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.
Beger, A. (2011). Deliberate metaphors?: An exploration of the choice and functions of metaphors in US-American College lectures. Metaphorik.de, 201, 39–60.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
Cameron, L. (1999). Operationalising ‘metaphor’ for applied linguistic research. In L. Cameron & G. Low (Eds.), Researching and applying metaphor (pp. 3–28). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.
Crisp, P., Heywood, J., & Steen, G. J. (2002). Metaphor identification and analysis, classification and quantification. Language and Literature, 11(1), 55–69.
Ernst, T. (1981). Grist for the linguistic mill: Idioms and “extra” adjectives. Journal of Linguistic Research, 1(3), 51–68.
Ernst, T. (2001). The syntax of adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs, R. W. (2015a). Do pragmatic signals affect conventional metaphor understanding?: A failed test of deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 901, 77–87.
Gibbs, R. W. (2015b). Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future?Journal of Pragmatics, 901, 73–76.
Goatly, A. (1997). The language of metaphors. London: Routledge.
Hanks, P. (2004). The syntagmatics of metaphor and idiom. International Journal of Lexicography, 17(3), 245–274.
Hertzberger, R. (2013). Economen hebben geen flauw benul [Economists haven’t got a clue]. NRC Handelsblad, March2. Retrieved from: [URL].
Krennmayr, T. (2011). Metaphors in newspapers. Utrecht: LOT.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174.
Pasma, T. (2011). Metaphor and register variation: The personalisation of Dutch news discourse. Oisterwijk: Box Press.
Perrez, J., & Reuchamps, M. (2014). Deliberate metaphors in political discourse: The case of citizen discourse. Metaphorik.de, 251, 7–41.
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39.
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.
Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Semino, E., Heywood, J., & Short, M. (2004). Methodological problems in the analysis of metaphors in a corpus of conversations about cancer. Journal of Pragmatics, 361, 1271–1294.
Sweetser, E. (1999). Compositionality and blending: Semantic composition in a cognitively realistic framework. In T. Janssen & G. Redeker (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Foundations, scope and methodology (pp. 129–162). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Turner, M. (1991). Reading minds: The study of English in the age of cognitive science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Reijnierse, W. Gudrun & Christian Burgers
2023. MSDIP: A Method for Coding Source Domains in Metaphor Analysis. Metaphor and Symbol 38:4 ► pp. 295 ff.
DÍAZ-PERALTA, MARINA
2021. Gramática cognitiva y representación del mundo femenino en el discurso político español de finales del siglo XIX. Bulletin of Hispanic Studies 98:6 ► pp. 531 ff.
Reijnierse, W. Gudrun, Christian Burgers, Marianna Bolognesi & Tina Krennmayr
2019. How Polysemy Affects Concreteness Ratings: The Case of Metaphor. Cognitive Science 43:8
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 october 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.