Volume 3, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


While Deliberate Metaphor Theory is controversial from a psychological point of view, its advocates propose that the communicative notion of ‘deliberateness’ is valuable for structural-functional analyses of metaphors in the social world. Nevertheless, the inter-relationships between the linguistic, conceptual, and communicative dimensions of metaphor highlighted by Deliberate Metaphor Theory, and how these may vary across different discourse contexts, remains underexplored. This paper examines deliberate metaphor across four contrasting discourse categories of psychotherapy talk, news articles, popular science articles, and political speeches. 800 metaphor units were randomly sampled and coded under the variables DIRECT (direct/indirect), NOVEL (novel/conventional), DELIB (deliberate/non-deliberate), and CATEGORY. In the first part of the study, a hierarchical log-linear analysis identified three significant interaction effects: DELIB*DIRECT, CATEGORY*NOVEL*DIRECT, and CATEGORY *NOVEL*DELIB (χ2(7) = 0.0,  = 1). While generally reflecting the inter-relatedness of the three dimensions, the three-way interactions point towards underexplored patterns of variation which are discussed with respect to contrasting discourse objectives. In the second part of the study, six categories of deliberate metaphor features were inductively identified: elaboration, signal, analogy, stark novelty, topic-triggering, and repetition. They demonstrate diverse strategic ways in which ‘deliberateness’ is constructed across the four discourse categories.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Altman, D
    (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Beger, A
    (2011) Deliberate metaphors? An exploration of the choice and functions of metaphors in US-American college lectures. Metaphorikde, 20, 39–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Biber, D. , & Conrad, S
    (2009) Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511814358
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511814358 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bowdle, B.F. , & Gentner, D
    (2005) The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 112(1), 193–216. Journal Article. doi: 10.1037/0033−295X.112.1.193
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033−295X.112.1.193 [Google Scholar]
  5. Cameron, L
    (2003) Metaphor in educational discourse. Book, London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cameron, L. , & Maslen, R
    (Eds.) (2010) Metaphor analysis. London: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Charteris-Black, J
    (2004) Corpus approaches to aritical metaphor analysis. Book, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230000612
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230000612 [Google Scholar]
  8. Christidou, V. , Dimopoulos, K. , & Koulaidis, V
    (2004) Constructing social representations of science and technology: The role of metaphors in the press and the popular scientific magazines. Public Understanding of Science, 13(4), 347–362. doi: 10.1177/0963662504044108
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662504044108 [Google Scholar]
  9. Deignan, A
    (2011) Deliberateness is not unique to metaphor. A response to Gibbs. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(1), 57–60. doi: 10.1075/msw.1.1.05dei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.1.1.05dei [Google Scholar]
  10. Duit, R
    (1991) On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75(6), 649–672. doi: 10.1002/sce.3730750606
    https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730750606 [Google Scholar]
  11. El Refaie, E
    (2001) Metaphors we discriminate by : Naturalized themes in Austrian newspaper articles about asylum seekers. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(3), 352–371. doi: 10.1111/1467−9481.00154
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467−9481.00154 [Google Scholar]
  12. Fairclough, N
    (2000) New labour new language?New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Gentner, D. , & Bowdle, B.F
    (2001) Convention, form, and figurative language processing. Metaphor & Symbol, 16, 223–247. doi: 10.1207/S15327868MS1603&4_6
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1603&4_6 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gibbs, R.W
    (2011) Are “deliberate” metaphors really deliberate?: A question of human consciousness and action. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(1), 26–52. doi: 10.1075/msw.1.1.03gib
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.1.1.03gib [Google Scholar]
  15. (2015) Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future?Journal of Pragmatics, 1–4. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.016 [Google Scholar]
  16. Goatly, A
    (1997) The language of metaphors. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203210000
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203210000 [Google Scholar]
  17. Guerini, M. , Strapparava, C. , & Stock, O
    (2008) CORPS: A corpus of tagged political speeches for persuasive communication processing. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 5(1), 19–32. doi: 10.1080/19331680802149616
    https://doi.org/10.1080/19331680802149616 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gumperz, J.J
    (1982) Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511611834
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kennedy, V
    (2000) Metaphors in the news - Introduction. Metaphor and Symbol, 15(4), 209–211. doi: 10.1207/S15327868MS1504
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1504 [Google Scholar]
  20. Koller, V
    (2004a) Businesswomen and war metaphors: “Possessive, jealous and pugnacious”?Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8(1), 3–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1467−9841.2004.00249.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467−9841.2004.00249.x [Google Scholar]
  21. (2004b) Metaphor and gender in business media discourse: A critical cognitive study. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230511286
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511286 [Google Scholar]
  22. Krennmayr, T
    (2014) What corpus linguistics can tell us about metaphor use In newspaper texts. Journalism Studies, (August), 1–17. doi: 10.1080/1461670X.2014.937155
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2014.937155 [Google Scholar]
  23. Lakoff, G
    (1993) The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp.202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013 [Google Scholar]
  24. McMullen, L.M
    (1996) Studying the use of figurative language in psychotherapy: The search for researchable questions. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 11(4), 241–255. Journal Article. doi: 10.1207/s15327868ms1104_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1104_1 [Google Scholar]
  25. Müller, C
    (2011) Are “deliberate” metaphors really special? Deliberateness in the light of metaphor activation. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(1), 61–66. doi: 10.1075/msw.1.1.06mul
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.1.1.06mul [Google Scholar]
  26. Musolff, A
    (2006) Metaphor scenarios in public discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 21(1), 23–28. doi: 10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2 [Google Scholar]
  27. Pragglejaz Group
    (2007) MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39. doi: 10.1207/s15327868ms2201_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2201_1 [Google Scholar]
  28. Rundell, M
    (Ed.) (2008) Macmillan English dictionary for advanced learners (2nd ed.). Oxford: Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Semino, E
    (2008) Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Steen, G
    (2008a) The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 23(4), 213–241. doi: 10.1080/10926480802426753
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480802426753 [Google Scholar]
  31. (2008b) When is metaphor deliberate?InProceedings of Second Metaphor Festival. Stockholm.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. (2011a) The contemporary theory of metaphor - now new and improved!Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 26–64. doi: 10.1075/rcl.9.1.03ste
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.9.1.03ste [Google Scholar]
  33. (2011b) What does “really deliberate” really mean?Metaphor and the Social World, 1(1), 53–56. doi: 10.1075/msw.1.1.04ste
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.1.1.04ste [Google Scholar]
  34. (2015) Developing, testing and interpreting deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013 [Google Scholar]
  35. Steen, G. , Dorst, A. , Herrmann, J.B. , Anna A, K. , & Krennmayr, T
    (2010) Metaphor in usage. Cognitive Linguistics, 4(4), 765–796. doi: 10.1515/COGL.2010.024
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COGL.2010.024 [Google Scholar]
  36. Steen, G. , Krennmayr, T. , Dorst, A.G. , & Herrmann, J.B
    (2010) A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/celcr.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 [Google Scholar]
  37. Tay, D. , & Jordan, J
    (2015) Metaphor and the notion of control in trauma talk. Text & Talk, 35(4), 553–573. doi: 10.1515/text−2015−0009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text−2015−0009 [Google Scholar]
  38. Wee, L
    (2005b) Constructing the source: Metaphor as a discourse strategy. Discourse Studies, 7(3), 363–384. doi: 10.1177/1461445605052191
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605052191 [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): deliberate metaphor; log-linear analysis; metaphor variation
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error