The Discourse Dynamics Approach to Metaphor and Metaphor-Led Discourse Analysis

Cameron, Lynne; Maslen, Robert; Todd, Zazie; Maule, John; Stratton, Peter; Stanley, Neil

doi:10.1080/10926480902830821

Cited by 193 publications

(168 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

146

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Full analysis of the metaphors was carried out using the procedure detailed by Cameron et al (2009); some of the findings are reported in (Cameron and Maslen 2010). For the present study, we carried out a further round of analysis 3 using the software Wordsmith Tools v.5 (Scott 2007) to extract all instances of the lemma see: i.e., see/seeing/sees/seen/saw.…”

Section: Discourse Data From Focus Group Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We randomly sampled 1,000 citations of see/saw/seeing/seen/sees. We read through all 1,000 citations, using Cameron's (2003Cameron's ( , et al 2009 version of the 'pragglejaz' procedure (Pragglejaz Group 2007) to identify 'vehicle' terms rather than words (as in the original procedure). Uses were classed as metaphorical if they satisfied both the criteria of contrast between contextual and basic meaning, where the basic meaning of see was taken to be visual perception, and transfer of meaning from the basic to the contextual sense.…”

Section: The Corpus Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Re-examination of UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING

Deignan

Cameron

2009

Cognitive Semiotics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive metaphor theorists have identified a number of mappings that, it has been claimed, are both central to thinking and productive of linguistic metaphors. One of these is UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING. In this article, we re-examine UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING using two sources of naturally occurring data. Our first source is the Oxford English Corpus: a two-billion-word corpus of authentic contemporary English texts, from which we extracted a 1,000-citation concordance of the lemma SEE. We analyzed this into major sense groups and identified the most frequent lexico-grammatical patterns. Our second source of data is transcribed spoken English from focus-group discussions. We analyzed this dataset, using detailed discourse analysis, to identify the meanings of SEE and its most frequent phraseologies. Both analyses lead us to conclude that SEE is, indeed, used to talk about understanding, as claimed by Conceptual Metaphor theorists, but that the metaphor usually describes difficulties with understanding another speaker's point of view or, more generally, the process of reaching an understanding: that is, it is used to talk about understanding or not understanding as processes, not states. Our findings are consistent with the construal of language and thought as a dynamic system.

show abstract

Section: Discourse Data From Focus Group Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Corpus Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Re-examination of UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING

Deignan

Cameron

2009

Cognitive Semiotics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The method of metaphor analysis is fully described in Cameron et al (2009) and Cameron & Maslen (2010). Briefly, verbal metaphors were identified and underlined in the data; these 12,363 prompted by this succession of references, showed that Janet was in the process of empathising with Muslims who experience this kind of over-generalisation, or lumping, while also distancing herself from those who over-generalise; several layers of dialogical construction of Self and Other were thus involved.…”

Section: Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As part of earlier work on the data, transcriptions had been analysed for metaphors by the authors (details in Cameron et al, 2009). To determine the new analysis, a section of transcript was subjected to intensive discourse analysis which identified features relevant to the research questions and prompted a multi-level, nested type of qualitative discourse analysis.…”

Section: Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The dialogic construction of self and other in response to terrorism.

Cameron¹,

Maslen²,

Todd³

2013

Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

and on a bus. It was not just the violence and death that shocked people in UK, but the fact that the young men, the first suicide bombers in UK, were British, three of them born and brought up in a long-established Muslim community. After this event (which became known as 7/7), government and community leaders worked hard to prevent a violent backlash in Muslim communities in UK, and were, by and large, successful. However, the event caused much social and personal disruption, shifting notions of both Self and Other.The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of that disruption on people's personal and social landscapes through an applied linguistic study of talk in focus groups. If, as a society, we can better understand how people and groups respond to an ongoing threat of terrorist attack, we should be better able to offer support towards resilience and protection against fragility.The study forms part of a larger project investigating the dynamics of empathy in dialogue in times of uncertainty. 1 Empathy concerns how one person (the Self) emotionally and cognitively responds to another, how they understand how it is to be 'the Other'. 2 In this study, where focus groups discuss the risk of terrorism and its effects on their everyday lives, we attend to one particular aspect of empathy in dialogue: how the Other is dialogically constructed in relation to the Self. By tracing patterns of stabilization and variability in dialogic construction of Self and Other, post 7/7 and 9/11, the study aims to understand the impact of increased uncertainty on people's emotions, and on the voices and positions that people construct for themselves and for others.The study is innovative in applying a complex dynamic systems view of society, culture, cognition and discourse which allows researchers to attend to interdependencies of affective, cognitive and social factors in people's lives. This approach highlights the fluidity of constructions CONSTRUCTION OF SELF AND OTHER AFTER TERRORISM 1 of Self and Other as voiced in people's accounts, and how people move in and out of multiple social identities.

show abstract

“…It was a small scale, quasi-replication study, using focus groups and a very similar question schedule. In both cases, metaphor-led discourse analysis (Cameron et al, 2009) was carried out to find out how people make use of verbal metaphors when discussing issues around violence. The findings of the two analyses are compared to explore how the different contexts, cultures and types of violence are reflected in, and constructed through, people's use of metaphor.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%