Cover not available
Article published In:
Applying Cognitive Linguistics: Figurative language in use, constructions and typology
Edited by Ana M. Piquer-Píriz and Rafael Alejo-González
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 14:1] 2016
► pp. 1–20

Applying Cognitive Linguistics

Identifying some current research foci (figurative language in use, constructions and typology)

In recent years, Cognitive Linguistics (CL) has established itself not only as a solid theoretical approach but also as an important source from which different applications to other fields have emerged. In this introductory article, we explore some of the current, most relevant topics in applied CL-oriented studies grouped into three main strands: Analyses of figurative language (both metaphor and metonymy) in use, constructions and typology. An outline of the contents of the eight chapters included in this special issue is provided, explaining their contributions to these research areas and highlighting their methodological rigour.
Keywords: Cognitive Linguistics, figurative language, constructions, typology, applications
Published online: 7 July 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.14.1.01piq
References (120)
Achard, M., & Niemeier, S. (Eds.). (2004). Cognitive Linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2010b). Where does the money go? An analysis of the container metaphor in economics: The market and the economy. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(4), 1137–1150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aske, J. (1989). Path predicates in English and Spanish: A closer look. In K. Hall, M. Meacham, & R. Shapiro (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifteenth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 1–14). Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Barcelona, A. (Ed.) (2000). Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. (2003). Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: An analysis and a few modest proposals. In H. Cuyckens, K.U. Panther, & T. Berg (Eds.), Motivation in language: Studies in honor of Günter Radden (pp. 223–255). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barcelona, A., & Valenzuela, J. (2011). An overview of cognitive linguistics. In M. Brdar, S.T. Gries, & M.Z. Fuchs (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Convergence and expansion (pp. 17–44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beger, A. (2011). Deliberate metaphors?: An exploration of the choice and functions of metaphors in US-American college lectures. metaphorik.de, 201, 39–60.Google Scholar
Benczes, R., Barcelona, A., & Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.J. (Eds.). (2011). Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus view. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bielak, J. (2011). Cognitive linguistics and foreign language pedagogy: An overview of recent trends and developments. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), Extending the boundaries of research on second language learning and teaching (pp. 241–262) Heidelberg: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blumenthal-Dramé, A. (2012). Entrenchment in usage-based theories: What corpus data do and do not reveal about the mind. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F. (2000). Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 553–571. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2011). Cognitive semantic ways of teaching figurative phrases: An assessment. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 227–261. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2014). Cognitive Linguistics and language pedagogy: Finding ways forward. Paper presented at the 9th AELCO International conference , Badajoz, Spain.
Boers, F., & Demecheleer, M. (1998). A cognitive semantic approach to teaching prepositions. English Language Teaching Journal, 531, 197–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., De Rycker, A., & De Knop. S. (2010). Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics: Introduction. In S. De Knop , F. Boers, & A. De Rycker (Eds.), Fostering language teaching efficiency through Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 1–26). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (2006) Cognitive Linguistic approaches to second or foreign language instruction: Rationale, proposals and evaluation. In G. Kristaensen, R. Dirven, M. Achard, & F.J. Ruiz-Mendoza (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Current applications and future perspectives (pp. 305–358). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. (Eds.). (2008). Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2009). Optimizing a lexical approach to instructed second language acquisition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., Piquer-Píriz, A. Mª, Stengers, H., & Eyckmans, J. (2009). Does pictorial elucidation foster recollection of idioms? Language Teaching Research, 13(4), 367–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brooks, P.J., & Tomasello, M. (1999a). Young children learn to produce passives with nonce verbs. Developmental Psychology, 35(1), 29–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1999b). How children constrain their argument structure constructions. Language, 751, 720–738. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butler, C.S. (2009). The Lexical Constructional Model: Genesis, strengths and challenges. In C.S. Butler & J. Martín Arista (Eds.), Deconstructing constructions (pp. 117–152). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caballero, R. (2006). Re-viewing space: Figurative language in architects’ assessment of built space. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caballero, R., & Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (forthcoming) And yet they DON’T move: A genre approach to metaphorical motion. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Caballero, R., & Suárez-Toste, E. (2008). Translating the senses: Teaching the metaphors in winespeak. In F. Boers & S. Lindstromberg, (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (241–259). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cadierno, T. (2004). Expressing motion events in a second language: A cognitive typological perspective. In M. Achard & S. Neimeier (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp.13–49). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cadierno, T., & Lund, K. (2004). Cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition: Motion events in a typological framework. In B. VanPatten, J. Williams, S. Rott, & M. Overstreet (Eds.), Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition (pp. 139–154). Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cadierno, T., & Ruiz, L. (2006). Motion events in Spanish L2 acquisition. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 4(1), 183–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cienki, A., & Müller, C. (Eds.). (2008). Metaphor and gesture. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Condon, N. (2008). How cognitive linguistic motivations influence the phrasal verbs. In F. Boers & S. Lindstromberg (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (pp. 133–158). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2001). Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2007). Construction grammar. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuykens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 463–508). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, D.A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuenca, M.J., & Hilferty, J. (1999). Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
Dabrowska, E. (2009). Constructing a second language: Some final thoughts. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7(1), 277–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dabrowska, E., & Divjak, D. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deignan, A., Gabrys, D., & Solska, A. (1997). Teaching English metaphors using cross-linguistic awareness-raising activities. English Language Teaching Journal, 51(4), 352–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deignan, A., Littlemore, J., & Semino, E. (2013). Figurative language, genre and register. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
De Knop, S., Boers, F., & De Rycker, T. (Eds.). (2010). Fostering language teaching efficiency through Cognitive Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dirven, R. (2001). English phrasal verbs: Theory and didactic application. In M. Pütz, S. Niemeier, & R. Dirven (Eds.), Applied Cognitive Linguistics II: Language pedagogy (pp. 3–27). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N.C. (2010). Construction learning as category learning. In M. Pütz & L. Sicola (Eds.), Cognitive processing and second language acquisition (pp. 27–48). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N.C., & Cadierno, T. (2009). Constructing a second language: Introduction to the Special Section. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7(1), 111–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N.C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009). Constructions and their acquisition Islands and the distinctiveness of their occupancy. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7(1), 187–220.Google Scholar
Ellis, N.C., & O’Donnell, M. (2011). Robust language acquisition: An emergent consequence of language as a complex adaptive system. In L. Carlson, C. Hölscher, & T. Shipley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 3512–3517). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Ellis, N.C., O’Donnell, M., & Römer, U. (2015). Usage-based language learning. In B. MacWhinney & W. O’Grady (Eds.), The handbook of language emergence (pp. 163–180). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ellis, N.C., & Robinson, P. (2008). An introduction to cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and language instruction. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), The handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 3–23). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Evans, V., Bergen, B.K., & Zinken, J. (2007a). (Eds.). The Cognitive Linguistics reader. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
. (2007b). The Cognitive Linguistics enterprise: An overview. In V. Evans, B.K. Bergen, & J. Zinken (Eds.), The Cognitive Linguistics reader (pp. 2–36). London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Filipović, L., & Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2015). Motion. In E. Dabrowska & D. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 526–537). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C.J., & Kay, P. (1993). Construction grammar coursebook: Chapters 1 thru 11. Berkeley: University of California Berkeley.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D., & Cuyckens, H. (2007a). Introducing cognitive linguistics. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 3–21). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. (Eds.). (2007b). The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R.W. (1994). The poetics of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2001). Evaluating contemporary models of figurative language understanding. Metaphor and Symbol, 161, 317–333. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R.W. (Ed.). (2008). The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R.W. (2015). Metaphor. In E. Dabrowska & D. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 167–189). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.E. (2013). Constructionist approaches. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 15–31). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gonzálvez-García, F., & Butler, C.S. (2006). Mapping functional-cognitive space. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 4(1), 39–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S.T., & Wulff, S. (2005). Do foreign language learners also have constructions? Evidence from primining, sorting, and corpora. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 31, 182–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Han, Z., & Cadierno, T. (Eds.). (2010). Linguistic relativity in SLA: Thinking for speaking. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrera-Soler, H., & White, M. (Eds.). (2012). Metaphor and mills: Figurative language in business and economics. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrmann, J.B. (2013). Metaphor in academic discourse: Linguistic forms, conceptual structures, communicative functions and cognitive representations. VU University, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Hijazo-Gascón, A., & Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2013). Las lenguas románicas y la tipología de los eventos de movimiento. Romanische Forschungen, 125(4), 467–494. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (2013). The Oxford handbook of construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holme, R. (2009). Cognitive linguistics and language teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2009). Path salience in motion events. In E.L.J. Guo, N. Budwig, S. Ervin-Tripp, N. Nakamura, & S. Özçaliskan (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 403–14). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., & Valenzuela, J. (Eds.). (2012). Lingüística cognitiva. Barcelona: Anthropos.Google Scholar
Imbert, C. (2012). Path: Ways typology has walked through it. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(4), 236–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S., & Pavlenko, A. (2008). Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaschak, M.P., & Glenberg, A.M. (2000). Constructing meaning: The role of affordances and grammatical constructions in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 431, 508–529. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koller, V. (2004). Metaphor and gender in business media discourse: A critical cognitive study. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. (2005). Metaphor in culture: Universality and variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & Radden, G. (1998). Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 37–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & Szabó, P. (1996). Idioms: A view from Cognitive Semantics. Applied Linguistics, 17(3), 326–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kristiansen, G., Achard, M., Dirven, R., & Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.J. (Eds.). (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: Current applications and future perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd edition) (pp. 202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R.W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 1, Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Standford University Press.Google Scholar
Lazar, G. (1996). Using figurative language to expand students’ vocabulary. English Language Teaching Journal, 50(1), 43–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2003). Meanings and metaphor: Activities to practise figurative language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lindstromberg, S. (1996). Prepositions: Meaning and method. English Language Teaching Journal, 50(3), 225–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2010). English prepositions explained (revised edition). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J. (2009). Applying Cognitive Linguistics to second language learning and teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2015). Metonymy. Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J., Chen, P., Barnden, J., & Koester, A. (2011). Difficulties in metaphor comprehension faced by international students whose first language is not English. Applied Linguistics, 32(4), 208–429. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J., & Juchem-Grundmann, C. (Eds.). (2010). Applied Cognitive Linguistics in second language learning and teaching. AILA Review, 23 (special issue). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J., & Low, G. (2006). Figurative thinking and foreign language learning. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J., & Taylor, J.R. (Eds.). (2014). The Bloomsbury companion to cognitive linguistics. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Low, G. (1988). On teaching metaphor. Applied linguistics, 9(2), 125–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Low, G., Littlemore, J., & Koester, A. (2008). The use of metaphor in three university academic lectures. Applied Linguistics, 29(3), 428–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, F., & Littlemore, J. (2008). A discovery approach using corpora in the foreign language classroom. In F. Boers & S. Lindstromberg (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
MacLennan, C.H. (1994). Metaphors and prototypes in the learning teaching of grammar and vocabulary. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(3), 97–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Musolff, A. (2004). Metaphor and political discourse: Analogical reasoning in debates about Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Özçaliskan, S. (2004). Encoding the manner, path, ground components of a metaphorical motion event. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 21, 73−102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2005). Metaphor meets typology: Ways of moving metaphorically in English and Turkish. Cognitive Linguistics, 16(1): 207−246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2015). Ways of crossing a spatial boundary in typologically distinct languages. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(2), 485–508. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panther, K.U., & Radden, G. (Eds.). (1999). Metonymy in language and thought. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piquer-Píriz, A.M. (2008). Reasoning figuratively in early EFL: Some implications for the development of vocabulary. In F. Boers & S. Lindstromberg (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (pp. 219–240). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ponterotto, D. (1994). Metaphors we can learn by. English Teaching Forum, 32(3), 2–7. [URL].Google Scholar
Pütz, M., Niemeier, S., & Dirven, R. (Eds.). (2001a). Applied Cognitive Linguistics I: Theory and language acquisition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (Eds.). (2001b). Applied Cognitive Linguistics II: Language pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Robinson, P., & Ellis, N. (2008). The handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (2003). Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds. A cognitive approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, H., & Ungerer, F. (2013). Cognitive linguistics. In J. Simpson (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 611–624). Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219–57). Mahawah, NJ/London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Slobin, D.I. (1996). Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In M. Shibatani, and S.A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning (pp.195–219). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S.T. (2003). Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8(2), 209–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.) Language typology and syntactic description (Vol. 31) (pp. 57–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ungerer, F., & Schmid, H.J. (1996)[2008]. An introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Van der Auwera, J., & Nuyts, J. (2007). Cognitive linguistics and linguistic typology. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuykens (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 1074–1091). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilcox, P. (2000). Metaphor in American Sign Language. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Llopis-García, Reyes & Ana María Piquer-Píriz
2024. Introduction. Review of Cognitive Linguistics DOI logo
Piquer-Píriz, Ana M. & Marta Martín-Gilete
2024. Applying Cognitive Linguistics to elucidate the meanings of the particles IN/OUT and UP/DOWN in L2 classrooms. Review of Cognitive Linguistics DOI logo

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.