Part of
Metaphor in Specialist DiscourseEdited by J. Berenike Herrmann and Tony Berber Sardinha
[Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 4] 2015
► pp. 299–314
Edited by J. Berenike Herrmann and Tony Berber Sardinha
[Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 4] 2015
► pp. 299–314
Metaphor in specialist discourse
Insights and implications for metaphor studies and beyond
The present chapter attempts to draw together some of the main ideas that have
been developed in the volume. It focuses on the ways in which metaphor use
has been found to vary across the different types of specialist discourse, and
relates this to: disciplines, intended audience, positioning on the scientificpopular
continuum, mode of delivery (written, spoken, textual or multimodal),
immediacy of the communication, and relationship between interlocutors. The
chapter relates these findings to current issues and controversies in the metaphor
literature, discusses the need for more informant data, and suggests ways
in which the impact of metaphor on its intended audiences might be studied. In
all of these areas, proposals for further study are made.
References (30)
Anthony, L. (2007). AntConc [Software]. Retrieved from [URL]
Barnden, J. (2010). Metaphor and metonymy: Making their connections more slippery. Cognitive Linguistics, 21 (1), 1–34 
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boers, F. (1997). No pain no gain in a free market rhetoric: A test for cognitive semantics. Metaphor and Symbol, 12(4), 231–241.
Boyd, R. (1993). Metaphor and theory change: What is ‘metaphor’ a metaphor for? In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 481–532). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Caballero, R. (2003). Metaphor and genre: The presence and role of metaphor in the building review. Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 145–67.
. (2006). Re-viewing space: Figurative language in architects’ assessment of built space. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.
. (1999). Operationalising “metaphor” for applied linguistics research. In L. Cameron & G. Low (Eds.), Researching and applying metaphor (pp. 105–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, L., & Deignan, A. (2003). Combining large and small corpora to investigate tuning devices around metaphor in spoken discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 18 (3), 149–60.
Channell, J. (1994). Vague language. Oxford University Press.
Croft, W., & Cruse, A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deignan, A. (2011). Deliberateness is not unique to metaphor. Metaphor in the Social World, 1(1), 57–60.
Deignan, A., Littlemore, J., & Semino, E. (2013). Figurative language, genre and register. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dirven, R. (2003). Metonymy and metaphor: Different mental strategies of conceptualisation. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 75–112). Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Gibbs, R.W. Jr. (2011). Are “deliberate” metaphors really deliberate? A question of human consciousness and action. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(1), 26–52.
Gibbs, R.W. Jr., & Santa Cruz, M. (2012). The unfolding of conceptual metaphors. Metaphor and Symbol, 27(4), 299–311.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
James, A. (1983). Compromisers in English: A cross-disciplinary approach to their interpersonal significance. Journal of Pragmatics, 7, 191–206.
Kimmel, M. (2010). Why we mix metaphors (and mix them well): Discourse coherence, conceptual metaphor, and beyond. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(1), 97–115.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lin, C.-Y. (2010). ‘…that’s actually sort of you know trying to get consultants in…’: Functions and multifunctionality of modifiers in academic lectures. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 1173–1183.
Müller, C. (2008). Metaphors dead and alive, sleeping and waking: A dynamic view. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Pragglejaz group (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39.
Scott, M. (2007). WordSmith Tools (v5) [Software]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steen, G. (2008). The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 23(4), 213–241.
. (2011). What does ‘really deliberate’ really mean? More thoughts on metaphor and consciousness. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(1), 53–6.
Steen, G.J., Dorst, A.G., Herrmann, J.B., Kaal, A.A., & Krennmayr, T. (2010). Metaphor in usage. Cognitive Linguistics, 21(4), 765–796.
Steen, G.J., Dorst, A.G., Kaal, A.A., Herrmann, J.B., Tina, K., & Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cited by (6)
Cited by six other publications
Julich-Warpakowski, Nina & Thomas Wiben Jensen
Andryukhina, T. V.
2021. Metaphor Variation in Economic Discourse. Professional Discourse & Communication 3:4 ► pp. 9 ff. 
Andryukhina, T. V.
2023. Cognitive research in pedagogy: conceptual metaphor in CLIL-economics. Linguistics & Polyglot Studies 9:2 ► pp. 103 ff.
Galera Masegosa, Alicia
2020. The role of echoing in meaning construction and interpretation. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 18:1 ► pp. 19 ff.
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.