Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics - Volume 4, Issue 1, 2006

The systematic use of metaphor and metonymy in economics discourse facilitates reading and widens the scope of our understanding in the globalisation domain. The importance of metaphor in conveying ideology has been highlighted since Lakoff and Johnson (1980:34) and recent studies have shown in detail how ideology, particularly in press discourse, underlies conceptual metaphors (Hawkins 2001; White and Herrera-Soler 2003). The aim of this article is to identify and contrast the conceptual metaphors underlying the metaphorical expressions found on internet editions throughout 2003 in Spanish and British press headlines dealing with the subject of globalisation. Findings show that though the meaning of globalisation seems to be elusive, the perspectivation metaphor provides a good understanding of the way the press handles pro- and anti-globalisation headlines. On the grounds of cultural frames such as national stereotypes and economies, and newspaper ideology, no significant differences are found between the languages at the conceptual level. Nevertheless, important differences arise by virtue of culture specific imagery and value-judgements occasionally show a markedly cultural realisation.

The present article analyzes the copular realization of GET in relation to its lexical transitive, intransitive motion and passive realizations. The change-of-state construction was previously defined by the author as X CHANGES TO Ystate. If COME, GO, TURN… copular realizations were proved to be constrained (Bonnefille, 2001 and 2004; Bonnefille & McMichael, 2001) by X MOVES TO Ylocation (Goldberg, 1995), the search for real-world constraints at work in this construction when used with GET leads us to the conclusion that the copular realization of GET is constrained by the blending of two constructions, i.e. X MOVES TO Ylocation and either X EXPERIENCES Y (with the meaning “receiving an object”) or X ACTS ON Y (with the meaning “obtaining/possessing an object”), depending on the degree of agenthood of X.

The aim of this paper is to describe in some detail the topography of the space occupied by functional and cognitive models. We describe the salient characteristics of functionalist, cognitivist and/or constructionist models against the general background of usage-based models, and also include in our discussion the parallel architecture framework of Jackendoff (1997, 2002a, 2002b), recently further refined as the Simpler Syntax hypothesis (Culicover & Jackendoff, 2005). A list of 36 features for the comparison of models is drawn up, and each of 11 approaches is discussed in the light of these features. Our conclusion is that although the study provides some evidence for the view that functionalist and cognitive and/or constructionist models occupy two partially distinct areas of functional/cognitive space, there is nevertheless a large group of features which are shared across all the types of model we have examined. Other groups of features allow us to distinguish between two major groups of models, one largely functionalist in its orientation, the other cognitivist and/or constructionist, the remaining models showing affinities with one or other of the two main groups, according to the feature concerned.

This paper investigates how simultaneity between two events, a main clause event and a subordinate clause event, is coded in English. It focuses on as-clauses but also contrasts them with while-clauses. It argues that as-clauses evoke path events, i.e. events susceptible to change. It also points out that as-clauses define a family resemblance network in that different, though related, variants can be recognised. While-clauses are argued to generally evoke larger and more stable temporal configurations, e.g. properties. The different behaviour of as-clauses and while-clauses is related to the different lexical status of as vs. while. The former is analysed as a subordinator unspecified for temporality whereas the latter is regarded as a temporal subordinator by default. Finally, the use of progressive aspect is discussed. It is argued to function as a “slow motion” marker in as-clauses and/or to signal a contrast between the temporal expanses of the main and as-clauses. By contrast, it takes on a transience-highlighting function in while-clauses.

Cognitive linguists typically conduct their scholarship by relying upon their own intuitions about systematic patterns of language and what these may imply about the structure of human thought. But are linguists’ introspections reliable sources of evidence? Much work in contemporary cognitive science suggests that people’s introspections about their beliefs, feelings, and the reasons for their actions are quite inaccurate. Even trained experts often fail to recognize the real reasons for their beliefs and actions. The simple fact is that our ability to introspect upon many cognitive processes is extremely limited. This article discusses the implications of this empirical evidence for cognitive linguistic research and theory. I suggest several ways, nonetheless, by which cognitive linguists can better contribute to interdisciplinary scholarship by more systematically exploring the nature and reasons for their introspections on language and thought.

Attested instances of persuasive discourse were examined from the perspective of conceptual blending theory to reveal that serious argumentative points are often made via the construction of unrealistic blended cognitive models. The unrealistic character of these models is often related to compression, a process by which complex relationships are reconstrued with simpler, more familiar concepts. These examples show how speakers’ compressions enable them to strategically frame controversial issues, and to evoke particular sorts of affective responses consistent with their argumentative goals. Analysis points to various constraints on blending. Besides the constitutive and governing principles outlined by Fauconnier & Turner (2002), conceptual integration operations are greatly constrained by the frames and cultural models of a particular community, together with overall knowledge of the communicative event, the cognitive task, the issues dealt with, and the discursive goal. The paper focuses on pre-natal and post-mortem blends in “pro-life” rhetoric and judicial argumentation.

The overall aim of this paper is to discuss how Talmy’s (1985, 2000) typological framework and Slobin’s (1996) thinking for speaking hypothesis can be fruitful for the investigation of how adult language learners come to express motion events in an L2. We report an empirical study which compares the expression of the semantic components of Path and Manner of motion by three groups of informants: (a) learners whose L1 and L2 belong to different typological patterns (Danish learners of Spanish; (b) learners whose L1 and L2 share the same typological pattern (Italian learners of Spanish); and (c) Spanish native speakers. Based on previous research on L1 acquisition, it was hypothesized that the Danish learner group would exhibit a higher degree of elaboration of the two semantic components than the other informant groups. The results of the study, however, show a limited role for the L1 thinking for speaking patterns in advanced second language acquisition.

This paper claims that scents, alone and/or in combination with visual and/or verbal support, are made to function metaphorically in ads since they symbolize something different (i.e., sexuality, romanticism, etc.) from the physical odor directly conveyed by each fragrance (i.e., floral, woody, oriental, etc.). Drawing on Lakoff and Johnson’s assertion that metaphors are fundamentally nonlinguistic devices, on the application of metaphor theory to pictures and film, and on investigations into olfactory metaphors and synaesthesias, our empirical analyses have found first that odors in perfumes are not indexes but symbols which give rise to olfactory metaphors; secondly, that olfactory metaphors do not stand alone in print ads for perfume; and thirdly, that the advertiser (mostly the composite of copywriters and art directors) succeeds in using olfactory and olfactory-mixed metaphors, as part of the overall covert communication that permeates advertising.

This interview is the result of a series of email exchanges with Leonard Talmy from February to May, 2005 and, from January to May, 2006. The first part, published in the previous ARCL issue (3:325–347) discusses some of the most important and, at the same time, controversial aspects of Talmy’s theory of lexicalisation patterns in motion event. This second and final part offers an overview of Talmy’s understanding of what language and cognition are.