1887
Volume 16, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1877-9751
  • E-ISSN: 1877-976X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper offers a systematic, bottom-up, investigation of the role of adjectives as metaphor signals in metaphorical domain constructions (MDCs) such as ‘budgetary anorexia’ and ‘economic crash’ within the framework of Deliberate Metaphor Theory (e.g., Steen, 2017). To this end, we analyse all MDCs in the VU Amsterdam Metaphor Corpus. Results of our analyses demonstrate that domain adjectives in MDCs do not by definition constitute signals of metaphor, and that not all nouns in MDCs are identified as potentially deliberate metaphors. We identify three different functions of domain adjectives: (1) signal of novel metaphor; (2) signal of conventional metaphor; (3) non-signal. The analyses in this paper provide new insights into both the role of domain adjectives in MDCs, and the position of MDCs as a typical manifestation of potentially deliberate metaphor.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00017.rei
2018-11-05
2019-12-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Beger, A.
    (2011) Deliberate metaphors?: An exploration of the choice and functions of metaphors in US-American College lectures. Metaphorik.de, 20, 39–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
    (1999) The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Cameron, L.
    (1999) Operationalising ‘metaphor’ for applied linguistic research. InL. Cameron & G. Low (Eds.), Researching and applying metaphor (pp.3–28). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524704.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524704.004 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2003) Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Crisp, P., Heywood, J., & Steen, G. J.
    (2002) Metaphor identification and analysis, classification and quantification. Language and Literature, 11(1), 55–69. doi:  10.1177/096394700201100105
    https://doi.org/10.1177/096394700201100105 [Google Scholar]
  6. Dorst, A. G., & Reijnierse, W. G.
    (2015) A dictionary gives definitions, not decisions: On using a dictionary to identify the basic senses of words. Metaphor and the Social World, 5(1), 137–144. doi:  10.1075/msw.5.1.08dor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.5.1.08dor [Google Scholar]
  7. Ernst, T.
    (1981) Grist for the linguistic mill: Idioms and “extra” adjectives. Journal of Linguistic Research, 1(3), 51–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (2001) The syntax of adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486258
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486258 [Google Scholar]
  9. Gibbs, R. W.
    (2015a) Do pragmatic signals affect conventional metaphor understanding?: A failed test of deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 77–87. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.021
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.021 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2015b) Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future?Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 73–76. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.016 [Google Scholar]
  11. Goatly, A.
    (1997) The language of metaphors. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203210000
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203210000 [Google Scholar]
  12. Hanks, P.
    (2004) The syntagmatics of metaphor and idiom. International Journal of Lexicography, 17(3), 245–274. doi:  10.1093/ijl/17.3.245
    https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/17.3.245 [Google Scholar]
  13. Hertzberger, R.
    (2013) Economen hebben geen flauw benul [Economists haven’t got a clue]. NRC Handelsblad, March2. Retrieved from: www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2013/03/02/economen-hebben-geen-flauw-benul-12624625-a728936.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Krennmayr, T.
    (2011) Metaphors in newspapers. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
    (1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G.
    (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. doi:  10.2307/2529310
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310 [Google Scholar]
  17. Langlotz, A.
    (2006) Idiomatic creativity: A cognitive-linguistic model of idiom-representation and idiom-variation in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.17
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.17 [Google Scholar]
  18. Macmillan English Dictionary Online
    Macmillan English Dictionary Online. July 2016www.macmillandictionary.com/
  19. Moshinsky, B.
    (2016) Get ready for an economic crash if Britain leaves the EU. Business Insider UK, May23. Retrieved from: uk.businessinsider.com/uk-treasury-report-on-brexit-2016-5.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Musolff, A.
    (2004) Metaphor and political discourse: Analogical reasoning in debates about Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230504516
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230504516 [Google Scholar]
  21. Nacey, S.
    (2013) Metaphors in learner English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/milcc.2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.2 [Google Scholar]
  22. Pasma, T.
    (2011) Metaphor and register variation: The personalisation of Dutch news discourse. Oisterwijk: Box Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Perrez, J., & Reuchamps, M.
    (2014) Deliberate metaphors in political discourse: The case of citizen discourse. Metaphorik.de, 25, 7–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Pragglejaz Group
    Pragglejaz Group (2007) MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39. doi:  10.1080/10926480709336752
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752 [Google Scholar]
  25. 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. doi:  10.1007/s41701‑017‑0026‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-017-0026-7 [Google Scholar]
  26. Semino, E.
    (2008) Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Semino, E., Heywood, J., & Short, M.
    (2004) Methodological problems in the analysis of metaphors in a corpus of conversations about cancer. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1271–1294. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.013 [Google Scholar]
  28. Steen, G. J.
    (2007) Finding metaphor in grammar and usage: A methodological analysis of theory and research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.10
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.10 [Google Scholar]
  29. (2008) 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]
  30. (2011a) From three dimensions to five steps: The value of deliberate metaphor. Metaphorik.de, 21, 83–110.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. (2011b) 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]
  32. (2015) Developing, testing and interpreting deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 67–72. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013 [Google Scholar]
  33. (2016) Mixed metaphor is a question of deliberateness. InR. W. Gibbs (Ed.), Mixing metaphor (pp.113–132). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. (2017) Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues. Intercultural Pragmatics14(1), 1–24. doi:  10.1515/ip‑2017‑0001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0001 [Google Scholar]
  35. 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. 10.1075/celcr.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 [Google Scholar]
  36. Sullivan, K.
    (2013) Frames and constructions in metaphoric language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.14 [Google Scholar]
  37. Sweetser, E.
    (1999) Compositionality and blending: Semantic composition in a cognitively realistic framework. InT. Janssen & G. Redeker (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Foundations, scope and methodology (pp.129–162). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110803464.129
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110803464.129 [Google Scholar]
  38. Thibodeau, P. H.
    (2017) The function of metaphor framing, deliberate or otherwise, in a social world. Metaphor and the Social World, 7(2), 270–290. 10.1075/msw.7.2.06thi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.7.2.06thi [Google Scholar]
  39. Turner, M.
    (1991) Reading minds: The study of English in the age of cognitive science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00017.rei
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00017.rei
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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