1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Pragmatics & Cognition
  4. Volume 30, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 30, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0929-0907
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9943
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

The present contribution integrates a recent, multilevel approach to metaphor advanced by Kövecses (2017 and later publications), with gestures as a mode of metaphorical expression. In doing so, the paper shows how different elements of conceptual structure, varying from the abstract, recurring image schema, through more complex conceptual domains and frames, to contextually embedded and variable metaphorical scenarios, participate in the metaphoricity of gestures. This application of gestures to the multilevel approach lends direct support to the idea that human conceptual system recruits various semiotic modes – not limited to language – for expressing its content. Image schemas of and have been shown to participate directly in the domain of , which, when embedded in context of a given communicative situation, has become the conceptual frame of coming out. The frame, when realised via different gestural forms in a shared context across many speakers, turns into a highly context-sensitive, variable, and speech co-expressive gestural metaphorical scenario of .

© 2023 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/pc.00033.dyr
2024-07-11
2025-02-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/pc.00033.dyr
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/pc.00033.dyr.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/pc.00033.dyr&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Abdel-Raheem, Ahmed
    2023 What’s really in a frame? The case of public marriage proposals. Discourse Studies25(2). 273–287. 10.1177/14614456231154720
     https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456231154720 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bavelas, Janet
    1994 Gestures as part of speech: Methodological implications. Research on Language & Social Interaction27(3). 201–221. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2703_3
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2703_3 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bressem, Jana
    2021 Repetitions in gesture: A cognitive-linguistic and usage-based perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110697902
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110697902 [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown, Michael P.
    2000 Closet space: Geographies of metaphor from the body to the globe. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown, Lucien, Kim Hyunji, Iris Hübscher & Bodo Winter
    2023 Gestures are modulated by social context: A study of multimodal politeness across two cultures. Gesture21(2/3). 167–200. 10.1075/gest.20034.bro
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.20034.bro [Google Scholar]
  6. Charteris-Black, Jonathan
    2005 Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230501706
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230501706 [Google Scholar]
  7. 2019 Metaphors of Brexit: No cherries on the cake?New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑28768‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28768-9 [Google Scholar]
  8. Chirrey, Deborah
    2012 Reading the script. An analysis of script formulation in coming out advice texts. Journal of Language and Sexuality1(1). 35–58. 10.1075/jls.1.1.03chi
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.1.1.03chi [Google Scholar]
  9. 2020 Metaphors we come out by: how structural metaphors construct coming out in internet advice texts. Gender and Language14(1). 8–27. 10.1558/genl.37378
     https://doi.org/10.1558/genl.37378 [Google Scholar]
  10. Chui, Kawaii
    2012 Gestural manifestation of knowledge in conceptual frames. Discourse Processes49(8). 599–621. 10.1080/0163853X.2012.717803
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2012.717803 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cienki, Alan
    2017 Utterance Construction Grammar (UCxG) and the variable multimodality of constructions. Linguistics Vanguard3(s1). 20160048. 10.1515/lingvan‑2016‑0048
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0048 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2004 Bush’s and Gore’s language and gestures in the 2000 US presidential debates: A test case for two models of metaphors. Journal of Language and Politics3(3). 409–440. 10.1075/jlp.3.3.04cie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.3.3.04cie [Google Scholar]
  13. 2005 Image schemas and gesture. InBeate Hampe & Joseph. E. Grady (eds.), From perception to meaning, 421–442. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197532.5.421
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197532.5.421 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2008 Why study metaphor and gesture?InAlan Cienki & Cornelia Müller (eds.), Metaphor and gesture, 5–25. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/gs.3.04cie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.3.04cie [Google Scholar]
  15. 2013 Image schemas and mimetic schemas in cognitive linguistics and gesture studies. Review of Cognitive Linguistics11(2). 417–432. 10.1075/rcl.11.2.13cie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.11.2.13cie [Google Scholar]
  16. Clausner, Timothy C. & William Croft
    1999 Domains and image schemas. Cognitive Linguistics10(1). 1–31. 10.1515/cogl.1999.001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1999.001 [Google Scholar]
  17. Croft, William & Alan D. Cruse
    2004 Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511803864
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864 [Google Scholar]
  18. Debreslioska, Sandra & Marianne Gullberg
    2020 The semantic content of gestures varies with definiteness, information status and clause structure. Journal of Pragmatics1681. 36–52. 10.1016/j.pragma.2020.06.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.06.005 [Google Scholar]
  19. Dyrmo, Tomasz
    2022a A multilevel cognitive model of coming out. Prace Językoznawcze24(4). 27–43. 10.31648/pj.8159
     https://doi.org/10.31648/pj.8159 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2022b Gestural metaphorical scenarios and coming out narratives. Metaphor and the Social World12(1). 23–45. 10.1075/msw.20023.dyr
     https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.20023.dyr [Google Scholar]
  21. 2023 Metaphors of coming out in Polish: A cognitive linguistic approach. Topics in Linguistics24(1). 94–107. 10.2478/topling‑2023‑0007
     https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2023-0007 [Google Scholar]
  22. Evans, Vyvyan
    2015 The crucible of language: How language and mind create meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781316403631
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316403631 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2019 Cognitive linguistics: A complete guide. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 10.1515/9781474405232
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474405232 [Google Scholar]
  24. Fillmore, Charles. J.
    1976 Frame semantics and the nature of language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences2801. 20–32. 10.1111/j.1749‑6632.1976.tb25467.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1976.tb25467.x [Google Scholar]
  25. Fillmore, Charles. J. & Collin Baker
    2012 A frames approach to semantic analysis. InBernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 313–340. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0013
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0013 [Google Scholar]
  26. Gawne, Lauren
    2021 ‘Away’ gestures associated with negative expressions in narrative discourse in Syuba (Kagate, nepal) speakers. Semiotica 2021(239). 37–59. 10.1515/sem‑2017‑0163
     https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2017-0163 [Google Scholar]
  27. Gerwing, Jennifer & Janet Bavelas
    2004 Linguistic influences on gesture’s form. Gesture4(2). 157–195. 10.1075/gest.4.2.04ger
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.4.2.04ger [Google Scholar]
  28. Gibbs, Raymond. W.
    2008 Images schemas in conceptual development: What happened to the body?Philosophical Psychology21(2). 231–239. 10.1080/09515080801980195
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09515080801980195 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2021 Metaphors in the flesh: Metaphorical pantomimes in sports celebrations. Cognitive Linguistics32(1). 67–96. 10.1515/cog‑2019‑0115
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2019-0115 [Google Scholar]
  30. Gibbs, Raymond
    2022 Metaphorical experience. Contiguity or cross-domain mappings?Review of Cognitive Linguistics20(1). 7–32.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Goldberg, Adele. E.
    1995 Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 2019 Explain me this: Creativity, competition, and the partial productivity of constructions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Harrison, Simon
    2018 The impulse to gesture: Where language, minds, and bodies intersect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108265065
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108265065 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hinnell, Jennifer
    2018 The multimodal marking of aspect: The case of five periphrastic auxiliary constructions in North American English. Cognitive Linguistics29(4). 773–806. 10.1515/cog‑2017‑0009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2017-0009 [Google Scholar]
  35. Hoffmann, Thomas
    2017 Multimodal constructs – multimodal constructions? The role of constructions in the working memory. Linguistics Vanguard3(s1). 20160042. 10.1515/lingvan‑2016‑0042
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0042 [Google Scholar]
  36. Inbar, Anna & Yael Maschler
    2023 Shared knowledge as an account for disaffiliative moves: Hebrew ki ‘because’-clauses accompanied by the Palm-Up Open-Hand gesture. Research on Language and Social Interaction52(2). 141–164. 10.1080/08351813.2023.2205302
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2023.2205302 [Google Scholar]
  37. Johnson, Mark
    1987 The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  38. 2017 Embodied mind, meaning, and reason: How our bodies give rise to understanding. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226500393.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226500393.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  39. Kendon, Adam
    2008 Some reflections on the relationship between ‘gesture’ and ‘sign’. Gesture8(3). 348–366. 10.1075/gest.8.3.05ken
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.8.3.05ken [Google Scholar]
  40. Kövecses, Zoltán
    1986 Metaphors of anger, pride, and love: A lexical approach to the structure of concepts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pb.vii.8
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pb.vii.8 [Google Scholar]
  41. 2017 Levels of metaphor. Cognitive Linguistics281. 321–347. 10.1515/cog‑2016‑0052
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0052 [Google Scholar]
  42. 2020a An extended view of conceptual metaphor theory. Review of Cognitive Linguistics18(1). 112–130. 10.1075/rcl.00053.kov
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00053.kov [Google Scholar]
  43. 2020b Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108859127
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859127 [Google Scholar]
  44. Ladewig, Silva. H.
    2011 Putting the cyclic gesture on a cognitive basis. CogniTextes61. Available athttps://journals.openedition.org/cognitextes/406#quotation. 10.4000/cognitextes.406
     https://doi.org/10.4000/cognitextes.406 [Google Scholar]
  45. 2014 121. The cyclic gesture. InCornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewig, David McNeill & Jana Bressem (eds.), Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft [Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science (HSK)], 1605–1618. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110302028.1605
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110302028.1605 [Google Scholar]
  46. Lakoff, George
    1996 Moral politics: What conservatives know that liberals don’t. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. 2008 The neural theory of metaphor. InRaymond W. Gibbs (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 17–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.003 [Google Scholar]
  48. Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark
    1980 Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Lederer, Jenny
    2019 Gesturing the source domain: The role of co-speech gesture in the metaphorical models of gender transition. Metaphor and the Social World9(1). 32–58. 10.1075/msw.17016.led
     https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.17016.led [Google Scholar]
  50. Lovelock, Michael
    2017 ‘My coming out story’: Lesbian, gay and bisexual youth identities on YouTube. International Journal of Cultural Studies22(1). 1–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Łozińska, Joanna
    2021 Imagery underlying metaphors: A cognitive study of a multimodal discourse of yoga classes. Metaphor & Symbol36(3). 150–165. 10.1080/10926488.2021.1905486
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2021.1905486 [Google Scholar]
  52. Manning, Jammie
    2014 Communicating sexual identities: A typology of coming out. Sexuality & Culture19(1). 122–138. 10.1007/s12119‑014‑9251‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-014-9251-4 [Google Scholar]
  53. Martinez de Leon, Celia & Alba Fernandez Santana
    2021 Embodied cognition in the booth: Referential and pragmatic gestures in simultaneous interpreting. Cognitive Linguistic Studies8(2). 277–306. 10.1075/cogls.00079.mar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00079.mar [Google Scholar]
  54. Masi, Silvia
    2020 Exploring meaning-making practices via co-speech gestures in TED Talks. Journal of Visual Literacy39(3–4). 201–219. 10.1080/1051144X.2020.1826223
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1051144X.2020.1826223 [Google Scholar]
  55. McNeill, David
    2005 Gesture and thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  56. Mittelberg, Irene
    2017a Embodied frames and scenes: Body-based metonymy and pragmatic inferencing in gesture. Gesture16(2). 203–244. 10.1075/gest.16.2.03mit
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.16.2.03mit [Google Scholar]
  57. 2017b Multimodal existential constructions in German: Manual actions of giving as experiential substrate for grammatical and gestural patterns. Linguistics Vanguard3(s1). 20160047. 10.1515/lingvan‑2016‑0047
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0047 [Google Scholar]
  58. 2019 Peirce’s universal categories: On their potential for gesture theory and multimodal analysis. Semiotica 2019(228). 193–222. 10.1515/sem‑2018‑0090
     https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2018-0090 [Google Scholar]
  59. Mittelberg, Irene & Gina Joue
    2017 Source actions ground metaphor via metonymy: Toward a frame-based account of gestural action in multimodal discourse. InBeate Hampe (ed.), Metaphor, 119–137. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108182324.008
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182324.008 [Google Scholar]
  60. Müller, Cornelia
    2017a Waking metaphors: Embodied cognition in multimodal discourse. InB. Hampe (ed.), Metaphor, 297–316. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108182324.017
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182324.017 [Google Scholar]
  61. 2017b How recurrent gestures mean: Conventionalized contexts-of-use and embodied motivation. Gesture16(2). 277–304. 10.1075/gest.16.2.05mul
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.16.2.05mul [Google Scholar]
  62. Musolff, Andreas
    2004 Metaphor and political discourse: Analogical reasoning in debates about Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230504516
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230504516 [Google Scholar]
  63. 2017 Truths, lies and figurative scenarios: Metaphors at the heart of Brexit. Journal of Language and Politics16(5). 641–657. 10.1075/jlp.16033.mus
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.16033.mus [Google Scholar]
  64. 2021 National conceptualisations of the body politic: Cultural experience and political imagination. Singapore: Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑15‑8740‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8740-5 [Google Scholar]
  65. Parril, Fey & Stec Kashmiri
    2018 Seeing first person changes gesture but saying first person does not. Gesture17(1). 158–175. 10.1075/gest.00014.par
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.00014.par [Google Scholar]
  66. Reddy, Michael J.
    1979 The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. InAndrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and thought, 284–310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Schröder, Urlike
    2017 Multimodal metaphors as cognitive pivots for the construction of cultural otherness in talk. Intercultural Pragmatics14(4). 493–524. 10.1515/ip‑2017‑0023
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0023 [Google Scholar]
  68. Sharifian, Farzad
    2017 Cultural linguistics: Cultural conceptualisations and language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/clscc.8
     https://doi.org/10.1075/clscc.8 [Google Scholar]
  69. Sullivan, Karen
    2013 Frames and constructions in metaphoric language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.14
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.14 [Google Scholar]
  70. Szwedek, Aleksander
    2014 The nature of domains and the relationships between them in metaphorization. Review of Cognitive Linguistics12(2). 342–374. 10.1075/rcl.12.2.04szw
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.12.2.04szw [Google Scholar]
  71. 2019 Complex image schemas. Półrocznik Językoznawczy Tertium. 4(1). 1–11. 10.7592/Tertium2019.4.1.Szwedek
     https://doi.org/10.7592/Tertium2019.4.1.Szwedek [Google Scholar]
  72. 2022 Thematic roles in image schemas: A missing link between mind and language. Cognitive Semantics8(1). 141–157. 10.1163/23526416‑bja10024
     https://doi.org/10.1163/23526416-bja10024 [Google Scholar]
  73. Valenzuela, Javier, Cristóbal Pagán Cánovas, Inés Olza & Daniel Alcaraz Carrión
    2020 Gesturing in the wild: Evidence for a flexible mental timeline. Review of Cognitive Linguistics18(2). 289–315. 10.1075/rcl.00061.val
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00061.val [Google Scholar]
  74. Wehling, Elisabeth
    2009 Argument is Gesture War: Function, form and prosody of discourse structuring gestures in political argument. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society35(2). 54–65. 10.3765/bls.v35i2.3511
     https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v35i2.3511 [Google Scholar]
  75. 2017 Discourse management gestures. Gesture16(2). 245–276. 10.1075/gest.16.2.04weh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.16.2.04weh [Google Scholar]
  76. Winter, Bodo, Marcus Perlman & Teenie Matlock
    2013 Using space to talk and gesture about numbers: Evidence from the TV News Archive. Gesture13(3). 377–408. 10.1075/gest.13.3.06win
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.13.3.06win [Google Scholar]
  77. Zlatev, Jordan
    2007 Intersubjectivity, mimetic schemas and the emergence of language. Intellectica. Revue de l’Association pour la Recherche Cognitive46(2). 123–151. 10.3406/intel.2007.1281
     https://doi.org/10.3406/intel.2007.1281 [Google Scholar]
  78. 2014 Image schemas, mimetic schemas and children’s gestures. Cognitive Semiotics7(1). 3–29. 10.1515/cogsem‑2014‑0002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2014-0002 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/pc.00033.dyr
Loading
Levels of metaphor in gesture
Pragmatics & Cognition 30, 330 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.00033.dyr
/content/journals/10.1075/pc.00033.dyr
/content/journals/10.1075/pc.00033.dyr
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conceptual structure; extended conceptual metaphor theory; gesture analysis; levels of schematicity

Most Cited

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