Metaphor in Analytic Philosophy and Cognitive Science

Abstract

held exclusively by Aletheia-Associação Científica e Cultural. This e-offprint is furnished for personal use only (for non-commercial research and education use) and shall not be self-archived in electronic repositories. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. If you wish to self-archive your article, contact us to require the written permission of the RPF's editor. For the use of any article or a part of it, the norms stipulated by the copyright law in vigour are applicable. Authors requiring further information regarding Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.rpf.pt

Metaphor Research and the Hebrew Bible

“…Johnson 1981b; 1998; Martinich 1998; T. Cohen 2003; Hagberg 2013; Mácha 2019; and the reputable online resources Hills 2016 and Theodorou 2016.…”

“…Avis 1999: 98-102) notes, ‘Metaphor has come of age, and it can never again be dismissed as ornament or rhetorical flourish’. A brief account of the theories and their developments will be given here, while more extensive surveys and descriptions can be found elsewhere (Lakoff 1993; Ritchie 2006: 31-57; Grady 2007; Fusaroli and Morgagni 2009; Deignan 2010; Kövecses 2017; Mácha 2019). One can also consult de Gruyter’s online ‘Cognitive Linguistics Bibliography’ (CogBib) (https://www.degruyter.com/view/db/cogbib) for over 7,000 entries up to 2010.…”

“…Critiques of the theory often center around methodological concerns such as the ability to identify metaphors in discourse or accurately discern their conceptual precursors. There are, however, more substantial critiques concerning CMT’s ability to account for cultural influence, online-processing of metaphor comprehension, its insufficient theory of meaning, or its dismissal of truth and objectivity (for discussions of critiques of CMT, see Gibbs 2009; Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez and Hernández 2011; Gibbs 2017b; Kövecses 2017: 24-25; Varga 2018; Mácha 2019: 2274-77). Indeed, some scholars question the very existence of conceptual metaphors (e.g., Cameron and Maslen 2010).…”

“…Even for the many scholars who find CMT’s basic claims to be convincing, there is increasing recognition that CMT cannot account for every aspect of metaphor. Recent scholarship, therefore, has integrated multiple theories of metaphor to account for various aspects of metaphor existence and use (for a recent survey, see Mácha 2019: 2278-84). Steen (2011a; 2008) develops a three-fold integrative model of metaphor, incorporating conceptual, linguistic, and communicative aspects, though with a strong distinction between deliberate and non-deliberate metaphors not shared by all scholars (Gibbs 2011b; Steen 2011b; cf.…”

Analytické teorie metafory: III. Nekognitivní teorie D. Davidsona

“…Na přehledové zpraco vání této teorie a mnohých dalších, včetně argumentů pro a proti, odkazuji na můj anglický článek "Metaphor in Analytic Philosophy and Cognitive Sci ence" (2019). 49…”