1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Published under the auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Metaphorically speaking
PDF
EPUB

Abstract

While abundant studies have examined cognitive efforts required for metaphor comprehension, what happens during metaphor production remains underexplored. Based on 19 triadic conversations produced by 57 participants, this paper examines conversational behaviours associated with the use of metaphors and deliberate metaphors in particular. The data includes 2,631 conversational turns, of which 690 contained metaphors and 45 had deliberate metaphors. Four conversational behaviours were examined: turn duration, within-turn pause duration, between-turn gap duration, and co-speech gestures. Compared with turns without metaphors, those with metaphors lasted significantly longer and were more likely to co-occur with gestures, whereas differences in within-turn pause and between-turn gaps were not significant. The results suggest that metaphor production involves more cognitive efforts or a stronger awareness of the ongoing communication; however, metaphor processing by the listener does not necessarily take more time. The effect of metaphor deliberateness was not significant in any of the conversational behaviours.

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

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00256.han
2026-04-24
2026-05-11

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00256.han
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/rcl.00256.han/rcl.00256.han.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00256.han&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bambini, Valentina, Bott, Lewis, & Schumacher, Petra B.
    (2021) It is not always a matter of time: Addressing the costs of metaphor and metonymy through a speed-accuracy trade-off study. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale, (), –. 10.1037/cep0000256
     https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000256 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bard, Ellen G., Lickley, Robin J., & Aylett, Matthew P.
    (2001) Is disfluency just difficulty?InProceedings of the international workshop on disfluency in spontaneous speech (DiSS’01) (pp.–). International Speech Communication Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Berthold, Andre & Jameson, Anthony
    (1999) Interpreting symptoms of cognitive load in speech input. InProceedings of the seventh international conference (pp.–). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑7091‑2490‑1_23
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-2490-1_23 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bohrn, Isabel C., Altmann, Ulrike, & Jacobs, Arthur M.
    (2012) Looking at the brains behind figurative language — a quantitative meta–analysis of neuroimaging studies on metaphor, idiom, and irony processing. Neuropsychologia, (), –. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.07.021
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.07.021 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bolognesi, Marianna, Pilgram, Roosmaryn, & van den Heerik, Romy
    (2017) Reliability in content analysis: The case of semantic feature norms classification. Behavior Research Methods, , –. 10.3758/s13428‑016‑0838‑6
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0838-6 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bortfeld, Heather, Leon, Silva D., Bloom, Jonathan E., Schober, Michael F., & Brennan, Susan E.
    (2001) Disfluency rates in conversation: Effects of age, relationship, topic, role, and gender. Language and Speech, (), –. 10.1177/00238309010440020101
     https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309010440020101 [Google Scholar]
  7. Brisard, Frank, Frisson, Steven, & Sandra, Dominiek
    (2001) Processing unfamiliar metaphors in a self-paced reading task. Metaphor and Symbol, (), –. 10.1080/10926488.2001.9678888
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2001.9678888 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cameron, Lynne
    (2003) Metaphor in educational discourse. Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Cameron, Lynne & Maslen, Robert
    (Eds.) (2010) Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities. University of Toronto Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Campisi, Emanuela & Özyürek, Asli
    (2013) Iconicity as a communicative strategy: Recipient design in multimodal demonstrations for adults and children. Journal of Pragmatics, (), –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.12.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.12.007 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cienki, Alan
    (2020) A multimodal perspective on MCA: Cues of (possible) metacommunicative awareness. InCamila Di Biase-Dyson & Markus Egg (Eds.), Drawing Attention to Metaphor: Case studies across time periods, cultures and modalities (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/ftl.5.04cie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.5.04cie [Google Scholar]
  12. Citron, Francesca M., & Goldberg, Adele E.
    (2014) Metaphorical sentences are more emotionally engaging than their literal counterparts. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, (), –. 10.1162/jocn_a_00654
     https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00654 [Google Scholar]
  13. Citron, Francesca M., Cacciari, Cristina, Funcke, Jakob M., Hsu, Chun-Ting, & Jacobs, Arthur M.
    (2019) Idiomatic expressions evoke stronger emotional responses in the brain than literal sentences. Neuropsychologia, , –. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.05.020
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.05.020 [Google Scholar]
  14. Clark, Herbert H., & Tree, Jean E. Fox
    (2002) Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition, (),–. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(02)00017‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00017-3 [Google Scholar]
  15. Clough, Sharice & Duff, Melissa C.
    (2020) The role of gesture in communication and cognition: Implications for understanding and treating neurogenic communication disorders. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, , . 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00323
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00323 [Google Scholar]
  16. Columbus, Georgie, Sheikh, Naveed A., Côté-Lecaldare, Marilena, Häuser, Katja, Baum, Shari R., & Titone, Debra
    (2015) Individual differences in executive control relate to metaphor processing: An eye movement study of sentence reading. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, , . 10.3389/fnhum.2014.01057
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.01057 [Google Scholar]
  17. Coulson, Seana
    (2008) Metaphor comprehension and the brain. InRaymond W. Gibbs. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp.–). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.012
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.012 [Google Scholar]
  18. Cuccio, Valentina & Steen, Gerard
    (2019) Deliberate metaphors and embodied simulation. InIgnasi Navarro i Ferrando (Ed.), Current approaches to metaphor analysis in discourse (pp.–). De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110629460‑009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110629460-009 [Google Scholar]
  19. Desai, Rutvik H.
    (2022) Are metaphors embodied? The neural evidence. Psychological Research, (), –. 10.1007/s00426‑021‑01604‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01604-4 [Google Scholar]
  20. de Vries, Clarissa, Reijnierse, Gudrun, & Willems, Roel M.
    (2018) Eye movements reveal readers’ sensitivity to deliberate metaphors during narrative reading. Scientific Study of Literature, (), –. 10.1075/ssol.18008.vri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.18008.vri [Google Scholar]
  21. Galati, Alexia & Brennan, Susan E.
    (2014) Speakers adapt gestures to addressees’ knowledge: Implications for models of co-speech gesture. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, (), –. 10.1080/01690965.2013.796397
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.796397 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gallese, Vittorio & Lakoff, George
    (2005) The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, (), –. 10.1080/02643290442000310
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290442000310 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gibbs, Raymond W.
    (1994) The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. (2005) Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511805844
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805844 [Google Scholar]
  25. (2015) Do pragmatic signals affect conventional metaphor understanding? A failed test of deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics, , –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.021
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.021 [Google Scholar]
  26. (1990) Comprehending figurative referential descriptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Glucksberg, Sam
    (2008) How metaphors create categories-quickly. InRaymond W. Gibbs. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp.–). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.006
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.006 [Google Scholar]
  28. Goldman-Eisler, Frieda
    (1954) On the variability of the speed of talking and on its relation to the length of utterances in conversations. British Journal of Psychology, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Goodwin, Charles
    (1979) The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. InGeorge Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp.–). Irvington.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Healey, Patrik G. T., Plant, Nicola, Howes, Christine, & Lavelle, Mary
    (2015) When words fail: Collaborative gestures during clarification dialogues. InAAAI Spring Symposium: Technical report (pp.–). AAAI Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Hilliard, Caitlin & Cook, Susan Wagner
    (2016) Bridging gaps in common ground: Speakers design their gestures for their listeners. Journal of Experimental Psychology, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Hoetjes, Marieke, Krahmer, Emiel, & Swerts, Marc
    (2015) On what happens in gesture when communication is unsuccessful. Speech Communication, , –. 10.1016/j.specom.2015.06.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2015.06.004 [Google Scholar]
  33. Holler, Judith, Kendrick, Kobin H., & Levinson, Stephen C.
    (2018) Processing language in face-to-face conversation: Questions with gestures get faster responses. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, (), –. 10.3758/s13423‑017‑1363‑z
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1363-z [Google Scholar]
  34. Hostetter, Autumn B.
    (2011) When do gestures communicate? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, (), –. 10.1037/a0022128
     https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022128 [Google Scholar]
  35. Howes, Christine & Lavelle, Mary
    (2023) Quirky conversations: How people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia do dialogue differently. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. (), . 10.1098/rstb.2021.0480
     https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0480 [Google Scholar]
  36. Jefferson, Gail
    (2004) A sketch of some orderly aspects of overlap in natural conversation. InGene H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp.–). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/pbns.125.05jef
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.05jef [Google Scholar]
  37. Kaal, Anna Albertha
    (2012) Metaphor in conversation [Doctoral dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam].
  38. Kahneman, Daniel
    (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Kita, Sotaro
    (2000) How representational gestures help speaking. InDavid McNeill (Ed.), Language and gesture (pp.–). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620850.011
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620850.011 [Google Scholar]
  40. Kita, Sotaro & Davies, Thomas Stephen
    (2009) Competing conceptual representations trigger co-speech representational gestures. Language and Cognitive Processes, (), –. 10.1080/01690960802327971
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802327971 [Google Scholar]
  41. Lai, Vicky Tzuyin, Curran, Tim, & Menn, Lise
    (2009) Comprehending conventional and novel metaphors: An ERP study. Brain Research, , –. 10.1016/j.brainres.2009.05.088
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2009.05.088 [Google Scholar]
  42. Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark
    (1980) Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Lavelle, Mary, Healey, Patrik G. T., & McCabe, Rose
    (2012) Is nonverbal communication disrupted in interactions involving patients with schizophrenia?Schizophrenia Bulletin, (), –. 10.1093/schbul/sbs091
     https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbs091 [Google Scholar]
  44. Levelt, Willem. J.
    (1983) Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, (), –. 10.1016/0010‑0277(83)90026‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(83)90026-4 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lickley, Robin
    (2001) Dialogue moves and disfluency rates. InProceedings of the workshop on disfluency in spontaneous speech (DiSS’01) (pp.–). International Speech Communication Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. (2015) Fluency and disfluency. InMelissa A. Redford (Ed.), The handbook of speech production (pp.–). Wiley. 10.1002/9781118584156.ch20
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118584156.ch20 [Google Scholar]
  47. Linell, Per
    (1982) The written language bias in linguistics. Linköping University.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. McNeill, David
    (1992) Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Mon, Serena K., Nencheva, Mira, Citron, Francesca M., Lew-Williams, Casey, & Goldberg, Adele E.
    (2021) Conventional metaphors elicit greater real-time engagement than literal paraphrases or concrete sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, , . 10.1016/j.jml.2021.104285
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2021.104285 [Google Scholar]
  50. Morsella, Ezequiel & Krauss, Robert M.
    (2004) The role of gestures in spatial working memory and speech. The American Journal of Psychology, (), –. 10.2307/4149008
     https://doi.org/10.2307/4149008 [Google Scholar]
  51. Müller, Christian, Großmann-Hutter, Barbara, Jameson, Anthony, Rummer, Ralf, & Wittig, Frank
    (2001) Recognizing time pressure and cognitive load on the basis of speech: An experimental study. InProceedings of the 8th international conference on user modeling (UM 2001) (pp.–). Springer. 10.1007/3‑540‑44566‑8_3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44566-8_3 [Google Scholar]
  52. Müller, Cornelia & Tag, Susanne
    (2010) The dynamics of metaphor: Foregrounding and activating metaphoricity in conversational interaction. Cognitive Semiotics, (), –. 10.1515/cogsem.2010.6.spring2010.85
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem.2010.6.spring2010.85 [Google Scholar]
  53. Olkoniemi, Henri, Ranta, Henri, & Kaakinen, Johanna K.
    (2016) Individual differences in the processing of written sarcasm and metaphor: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Onishi, Kristine H., & Murphy, Gregory L.
    (1993) Metaphoric reference: When metaphors are not understood as easily as literal expressions. Memory & Cognition, , –. 10.3758/BF03202744
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202744 [Google Scholar]
  55. Ortony, Andrew, Schallert, Diane L., Reynolds, Ralph E., & Antos, Stephen J.
    (1978) Interpreting metaphors and idioms: Some effects of context on comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, (), –. 10.1016/S0022‑5371(78)90283‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(78)90283-9 [Google Scholar]
  56. Pragglejaz Group
    Pragglejaz Group (2007) MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Qiu, Amy Han, Vanzan, Vanessa, Soupiona, Chara, & Howes, Christine
    (2024) Disfluencies in conversation: a comparison of utterances with and without metaphors. InProceedings of the 28th workshop on the semantics and pragmatics of dialogue (Article 13). SemDial.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Reijnierse, Gudrun
    (2017) The Value of Deliberate Metaphor. [PhD-Thesis — Research and graduation external, Universiteit van Amsterdam].
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Reijnierse, Gudrun, Burgers, Christian, Krennmayr, Tina, & Steen, Gerard
    (2020) The role of co-text in the analysis of potentially deliberate metaphor. InCamila Di Biase-Dyson & Markus Egg (Eds.), Drawing attention to metaphor: Case studies across time periods, cultures and modalities (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/ftl.5.02rei
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.5.02rei [Google Scholar]
  60. (2018) DMIP: A method for identifying potentially deliberate metaphor in language use. Corpus Pragmatics, , –. 10.1007/s41701‑017‑0026‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-017-0026-7 [Google Scholar]
  61. Ritchie, David
    (2013) Metaphor. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139136822
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139136822 [Google Scholar]
  62. Roberts, Sean G., Torreira, Francisco, & Levinson, Stephen C.
    (2015) The effects of processing and sequence organization on the timing of turn taking: A corpus study. Frontiers in Psychology, , . 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00509
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00509 [Google Scholar]
  63. Semino, Elena
    (2008) Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Shriberg, Elizabeth
    (1996) Disfluency in Switchboard. InProceedings of the international conference on spoken language processing (pp.–). International Speech Communication Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Steen, Gerard
    (2011) From three dimensions to five steps: The value of deliberate metaphor. Metaphorik.de, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. (2015) Developing, testing and interpreting deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics, , –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013 [Google Scholar]
  67. (2023) Thinking by metaphor, fast and slow: Deliberate metaphor theory offers a new model for metaphor and its comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, , . 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1242888
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1242888 [Google Scholar]
  68. Steen, Gerard, Dorst, Aletta, Herrmann, J. Berenike, Kaal, Anna, Krennmayr, Tina, & Pasma, Tryntje
    (2010) A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.14
     https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 [Google Scholar]
  69. Tay, Dennis
    (2016) A variational approach to deliberate metaphors. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, (), –. 10.1075/cogls.3.2.05tay
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.3.2.05tay [Google Scholar]
  70. (2024) Affective engagement with metaphor in introductory statistics education. The Journal of Experimental Education, (), –. 10.1080/00220973.2024.2422090
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2024.2422090 [Google Scholar]
  71. Tay, Dennis, Huang, Jin, & Zeng, Huiheng
    (2020) Prompting strategies and outcomes in picture-based counseling. InBernadette Watson & Janice Kreiger (Eds.), Expanding horizons in health communication: An Asian perspective (pp.–). Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑15‑4389‑0_2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4389-0_2 [Google Scholar]
  72. Thibodeau, Paul
    (2017) The function of metaphor framing, deliberate or otherwise, in a social world. Metaphor and the Social World, (), –. 10.1075/msw.7.2.06thi
     https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.7.2.06thi [Google Scholar]
  73. Thibodeau, Paul & Boroditsky, Lera
    (2011) Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PLoS One, (), . 10.1371/journal.pone.0016782
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00256.han
Loading
Metaphorically speaking
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00256.han
/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00256.han
/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.00256.han
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: disfluencies ; cognitive processing ; deliberate metaphors ; conversational behaviours ; metaphor production

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