Article published in:
Metaphor and the Social World
Vol. 9:1 (2019) ► pp. 107130
References

References

Bowdle, B. F., & Gentner, D.
(2005) The career of metaphor. Psychological Review 112(1), 193–216. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, J.
(2004) Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Committee Stage (Commons)
De Landtsheer, C.
(2015) Media rhetoric plays the market: The logic and power of metaphors behind the financial crisis since 2006. Metaphor and the Social World, 5(2), 204–221.Google Scholar
Doury, M.
(2009) Argument schemes typologies in practice: The case of comparative arguments. In F. H. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (Eds.), Pondering on problems of argumentation (pp. 141–155). Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, F. H. van
(2010) Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse: Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, F. H. van & Garssen, B.
(2014) Analogie-argumentatie in stereotiepe argumentatieve patronen. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing 36(1), 31–50. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, F. H. van, & Grootendorst, R.
(1984) Speech acts in argumentative discussions: A theoretical model for the analysis of discussions directed towards solving conflicts of opinion. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 128 ]
(1992) Argumentation, communication and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2004) A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eemeren, F. H. van, Grootendorst, R., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F.
(2002) Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, presentation. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Eemeren, F. H. van, Houtlosser, P., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F.
(2007) Argumentative indicators in discourse: A pragma-dialectical study. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fahnestock, J.
(2011) Rhetorical style: The uses of language in persuasion. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garssen, B., & Kienpointner, M.
(2011) Figurative analogies in political argumentation. In E. Feteris, G. Garssen & A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Keeping in touch with pragma-dialectics: In honor of Frans H. van Eemeren (pp. 39–58). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D., & Bowdle, B. F.
(2001) Convention, form, and figurative language processing. Metaphor & Symbol, 16(3), 223–247. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goatly, A.
(2007) Washing the brain: Metaphor and ideology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hansard (Official Report)
Ihnen Jory, C.
(2012) Pragmatic argumentation in law-making debates. Instruments for the analysis and evaluation of pragmatic argumentation at the Second Reading of the British Parliament (Doctoral dissertation). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.Google Scholar
Juthe, L. J.
(2005) Argument by analogy. Argumentation, 19(1), 1–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016) Argumentation by analogy: A systematic analytical study of an argument scheme. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z.
(2010) Metaphor: A practical introduction (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
(1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Landau, M. J., Keefer, L. A., & Swanson, T. J.
(2017) “Undoing” a rhetorical metaphor: Testing the metaphor extension strategy. Metaphor & Symbol, 32(2), 63–83. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Macmillan English Dictionary Online
Musolff, A.
(2004) Metaphor and political discourse: Analogical reasoning in debates about Europe. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L.
(2003) The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. (J. Wilkinson & P. Weaver, Trans.). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
Reijnierse, W. G., Burgers, C., Krennmayr, T., & Steen, G. J.
(2018) DMIP: A method for identifying potentially deliberate metaphor in language use. Corpus Pragmatics, 2(2), 129–147. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Semino, E.
(2008) Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Steen, G. J.
(2008) The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor & Symbol, 23(4), 213–241. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) The contemporary theory of metaphor – now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 26–64. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 129 ]
(2013) Deliberate metaphor affords conscious metaphorical cognition. Journal of Cognitive Semiotics, 5(1–2), 179–197.Google Scholar
(2017) Attention to metaphor: Where embodied cognition and social interaction can meet, but may not often do so. In B. Hampe (Ed.), Embodied cognition and multimodal discourse (pp. 279–296). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 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
Thompson, L.
(2013) More of the same or a period of change? The impact of bill committees in the twenty-first century House of Commons. Parliamentary Affairs, 66(3), 459–479. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Turpin, C., & Tomkins, A.
(2011) British government and the constitution (7th ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weitzenfeld, J. S.
(1984) Valid reasoning by analogy. Philosophy of Science, 51(1), 137–149. Crossref[ p. 130 ]Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Hart, Christopher
2021. Animals vs. armies. Journal of Language and Politics 20:2  pp. 226 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 august 2021. 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.