Article published In:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Online-First ArticlesConventional metaphors in English as a lingua franca
An analysis of speech metaphors in three academic seminars
In the present article, I study the language used in three English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) digital
marketing seminars, in which the tutor and other participants gave feedback about the ‘pitches’, (i.e., short marketing speeches),
presented by students in the same session. As this activity involved making reference to what students said in their ‘pitches’,
the seminars provide ample evidence for the metaphorical construction of speech activity by the participants in the
seminars. The analysis shows that these ELF speakers mostly adopted pre-existing and conventionalised metaphorical models used in
English and that they do not attempt to incorporate other source domains, except for one, which I have labelled
storytelling, as it associates pitch delivery with telling a story. However, at the level of linguistic metaphors
used, greater use of unconventional metaphors can be found, although mostly adapted to and consistent with the conceptual models
identified. In general terms, metaphor innovation in this English as a Lingua Franca context seems to be ‘norm following’ rather
than ‘norm transcending’.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Metaphor in ELF
- 3. speech metaphors
- 4.Methodology
- Data and tools
- Participants
- 5.Results
- 5.1Metaphorical vs non-metaphorical speech
- a. Speech or pitch
- b.Non-metaphorical speech
- c.Metaphorical speech
- 5.2Main metaphorical source domains used in speech representation
- a.Source and path of motion: Thematic initiation and progression
- b.Goal of motion: Successful pitch
- c.Combining motion and containment: Amount of information in the pitch
- d.Visual metaphors: Main ideas
- e.Reification and physical construction: Speech planning
- f.Transfer: The audience
- g.Storytelling or drama: Enacting the pitch
- 5.1Metaphorical vs non-metaphorical speech
- 6.Conclusion
- Notes
-
References
Published online: 14 December 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00168.ale
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00168.ale
References (51)
Alejo-González, R., Piquer-Píriz, A. M., Castellano-Risco, I., Martín-Gilete, M., Fielden-Burns, L., MacArthur, F., Nacey, S., Philip, G., Krennmayr, T., Coelho, M., Littlemore, J., & Ädel, A. (2021). The
MetCLIL corpus. v1. [URL]
Alejo-González, R. (2024). Metaphor
and corpus linguistics: Building and investigating an English as a medium of instruction
corpus. Routledge.
Belinsky, S., & Gogan, B. (2016). Throwing
a change-up, pitching a strike: An autoethnography of frame acquisition, application, and fit in a pitch development and
delivery experience. IEEE Transactions on Professional
Communication, 59(4), 323–341.
Bolognesi, M. (2017). Using
semantic feature norms to investigate how the visual and verbal modes afford metaphor construction and
expression. Language and
Cognition
9
(3), 525–552.
(2008). Metaphor
and talk. In R. W. Gibbs Jr. (Ed.), The
Cambridge handbook of metaphor and
thought (pp.197–211). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cogo, A. (2009). Accommodating
difference in ELF Conversations: A study of pragmatic
strategies. In A. Mauranen & E. Ranta, (Eds), English
as a lingua franca: Studies and
findings (pp. 254–273). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Daly, P., & Davy, D. (2016). Crafting
the investor pitch using insights from rhetoric and
linguistics. In G. M. Alessi & G. Jacobs (Eds.), The
ins and outs of business and professional discourse research. Communicating in professions and
organizations (pp. 182–203). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Danesi, M. (1990). Thinking
is seeing: Visual metaphors and the nature of abstract
thought. Semiotica,
80
(3–4), 221–238.
Denning, P. J. & Dew, N. (2012). The
myth of the elevator pitch. Communications of the
ACM, 55(6), 38–40.
Franceschi, V. (2013). Figurative
language and ELF: Idiomaticity in cross-cultural interaction in university settings. Journal of
English as a Lingua
Franca,
2
(1), 75–99.
(1998). The
“Conduit” metaphor revisited: A reassessment of metaphors for
communication. In J-P. Koenig (Ed.), Discourse
and cognition: Bridging the
gap (pp. 205–18). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Hall, C. J. (2018). Cognitive
perspectives on English as a lingua franca. In J. Jenkins, W. Baker & M. Dewey (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of English as a lingua
franca (pp. 74–84). Oxford & New York: Routledge.
Halliday, M. (1994). An
introduction to functional grammar (2nd
ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hampe, B. (Ed.). (2017). Metaphor:
Embodied cognition and discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Herrmann, J. B. (2013). Metaphor
in academic discourse: Linguistic forms, conceptual structures, communicative functions and cognitive
representations. Amsterdam, NL: LOT.
Johnson, M. (1987). The
body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination and
reason. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Kreutzer, K. (2022). On
the discursive construction of social entrepreneurship in pitch situations: The intertextual reproduction of business and
social discourse by presenters and their audience. Journal of Business
Ethics,
179
1, 1071–1090.
Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More
than cool reason. A field guide to poetic
metaphors. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
MacArthur, F. (2016). Overt
and covert uses of metaphor in the academic mentoring in English of Spanish undergraduate students at five European
universities. Review of Cognitive
Linguistics,
14
(1), 23–50.
(2020). Rock
bottoms, juggling balls and coalprints. In J. Barnden & A. Gargett (Eds.), Producing
figurative expression: Theoretical, experimental and practical
perspectives (pp. 331–361). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
MacArthur, F., & Littlemore, J. (2011). On
the repetition of word with the potential for metaphoric extension in conversation between native and non-native
speakers. Metaphor and the Social
World,
1
(2), 201–239.
MacArthur, F., Krennmayr, T., & Littlemore, J. (2015). How
basic is “UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING” when reasoning about knowledge? Asymmetirc uses of sight hours in office
hours consultations in English as academic lingua franca. Metaphor and
Symbol,
30
(3), 184–217.
Mauranen, A. (2012). Exploring
ELF. Academic English shaped by non-native
speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Morgan, W. R., & Wright, E. S. (2021). Ten
simple rules for hitting a home run with your elevator pitch. PLoS Computational
Biology,
17
(3).
Müller, C. (2008). Metaphors
dead and alive, sleeping and waking: A dynamic
view. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Nacey, S. (2013). Metaphor
in learner English. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Pitzl, M.-L. (2009). “We
should not wake up any dogs”: Idiom and metaphor in ELF. In A. Mauranen & E. Ranta (Eds), English
as a lingua franca: Studies and
findings (pp. 299–322). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
(2012). Creativity
meets convention: idiom variation and re-metaphorization in ELF. Journal of English as a lingua
franca,
1
(1), 27–55.
Pitzl, M-L. (2018). Creativity
in English as a lingua franca: Idiom and metaphor. Boston & Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Philip, G. (2017). Conventional
and novel metaphors in language. In E. Semino & Z. Demjén (Eds.). The
Routledge handbook of metaphor and
language (pp. 237–250). Oxfrod & New York: Routledge.
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A
method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and
Symbol,
22
(1), 1–39.
Prodromou, L. (2007). Kettles
of fish: Or, does unilateral idiomaticity exist? English
Today,
23
1, 34–39.
Reddy, M. J. (1979). The
conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about
language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor
and thought (2nd
edition) (pp. 164–201). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sabaj, O., Cabezas, P., Varas, G., González-Vergara, C., & Pina-Stranger, A. (2020). Empirical
literature on the business pitch: Classes, critiques and future trends. Journal of Technology
Management &
Innovation,
15
(1), 55–63.
Schmid, H. J. (2020). The
dynamics of the linguistic system: Usage, conventionalization, and
entrenchment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Seidlhofer, B. (2002). The
shape of things to come? Some basic questions about English as a lingua
franca. In K. Knapp & Ch. Meierkord (Eds.) Lingua
franca
communication (pp. 269–302). Frankfurt am Main, GE: Peter Lang.
Semino, E. (2005). The
metaphorical construction of complex domains: the case of speech activity in English. Metaphor
and
Symbol,
20
1, 35–70.
(2006). A
corpus-based study of metaphors for speech activity in contemporary British
English. In S. T. Gries & A. Stefanowitsch (Eds.), Corpus-based
approaches to metaphor and
metonymy (pp. 36–62). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Semino, E., Demjén, Z., Hardie, A., Payne, S., Rayson, P. (2018). Metaphor,
cancer and the end of life: A corpus-based study. New York & London: Routledge.
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 & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Stampoulidis, G., & Bolognesi, M. (2019). Bringing
metaphors back to the streets: A corpus-based study for the identification and interpretation of rhetorical figures in street
art. Visual
Communication,
18
(1), 9–32.
Sullivan, K. (2013). Frames
and constructions in metaphoric language. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Swales, J. M. (2001). Metatalk
in American academic talk: The cases of point and thing. Journal of English
linguistics,
29
(1), 34–54.
Sweetser, E. (1987). Metaphorical
models of thought and speech: A comparison of historical directions and metaphorical mappings in the two
domains. In J. Aske, N. Beery, L. Michaelis & H. Filip (Eds.), Proceedings
of the thirteenth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics
Society, (pp. 446–59). Berkeley, US: Berkeley Linguistics Society.