed metaphors from a discourse dynamics perspective</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">A non-issue&#63;</Subtitle> 1 A01 Lynne Cameron Cameron, Lynne Lynne Cameron The Open University 01 The &#8216;mixed metaphor problem&#8217; is considered from the discourse dynamics perspective, examining instances from metaphor clusters in dialogue and interaction. Several types of multiple juxtaposed verbal metaphors are found but they rarely demonstrate the semantic dissonance or stylistic undesirability held characteristic of problematic mixed metaphors. Multiple verbal metaphors are not stylistically-tricky additions to the flow of talk but are constitutive of it, discursive resources that contribute to the flow of jointly-constructed meaning. Multiple metaphors are shown to result from and find coherence in: shifting discourse topics; anaphoric reference and lexico-conceptual pacts; being combined in coherent metaphorical scenarios; layering of conventionalised and systematic metaphors.The second part of the chapter demonstrates how multiple metaphors were selected and combined to form the basis of the new model of empathy~dyspathy dynamics in social science research, and reflects on the inevitability of mixing metaphors. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.03mul 31 56 26 Article 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 3. Why mixed metaphors make sense</TitleText> 1 A01 Cornelia Müller Müller, Cornelia Cornelia Müller European University Viadrina 01 This paper explores why speakers and addressees seem to have no problem in making sense of mixed metaphors. We will argue that the mixing of metaphors reveals something about the nature of conventionalized metaphoric meaning that is as interesting for cognitive linguists as speech errors are for psycholinguists. First, it shows that so-called dead metaphors are alive for speakers, second it reveals that people deal creatively with all the meaning facets of metaphoric meaning &#8211; including the uncommon ones, and third we will argue that the mixing of metaphors can be explained by assuming a dynamic view on metaphoric meaning making. This view suggests that rather than being static and fixed, metaphoric meaning is the product of a process of cognitively activating selected facets of source and target, or vehicle and tenor. As a consequence the mixing of metaphors is considered a result of a shifting focus of attention, or of dynamically foregrounding facets of meaning that are backgrounded in the common reading. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.04lon 57 72 16 Article 7 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 4. Tackling mixed metaphors in discourse</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">New corpus and psychological evidence</Subtitle> 1 A01 Julia E. Lonergan Lonergan, Julia E. Julia E. Lonergan University of California 2 A01 Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W. Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. University of California 01 We offer an analysis of a small corpus of mixed metaphor excerpts taken from &#8220;The New Yorker&#8221; magazine&#8217;s column titled &#8220;Block That Metaphor&#33;&#8221; (BTM). Our aim was to explore the main hypothesis that people interpret mixed metaphors as being meaningful and coherent because of their abilities to engage in elaborate reasoning about the source domains explicitly mentioned in these texts. A first study investigated the different individual metaphorical expressions in this series of mixed metaphorical narratives. We found that most of these have been employed, and conveyed metaphorical meanings, in other kinds of discourse, and that the metaphors within the BTM vignettes were, indeed, mixed, and done so in a variety of ways. A second study asked university students to write out their interpretations of the different phrases in these excerpts, one-by-one as they read through each vignette. Analysis of participants&#8217; protocols showed tremendous consistency in how people understood the individual metaphors and that the mixed metaphors in these narratives made good sense. The specificity of people&#8217;s understandings of verbal metaphors in narratives is aided by their rich social and cultural knowledge of the source domains referred to explicitly in language. Even if the underlying conceptual metaphors for these verbal metaphors appear to clash, people make use of their elaborate source domain information to create specific concepts and images that often make mixed metaphors perfectly coherent and, at times, delightful to hear and read. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.s3 Section header 8 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part II. Reasons for Mixing Metaphor</TitleText> 10 01 JB code milcc.6.05bar 73 112 40 Article 9 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 5. Mixed metaphor</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Its depth, its breadth, and a pretence-based approach</Subtitle> 1 A01 John Barnden Barnden, John John Barnden University of Birmingham, UK 01 The article sketches how a particular approach to metaphor, the ATT-Meta approach, which has been partially realized in an implemented AI program, copes with various types of mixing. Mixing here is broadly construed as including felicitous compounding, not only infelicitous mixes such as when there are unintended comical effects. The structures of mixing considered included chaining (called here serial mixing), parallel mixing (e.g., when different metaphorical views are brought to bear on the target of the metaphor), and combinations of serial and parallel mixing. ATT-Meta has specific technical advantages as regards mixing. These include (i) a focus on individual mappings as opposed to packages of mappings such as conceptual metaphors, (ii) the use of generic mappings called view-neutral mapping adjuncts, which are not specific to particular metaphorical views and cope with certain core types of information that are commonly manipulated in metaphor, and (iii) the construal of mappings as going from pretence spaces (fictional spaces) to surrounding reasoning spaces as opposed to going from one domain to another. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.06ste 113 132 20 Article 10 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 6. Mixed metaphor is a question of deliberateness</TitleText> 1 A01 Gerard J. Steen Steen, Gerard J. Gerard J. Steen University of Amsterdam 01 This paper aims to explore the interaction between mixed metaphor and deliberateness in order to throw some new light on the nature of mixed metaphor. The basic claim is that the typical or strongest experience of mixed metaphor arises when two metaphors conflict that are both used deliberately as metaphors. It is likely that all other cases of conceptual clashes between adjacent metaphors do not get recognized as mixed metaphor because their components are not used deliberately as metaphors. Whether the clash between one deliberate and one non-deliberate metaphor can elicit the experience of mixed metaphor is an in-between case that is also discussed. The gist of the paper is, then, that research on mixed metaphor needs to take into account the variable communicative status of each of the presumably clashing metaphors, making a distinction between their deliberate or non-deliberate use as metaphors. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.07mac 133 154 22 Article 11 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 7. When languages and cultures meet</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Mixed metaphors in the discourse of Spanish speakers of English</Subtitle> 1 A01 Fiona MacArthur MacArthur, Fiona Fiona MacArthur Universidad de Extremadura 01 This chapter examines the metaphors used by speakers of English as a second language (L2), showing how these are often the result of the mixing of two linguistic and conceptual systems. The resulting &#8220;hybrid&#8221; metaphors may be unconventional in English and therefore seen as problems in need of remedy. However, the concept of native speaker norms as a model for metaphor production may be unrealistic as a goal for learners. As this chapter shows, hybrid metaphors are an almost inevitable outcome of language contact, and emerge in the speech and writing of even highly proficient users of English as a L2. I illustrate the type of hybrid metaphors that learners produce, and how communicatively successful they may be in different contexts, suggesting that proposed remedies for infelicitous metaphor use by L2 users of English can most usefully be framed from the perspective of discourse. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.08cha 155 176 22 Article 12 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 8. The &#8216;dull roar&#8217; and the &#8216;burning barbed wire pantyhose&#8217;</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Complex metaphor in accounts of chronic pain</Subtitle> 1 A01 Jonathan Charteris-Black Charteris-Black, Jonathan Jonathan Charteris-Black University of West England 01 This chapter examines metaphors in a corpus of interviews with people experiencing chronic pain. An important communicative purpose for people experiencing chronic pain is to get others to acknowledge its reality and I suggest that the mixing of metaphors contributes to the communication of pain. Where the rhetorical purpose is to communicate a means of gaining control over pain such as therapy or medication, speakers tend to use repeated metaphors or elaborate and extended metaphors based on some type of conceptual blending. Metaphor mixing occurs where the speaker&#8217;s purpose is to emphasise the intensity of the embodied experience by representing the pain as <i>out of control</i>. The greater the semantic divergence of metaphor source domains, the more intense the embodied experience of pain, and the greater the agency of the pain rather than the speaker. Conversely, when a speaker is discussing aspects of pain that <i>can be controlled</i> &#8211; as when using medication or in therapy &#8211; he or she uses metaphors that are more semantically convergent such as repeated or extended metaphors. Therefore the greater the semantic convergence of metaphor vehicles, the more the speaker represents him or herself as <i>in control of the pain</i>. The emergence of a metaphor theme through use of complex metaphors therefore enhances the credibility of the lived experience of chronic pain and shows metaphor use to be purposeful. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.s4 Section header 13 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part III. Effects of Mixing Metaphor</TitleText> 10 01 JB code milcc.6.09par 177 202 26 Article 14 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 9. We drink with our eyes first</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">The web of sensory perceptions, aesthetic experiences and mixed imagery in wine reviews</Subtitle> 1 A01 Carita Paradis Paradis, Carita Carita Paradis Lund University 2 A01 Charlotte Hommerberg Hommerberg, Charlotte Charlotte Hommerberg Linnaeus University 01 This chapter analyzes the language resources that writers have at their disposal to describe their experience of the web of sensory perceptions that are evoked in the wine tasting practice. The task of the writer is to provide a mental understanding of the sensations as well as a prehension of the experiences. We show that this involves the weaving together of the senses, starting with the sight of the wine, followed by a description that is iconic with the wine tasting procedure. The descriptors are systematically used cross-modally both through ontological crossovers and through longer stretches of mixed imagery<i>. </i>We also show how the socio-cultural context of wine consumption correlates with the types of imagery used in wine descriptions. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.10sem 203 222 20 Article 15 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 10. A corpus-based study of &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; as a metalinguistic comment</TitleText> 1 A01 Elena Semino Semino, Elena Elena Semino Lancaster University, UK 01 This chapter investigates the use of the expression &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; as a metalinguistic comment in the two-billion-word Oxford English Corpus. I consider the co-text of 141 occurrences of &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; in the corpus, in order to shed light on the kinds of uses of metaphors that writers opt to explicitly draw attention to as involving &#8216;mixing&#8217;. I show how folk understandings of &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; include phenomena that do not correspond to the technical use of the term in the specialist literature, and reflect on the implications of these findings for metaphor theory. Some attention is given to the use of the phrase &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; in different genres, the relevance of grammatical boundaries to perception of &#8216;mixing&#8217; between metaphors, and the possible pragmatic motivation for using &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; as a metalinguistic label. The study broadly confirms the prevailing view that the notion of &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; often involves a negative evaluation of a particular stretch of language and of the speaker/writer who produced it. However, in a substantial minority of cases, the phrase is used humorously to point out what are in fact creative, witty and highly effective uses of metaphor. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.11for 223 240 18 Article 16 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 11. Mixing in pictorial and multimodal metaphors&#63;</TitleText> 1 A01 Charles Forceville Forceville, Charles Charles Forceville University of Amsterdam 01 &#8220;Mixed metaphors&#8221; in language use two or more different source domains to predicate something about the same target domain in a short stretch of discourse. This often leads to unintendedly humorous results and is usually considered bad style. Given that metaphors may be expressed pictorially or multimodally as well as verbally, one may ask whether non-verbal modalities can also give rise to metaphors of the &#8220;mixed&#8221; kind. If so, would such instances be considered odd, humorous, or stylistically awkward&#63; And what, if anything, would make such &#8220;mixed metaphors&#8221; different from metaphoric blends with three input spaces (one target and two sources)&#63; The provisional conclusion is: we should, for the time being, not adopt &#8220;mixed pictorial/multimodal metaphor&#8221; as a technical term; but the discussion provides leads for further research from which both metaphor theory and multimodal discourse analysis will benefit. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.12nac 241 266 26 Article 17 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 12. Extended metaphor in the web of discourse</TitleText> 1 A01 Anita Naciscione Naciscione, Anita Anita Naciscione Latvian Academy of Culture 01 This chapter explores extended metaphor in the cognitive stylistic framework. Extended metaphor defines as an entrenched stylistic pattern of both thought and language, reflecting extended figurative thought. It is a cognitive inference tool, applicable in new figurative thought instantiations. A metaphor can be extended only by extension of its metaphorical image: by creating a metaphorical subimage or a string of sub-images, which relate metonymically by associations of contiguity. Metonymy is invariably present in each instantiation of metaphorical extension. Thus, extended metaphor is &#8220;mixed&#8221; by definition.Metaphor is not alone in figurative meaning construction. Apart from metonymy, extended metaphor may incorporate other figurative modes (pun, allusion, personification, euphemism, hyperbole, irony), forming figurative networks and representing a process and a result of human thought and a conceptualisation of experience. Only a detailed semantic and stylistic analysis will reveal the interaction and interrelationships of direct and figurative meanings in the web of discourse, which is not a &#8220;mix&#8221; but a natural flow of figurative thought in natural discourse. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.13ind 267 270 4 Article 18 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Index</TitleText> 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20160318 2016 John Benjamins B.V. 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027202109 01 JB 3 John Benjamins e-Platform 03 jbe-platform.com 09 WORLD 21 01 00 90.00 EUR R 01 00 76.00 GBP Z 01 gen 00 135.00 USD S 59016541 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code MiLCC 6 Hb 15 9789027202109 13 2015043290 BB 01 MiLCC 02 2210-4836 Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Mixing Metaphor</TitleText> 01 milcc.6 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/milcc.6 1 B01 Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W. Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. University of California, Santa Cruz 01 eng 283 xiv 269 LAN009000 v.2006 CFK 2 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.COGN Cognition and language 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.COGPSY Cognitive linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 06 01 Mixing metaphors in speech, writing, and even gesture, is traditionally viewed as a sign of inconsistency in thought and language. Despite the prominence of mixed metaphors, there have been surprisingly few attempts to comprehensively explain why people mix their metaphors so frequently and in the particular ways they do. This volume brings together a distinguished group of linguists, psychologists and computer scientists, who tackle the issue of how and why mixed metaphors arise and what communicative purposes they may serve. These scholars, almost unanimously, argue that mixing metaphors is a natural consequence of common metaphorical thought processes, highlighting important complexities of the metaphorical mind. <i>Mixing Metaphor</i>, for the first time, offers new, critical empirical and theoretical insights on a topic that has long been ignored within interdisciplinary metaphor studies. 05 Overall, we found the engaging and thought-provoking book has provided a plethora of fertile starting points for future research in this emergent interdisciplinary area of metaphor studies. It has remarkably input food for thought to prompt and facilitate new tasks and discussions on mixed metaphors that otherwise would have remained blurred and indistinct and opened an inviting and intriguing pathway for dominant but often bombarded CMT as an outlet. Yi Sun and Yang Bai, Xi’an International Studies University, in Review of Cognitive Linguistics 16:1 (2018) 05 <i>Mixing Metaphor</i> is a compilation of 12 chapters by prominent researchers, introduced by Raymond Gibbs, one of the main actors in the field of metaphor studies. It is a highly timely contribution that fills a gap between the pre-theoretical notion of ‘mixed metaphors’, largely known to the (English-speaking) public as something to be avoided as it reflects poor style or even sloppy thinking, and scholarly research on metaphor, where the topic has received little attention. Jordan Zlatev and Georgios Stampoulidis, Lund University, in Metaphor and the Social World Vol. 8:2 (2018) 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/milcc.6.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027202109.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027202109.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/milcc.6.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/milcc.6.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/milcc.6.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/milcc.6.hb.png 10 01 JB code milcc.6.s1 Section header 1 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Introduction</TitleText> 10 01 JB code milcc.6.001int vii xiv 8 Article 2 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Introduction</TitleText> 1 A01 Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W. Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. University of California 10 01 JB code milcc.6.s2 Section header 3 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part I. Is Mixed Metaphor a Problem?</TitleText> 10 01 JB code milcc.6.01kov 1 16 16 Article 4 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 1. A view of &#8220;mixed metaphor&#8221; within a conceptual metaphor theory framework</TitleText> 1 A01 Zoltán Kövecses Kövecses, Zoltán Zoltán Kövecses Eötvös Loránd University 01 How does conceptual metaphor theory handle mixed metaphors&#63; Several metaphor scholars argue that mixed metaphor is a phenomenon that conceptual metaphor theory cannot handle. Their argument is that, given the claims of conceptual metaphor theory, mixed metaphors should not occur at all. This is because once a conceptual metaphor is activated in discourse by means of a linguistic metaphor, that conceptual metaphor should lead to and support the use of further linguistic examples of the same conceptual metaphor. However, in real discourse, the argument goes, most metaphors are mixed, which indicates that conceptual metaphors are not activated and thus do not lead to further consistent linguistic metaphors of the same conceptual metaphor. In the paper, I will argue that the idea of the production of consistent and homogeneous linguistic examples does not necessarily follow from conceptual metaphor theory and that, as a matter of fact, the opposite is the case: given conceptual metaphor theory, we should expect the use of mixed metaphors in natural discourse. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.02cam 17 30 14 Article 5 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 2. Mixed metaphors from a discourse dynamics perspective</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">A non-issue&#63;</Subtitle> 1 A01 Lynne Cameron Cameron, Lynne Lynne Cameron The Open University 01 The &#8216;mixed metaphor problem&#8217; is considered from the discourse dynamics perspective, examining instances from metaphor clusters in dialogue and interaction. Several types of multiple juxtaposed verbal metaphors are found but they rarely demonstrate the semantic dissonance or stylistic undesirability held characteristic of problematic mixed metaphors. Multiple verbal metaphors are not stylistically-tricky additions to the flow of talk but are constitutive of it, discursive resources that contribute to the flow of jointly-constructed meaning. Multiple metaphors are shown to result from and find coherence in: shifting discourse topics; anaphoric reference and lexico-conceptual pacts; being combined in coherent metaphorical scenarios; layering of conventionalised and systematic metaphors.The second part of the chapter demonstrates how multiple metaphors were selected and combined to form the basis of the new model of empathy~dyspathy dynamics in social science research, and reflects on the inevitability of mixing metaphors. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.03mul 31 56 26 Article 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 3. Why mixed metaphors make sense</TitleText> 1 A01 Cornelia Müller Müller, Cornelia Cornelia Müller European University Viadrina 01 This paper explores why speakers and addressees seem to have no problem in making sense of mixed metaphors. We will argue that the mixing of metaphors reveals something about the nature of conventionalized metaphoric meaning that is as interesting for cognitive linguists as speech errors are for psycholinguists. First, it shows that so-called dead metaphors are alive for speakers, second it reveals that people deal creatively with all the meaning facets of metaphoric meaning &#8211; including the uncommon ones, and third we will argue that the mixing of metaphors can be explained by assuming a dynamic view on metaphoric meaning making. This view suggests that rather than being static and fixed, metaphoric meaning is the product of a process of cognitively activating selected facets of source and target, or vehicle and tenor. As a consequence the mixing of metaphors is considered a result of a shifting focus of attention, or of dynamically foregrounding facets of meaning that are backgrounded in the common reading. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.04lon 57 72 16 Article 7 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 4. Tackling mixed metaphors in discourse</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">New corpus and psychological evidence</Subtitle> 1 A01 Julia E. Lonergan Lonergan, Julia E. Julia E. Lonergan University of California 2 A01 Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W. Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr. University of California 01 We offer an analysis of a small corpus of mixed metaphor excerpts taken from &#8220;The New Yorker&#8221; magazine&#8217;s column titled &#8220;Block That Metaphor&#33;&#8221; (BTM). Our aim was to explore the main hypothesis that people interpret mixed metaphors as being meaningful and coherent because of their abilities to engage in elaborate reasoning about the source domains explicitly mentioned in these texts. A first study investigated the different individual metaphorical expressions in this series of mixed metaphorical narratives. We found that most of these have been employed, and conveyed metaphorical meanings, in other kinds of discourse, and that the metaphors within the BTM vignettes were, indeed, mixed, and done so in a variety of ways. A second study asked university students to write out their interpretations of the different phrases in these excerpts, one-by-one as they read through each vignette. Analysis of participants&#8217; protocols showed tremendous consistency in how people understood the individual metaphors and that the mixed metaphors in these narratives made good sense. The specificity of people&#8217;s understandings of verbal metaphors in narratives is aided by their rich social and cultural knowledge of the source domains referred to explicitly in language. Even if the underlying conceptual metaphors for these verbal metaphors appear to clash, people make use of their elaborate source domain information to create specific concepts and images that often make mixed metaphors perfectly coherent and, at times, delightful to hear and read. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.s3 Section header 8 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part II. Reasons for Mixing Metaphor</TitleText> 10 01 JB code milcc.6.05bar 73 112 40 Article 9 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 5. Mixed metaphor</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Its depth, its breadth, and a pretence-based approach</Subtitle> 1 A01 John Barnden Barnden, John John Barnden University of Birmingham, UK 01 The article sketches how a particular approach to metaphor, the ATT-Meta approach, which has been partially realized in an implemented AI program, copes with various types of mixing. Mixing here is broadly construed as including felicitous compounding, not only infelicitous mixes such as when there are unintended comical effects. The structures of mixing considered included chaining (called here serial mixing), parallel mixing (e.g., when different metaphorical views are brought to bear on the target of the metaphor), and combinations of serial and parallel mixing. ATT-Meta has specific technical advantages as regards mixing. These include (i) a focus on individual mappings as opposed to packages of mappings such as conceptual metaphors, (ii) the use of generic mappings called view-neutral mapping adjuncts, which are not specific to particular metaphorical views and cope with certain core types of information that are commonly manipulated in metaphor, and (iii) the construal of mappings as going from pretence spaces (fictional spaces) to surrounding reasoning spaces as opposed to going from one domain to another. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.06ste 113 132 20 Article 10 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 6. Mixed metaphor is a question of deliberateness</TitleText> 1 A01 Gerard J. Steen Steen, Gerard J. Gerard J. Steen University of Amsterdam 01 This paper aims to explore the interaction between mixed metaphor and deliberateness in order to throw some new light on the nature of mixed metaphor. The basic claim is that the typical or strongest experience of mixed metaphor arises when two metaphors conflict that are both used deliberately as metaphors. It is likely that all other cases of conceptual clashes between adjacent metaphors do not get recognized as mixed metaphor because their components are not used deliberately as metaphors. Whether the clash between one deliberate and one non-deliberate metaphor can elicit the experience of mixed metaphor is an in-between case that is also discussed. The gist of the paper is, then, that research on mixed metaphor needs to take into account the variable communicative status of each of the presumably clashing metaphors, making a distinction between their deliberate or non-deliberate use as metaphors. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.07mac 133 154 22 Article 11 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 7. When languages and cultures meet</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Mixed metaphors in the discourse of Spanish speakers of English</Subtitle> 1 A01 Fiona MacArthur MacArthur, Fiona Fiona MacArthur Universidad de Extremadura 01 This chapter examines the metaphors used by speakers of English as a second language (L2), showing how these are often the result of the mixing of two linguistic and conceptual systems. The resulting &#8220;hybrid&#8221; metaphors may be unconventional in English and therefore seen as problems in need of remedy. However, the concept of native speaker norms as a model for metaphor production may be unrealistic as a goal for learners. As this chapter shows, hybrid metaphors are an almost inevitable outcome of language contact, and emerge in the speech and writing of even highly proficient users of English as a L2. I illustrate the type of hybrid metaphors that learners produce, and how communicatively successful they may be in different contexts, suggesting that proposed remedies for infelicitous metaphor use by L2 users of English can most usefully be framed from the perspective of discourse. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.08cha 155 176 22 Article 12 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 8. The &#8216;dull roar&#8217; and the &#8216;burning barbed wire pantyhose&#8217;</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Complex metaphor in accounts of chronic pain</Subtitle> 1 A01 Jonathan Charteris-Black Charteris-Black, Jonathan Jonathan Charteris-Black University of West England 01 This chapter examines metaphors in a corpus of interviews with people experiencing chronic pain. An important communicative purpose for people experiencing chronic pain is to get others to acknowledge its reality and I suggest that the mixing of metaphors contributes to the communication of pain. Where the rhetorical purpose is to communicate a means of gaining control over pain such as therapy or medication, speakers tend to use repeated metaphors or elaborate and extended metaphors based on some type of conceptual blending. Metaphor mixing occurs where the speaker&#8217;s purpose is to emphasise the intensity of the embodied experience by representing the pain as <i>out of control</i>. The greater the semantic divergence of metaphor source domains, the more intense the embodied experience of pain, and the greater the agency of the pain rather than the speaker. Conversely, when a speaker is discussing aspects of pain that <i>can be controlled</i> &#8211; as when using medication or in therapy &#8211; he or she uses metaphors that are more semantically convergent such as repeated or extended metaphors. Therefore the greater the semantic convergence of metaphor vehicles, the more the speaker represents him or herself as <i>in control of the pain</i>. The emergence of a metaphor theme through use of complex metaphors therefore enhances the credibility of the lived experience of chronic pain and shows metaphor use to be purposeful. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.s4 Section header 13 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part III. Effects of Mixing Metaphor</TitleText> 10 01 JB code milcc.6.09par 177 202 26 Article 14 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 9. We drink with our eyes first</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">The web of sensory perceptions, aesthetic experiences and mixed imagery in wine reviews</Subtitle> 1 A01 Carita Paradis Paradis, Carita Carita Paradis Lund University 2 A01 Charlotte Hommerberg Hommerberg, Charlotte Charlotte Hommerberg Linnaeus University 01 This chapter analyzes the language resources that writers have at their disposal to describe their experience of the web of sensory perceptions that are evoked in the wine tasting practice. The task of the writer is to provide a mental understanding of the sensations as well as a prehension of the experiences. We show that this involves the weaving together of the senses, starting with the sight of the wine, followed by a description that is iconic with the wine tasting procedure. The descriptors are systematically used cross-modally both through ontological crossovers and through longer stretches of mixed imagery<i>. </i>We also show how the socio-cultural context of wine consumption correlates with the types of imagery used in wine descriptions. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.10sem 203 222 20 Article 15 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 10. A corpus-based study of &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; as a metalinguistic comment</TitleText> 1 A01 Elena Semino Semino, Elena Elena Semino Lancaster University, UK 01 This chapter investigates the use of the expression &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; as a metalinguistic comment in the two-billion-word Oxford English Corpus. I consider the co-text of 141 occurrences of &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; in the corpus, in order to shed light on the kinds of uses of metaphors that writers opt to explicitly draw attention to as involving &#8216;mixing&#8217;. I show how folk understandings of &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; include phenomena that do not correspond to the technical use of the term in the specialist literature, and reflect on the implications of these findings for metaphor theory. Some attention is given to the use of the phrase &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; in different genres, the relevance of grammatical boundaries to perception of &#8216;mixing&#8217; between metaphors, and the possible pragmatic motivation for using &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; as a metalinguistic label. The study broadly confirms the prevailing view that the notion of &#8216;mixed metaphor&#8217; often involves a negative evaluation of a particular stretch of language and of the speaker/writer who produced it. However, in a substantial minority of cases, the phrase is used humorously to point out what are in fact creative, witty and highly effective uses of metaphor. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.11for 223 240 18 Article 16 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 11. Mixing in pictorial and multimodal metaphors&#63;</TitleText> 1 A01 Charles Forceville Forceville, Charles Charles Forceville University of Amsterdam 01 &#8220;Mixed metaphors&#8221; in language use two or more different source domains to predicate something about the same target domain in a short stretch of discourse. This often leads to unintendedly humorous results and is usually considered bad style. Given that metaphors may be expressed pictorially or multimodally as well as verbally, one may ask whether non-verbal modalities can also give rise to metaphors of the &#8220;mixed&#8221; kind. If so, would such instances be considered odd, humorous, or stylistically awkward&#63; And what, if anything, would make such &#8220;mixed metaphors&#8221; different from metaphoric blends with three input spaces (one target and two sources)&#63; The provisional conclusion is: we should, for the time being, not adopt &#8220;mixed pictorial/multimodal metaphor&#8221; as a technical term; but the discussion provides leads for further research from which both metaphor theory and multimodal discourse analysis will benefit. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.12nac 241 266 26 Article 17 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Chapter 12. Extended metaphor in the web of discourse</TitleText> 1 A01 Anita Naciscione Naciscione, Anita Anita Naciscione Latvian Academy of Culture 01 This chapter explores extended metaphor in the cognitive stylistic framework. Extended metaphor defines as an entrenched stylistic pattern of both thought and language, reflecting extended figurative thought. It is a cognitive inference tool, applicable in new figurative thought instantiations. A metaphor can be extended only by extension of its metaphorical image: by creating a metaphorical subimage or a string of sub-images, which relate metonymically by associations of contiguity. Metonymy is invariably present in each instantiation of metaphorical extension. Thus, extended metaphor is &#8220;mixed&#8221; by definition.Metaphor is not alone in figurative meaning construction. Apart from metonymy, extended metaphor may incorporate other figurative modes (pun, allusion, personification, euphemism, hyperbole, irony), forming figurative networks and representing a process and a result of human thought and a conceptualisation of experience. Only a detailed semantic and stylistic analysis will reveal the interaction and interrelationships of direct and figurative meanings in the web of discourse, which is not a &#8220;mix&#8221; but a natural flow of figurative thought in natural discourse. 10 01 JB code milcc.6.13ind 267 270 4 Article 18 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Index</TitleText> 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20160318 2016 John Benjamins B.V. 02 WORLD 08 655 gr 01 JB 1 John Benjamins Publishing Company +31 20 6304747 +31 20 6739773 bookorder@benjamins.nl 01 https://benjamins.com 01 WORLD US CA MX 21 14 22 01 02 JB 1 00 90.00 EUR R 02 02 JB 1 00 95.40 EUR R 01 JB 10 bebc +44 1202 712 934 +44 1202 712 913 sales@bebc.co.uk 03 GB 21 22 02 02 JB 1 00 76.00 GBP Z 01 JB 2 John Benjamins North America +1 800 562-5666 +1 703 661-1501 benjamins@presswarehouse.com 01 https://benjamins.com 01 US CA MX 21 1 22 01 gen 02 JB 1 00 135.00 USD