Review published in:
Metaphor in Education: A multilingual perspective
Edited by Katrin Ahlgren, Anne Golden and Ulrika Magnusson
[Metaphor and the Social World 11:2] 2021
► pp. 373381
References
Badryzlova, Y., Y. Isaeva, N. Shekhtman & R. Kerimov
(2013) Annotating a Russian corpus of conceptual metaphor: A bottom-up approach. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Metaphor in NLP (pp. 77–86), Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Biernacka, E.
(2013) A discourse dynamics investigation of metonymy in talk. (PhD thesis). The Open University, England, UK. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L.
(2003) Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Dancygier, B. & E. Sweetser
(2014) Figurative Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Di Biase-Dyson, C.
Erman, A. & H. Grapow
(1926–1963) Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache, 131 Volumes. Leipzig: Hinrichs.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R.
(2007) Why cognitive linguists should care more about empirical methods. In M. Gonzalez-Marquez, I. Mittelberg, S. Coulson & M. J. Spivey (Eds.), Methods in cognitive linguistics (pp. 2–18). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Sobrino, P.
(2014) Review of Steen et al. (2010) “A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification”. Metaphor and the Social World, 4(1), 138–146. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pragglejaz Group
(2007) MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T.
(2010) A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar