Volume 12, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2210-4070
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4097



This article extends the framework of metaphorical scenarios proposed by Musolff (20062016) by adding a gestural component. Coming out videos, serving as the source of data for the present analysis, help to uncover the conceptual mechanisms that shape the understanding and conceptualisation of this phenomenon. The extended framework of gestural metaphorical scenarios reveals that conceptual metaphors create cognitively and communicatively coherent wholes that are expressed multimodally, via speech and gesture. The article proposes that coming out, a highly individualised process, is conceptualised at various levels by both generic and specific metaphors. The analysis shows that metaphorical variation is present not only at the level of lexical scenarios, but also at the level of gesture, giving rise to multimodal discourse fragments. The extended framework, therefore, might be useful in analysing multimodal discourse.

Available under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.

Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. Beattie, G., & Sale, L.
    (2012) Do metaphoric gestures influence how a message is perceived? The effects of metaphoric gesture-speech matches and mismatches on semantic communication and social judgment. Semiotica 2012(192), 77–98. 10.1515/sem‑2012‑0067
    https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2012-0067 [Google Scholar]
  2. Brookes, H.
    (2005) What gestures do: Some communicative functions of quotable gestures in conversations among Black urban South Africans. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(12), 2044–2085. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.03.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.03.006 [Google Scholar]
  3. Calbris, G.
    (2008) From left to right…: Coverbal gestures and their symbolic use of space. InA. Cienki & C. Müller (Eds.), Gesture Studies, 3, 27–53. 10.1075/gs.3.05cal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.3.05cal [Google Scholar]
  4. (2011) Elements of meaning in gesture. John Benjamins. 10.1075/gs.5
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.5 [Google Scholar]
  5. Calero, C. I., Shalom, D. E., Spelke, E. S., & Sigman, M.
    (2019) Language, gesture, and judgment: Children’s paths to abstract geometry. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 177, 70–85. 10.1016/j.jecp.2018.07.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2018.07.015 [Google Scholar]
  6. Casasanto, D., & Jasmin, K.
    (2012) The hands of time: Temporal gestures in English speakers. Cognitive Linguistics, 23(4), 643–674. 10.1515/cog‑2012‑0020
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2012-0020 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chui, K.
    (2011) Conceptual metaphors in gesture. Cognitive Linguistics, 22(3), 437–458. 10.1515/cogl.2011.017
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2011.017 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cienki, A.
    (2008) Why study metaphor and gesture?InA. Cienki & C. Müller (Eds.), Gesture Studies3 (pp.5–25). John Benjamins. 10.1075/gs.3.04cie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.3.04cie [Google Scholar]
  9. (2013) Image schemas and mimetic schemas in cognitive linguistics and gesture studies. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 11(2), 417–432. 10.1075/rcl.11.2.13cie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.11.2.13cie [Google Scholar]
  10. (2016) Cognitive Linguistics, gesture studies, and multimodal communication. Cognitive Linguistics, 27(4), 603–618. 10.1515/cog‑2016‑0063
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0063 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cooperrider, K.
    (2017) Foreground gesture, background gesture. Gesture, 16(2), 176–202. 10.1075/gest.16.2.02coo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.16.2.02coo [Google Scholar]
  12. Fabiszak, M., & Olszewska, E.
    (2018) Axiological ambivalence of conceptual imagery in visual communication: Commemoration architecture and 3D art. Language, Mind, Culture and Society, 2, 104–131.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fillmore, C. J.
    (1975) An alternative to checklist theories of Meaning. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 123–131
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Forceville, C. J.
    (2009) Chapter 2. Non-verbal and multimodal metaphor in a cognitivist framework: Agendas for research. InC. J. Forceville, E. Urios-Aparisi, (Eds.), Applications of Cognitive Linguistics (pp.19–44). Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gibbs, R. W.
    (2019) Metaphor as dynamical–ecological performance. Metaphor and Symbol, 34(1), 33–44. 10.1080/10926488.2019.1591713
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2019.1591713 [Google Scholar]
  16. Halwani, R.
    (2002) Outing and virtue ethics. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 19(2), 141–154. 10.1111/1468‑5930.00211
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5930.00211 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hostetter, A. B.
    (2011) When do gestures communicate? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137(2), 297–315. 10.1037/a0022128
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022128 [Google Scholar]
  18. Jelec, A.
    (2019) Chapter 4. Are abstract concepts grounded in bodily mimesis?InM. Bolognesi & G. J. Steen (Eds.), Human Cognitive Processing (pp.75–99). John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.65.05jel
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.65.05jel [Google Scholar]
  19. Johnson, M.
    (2018) The aesthetics of meaning and thought: The bodily roots of philosophy, science, morality, and art. The University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226539133.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226539133.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  20. Kappelhoff, H., & Müller, C.
    (2011) Embodied meaning construction: Multimodal metaphor and expressive movement in speech, gesture, and feature film. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(2), 121–153. 10.1075/msw.1.2.02kap
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.1.2.02kap [Google Scholar]
  21. Kendon, A.
    (1992) Some recent work from Italy on ‘Quotable gestures (Emblems)’. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 2(1), 92–108. 10.1525/jlin.1992.2.1.92
    https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1992.2.1.92 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2004) Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511807572
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807572 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2009) Kinesic components of multimodal utterances. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 35(2), 36–53. 10.3765/bls.v35i2.3510
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v35i2.3510 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kimbara, I.
    (2008) Gesture form convergence in joint description. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 32(2), 123–131. 10.1007/s10919‑007‑0044‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-007-0044-4 [Google Scholar]
  25. Kövecses, Z.
    (2010) Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Ladewig, S. H., & Bressem, J.
    (2013) New insights into the medium hand: Discovering recurrent structures in gestures. Semiotica 2013(197), 203–231. 10.1515/sem‑2013‑0088
    https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2013-0088 [Google Scholar]
  27. Ladewig, Silva H.
    (2014) The cyclic gesture. InC. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill & J. Bressem (Eds.), Body-Language-Communication: An International Hand- book on Multimodality in Human Interaction. Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science (pp.1605–1618). Mouton De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Lakoff, G.
    (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. The University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  29. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
    (1999) Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. (1980) Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Lederer, J.
    (2015) Exploring the metaphorical models of transgenderism. Metaphor and Symbol, 30(2), 95–117. 10.1080/10926488.2015.1016809
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2015.1016809 [Google Scholar]
  32. Li, H.
    (2017) Time on hands: Deliberate and spontaneous temporal gestures by speakers of Mandarin. Gesture, 16(3), 396–415. 10.1075/gest.00002.li
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.00002.li [Google Scholar]
  33. Littlemore, J.
    (2003) The effect of cultural background on metaphor interpretation. Metaphor and Symbol, 18(4), 273–288. 10.1207/S15327868MS1804_4
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1804_4 [Google Scholar]
  34. (2019) Metaphors in the mind: Sources of variation in embodied metaphor. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108241441
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108241441 [Google Scholar]
  35. McNeill, D.
    (2005) Gesture and thought. University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  36. (2009) Gesture and communication. InJ. L. Mey (Ed.), Concise encyclopedia of pragmatics, Elsevier, 299–307.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. (2013) Gesture as a window onto mind and brain, and the relationship to linguistic relativity and ontogenesis. InC. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. Ladewig, D. McNeill & S. Tessendorf (Ed.), Boldy-Language-Communication: An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction. Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science. Mouton De Gruyter, 28–45. 10.1515/9783110261318.28
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261318.28 [Google Scholar]
  38. (2018) Recurrent gestures: How the mental reflects the social. Gesture, 17(2), 229–244. 10.1075/gest.18012.mcn
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.18012.mcn [Google Scholar]
  39. Mittelberg, I.
    (2019) Visuo-kinetic signs are inherently metonymic: How embodied metonymy motivates forms, functions, and schematic patterns in gesture. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 254, 1–18. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00254
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00254 [Google Scholar]
  40. (2017) Multimodal existential constructions in German: Manual actions of giving as experiential substrate for grammatical and gestural patterns. Linguistics Vanguard, 3(s1) 10.1515/lingvan‑2016‑0047
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0047 [Google Scholar]
  41. Molnar, I.
    (2018) A case study on coming out: Theoretical and practical implications for psychological counselling. Journal of Experimental Psychotherapy, 21(3), 51–59.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Müller, C.
    (2004) Forms and uses of the Palm Up Open Hand: A case of a gesture family?InC. Müller & R. Posner (Eds.), The Semantics and Pragmatics of Everyday Gestures (pp.233–256). Weidler.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Müller, C.
    (2008) Metaphors dead and alive, sleeping and waking: A dynamic view. The University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226548265.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226548265.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  44. Müller, C.
    (2017) How recurrent gestures mean: Conventionalized contexts-of-use and embodied motivation. Gesture, 16(2), 277–304. 10.1075/gest.16.2.05mul
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.16.2.05mul [Google Scholar]
  45. (2017) Waking metaphors: Embodied cognition in multimodal discourse. In: B. Hampe (Ed.), Metaphor (pp.297–316). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108182324.017
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182324.017 [Google Scholar]
  46. (2018) Gesture and sign: Cataclysmic break or dynamic relations?Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1651. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01651
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01651 [Google Scholar]
  47. Müller, C., & Tag, S.
    (2010) The dynamics of metaphor: Foregrounding and activating metaphoricity in conversational interaction. Cognitive Semiotics, 6, 85–120. 10.1515/cogsem.2010.6.spring2010.85
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem.2010.6.spring2010.85 [Google Scholar]
  48. Müller, C.
    (2013) Gestures as a medium of expression: The linguistic potential of gestures. InC. Müller, A. Cienki, & E. Fricke (Eds.), Body – Language – Communication. An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction (pp.201–217). Mouton De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110261318.202
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261318.202 [Google Scholar]
  49. Musolff, A.
    (2006) Metaphor scenarios in public discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 21(1), 23–38. 10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2 [Google Scholar]
  50. (2016) Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Pouw, W. T. J. L., de Nooijer, J. A., van Gog, T., Zwaan, R. A., & Paas, F.
    (2014) Toward a more embedded/extended perspective on the cognitive function of gestures. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–14. 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00359
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00359 [Google Scholar]
  52. Putnam, H.
    (1975) Mind, language and reality: Philosophical papers, Vol. II. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511625251
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625251 [Google Scholar]
  53. Reddy, M. J.
    ([1979] 1993) The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. InA. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (pp.164–201). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139173865.012
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173865.012 [Google Scholar]
  54. Scott, D. T.
    (2018) ‘Coming out of the closet’ – examining a metaphor. Annals of the International Communication Association, 42(3), 145–154. 10.1080/23808985.2018.1474374
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2018.1474374 [Google Scholar]
  55. Sharifian, F.
    (2017) Cultural Linguistics. Cultural conceptualisations and language. John Benjamins. 10.1075/clscc.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/clscc.8 [Google Scholar]
  56. Son, J. Y., Ramos, P., DeWolf, M., Loftus, W., & Stigler, J. W.
    (2018) Exploring the practicing-connections hypothesis: Using gesture to support coordination of ideas in understanding a complex statistical concept. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3(1), 1–18. 10.1186/s41235‑017‑0085‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0085-0 [Google Scholar]
  57. Spitzer, M.
    (2004) Metaphor and musical thought. Chicago: The University of Chicago. 10.7208/chicago/9780226279435.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226279435.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  58. Steen, G.
    (2017) Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues. Intercultural Pragmatics, 14(1), 1–24. 10.1515/ip‑2017‑0001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0001 [Google Scholar]
  59. Sternberg, R. J., Sternberg, K., & Mio, J. S.
    (2012) Cognitive psychology (6th ed). Wadsworth.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Szwedek, A.
    (2011) The ultimate source domain. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(2), 341–366. 10.1075/rcl.9.2.01szw
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.9.2.01szw [Google Scholar]
  61. Thiering, M.
    (2011) Figure-ground reversal in language. Gestalt Theory, 33(3–4), 245–276.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Veale, T.
    (2008) Figure-ground duality in humour: A multi-modal perspective. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 4(1), 63–81. 10.2478/v10016‑008‑0009‑z
    https://doi.org/10.2478/v10016-008-0009-z [Google Scholar]
  63. Zlatev, J.
    (2018) Mimesis theory, learning, and polysemiotic communication. InM. A. Peters (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and TheorySpringer.   10.1007/978‑981‑287‑532‑7_672‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-532-7_672-1 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): coming out; conceptual metaphor; gestural metaphorical scenario; gesture; multimodality
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