When Is a Metaphor Not a Metaphor? An Investigation Into Lexical Characteristics of Metaphoricity Among Uncertain Cases

Patterson, Katie J.

doi:10.1080/10926488.2017.1297622

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…6 See also Bates (1976) and McConnell-Ginet (2017). 7 For analyses of the relationship between context and metaphor comprehension, see also Boswell (1986); Camp (2005); Condit (2002); Cureton (1990); Forceville (2017); Gibbs and Gerrig (1989); Harris et al (2006); McCabe (1998); Nanji (1990); Neagu (2010); Newbury and Hoskins (2010); Nicaise (2010); Petterson (2017); Ritchie (2004); Ritchie (2006); Samur (2015); Semino (2013); Shinjo (1986); Slack (1980); Steen (2004); Tang (2017) and Vosniadou (1989). personality variables are related to spoken idiom comprehension in context.…”

Section: Non-literal Comprehension and The Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Çocuklarda imgesel anlama ve bağlam ipuçları: Türkçede bir çözümleme

Akcan

DEMİRHAN

2022

RumeliDE Dil Ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study moves from the arguments on one side that language input (specifically the adult language) has a significant part and a shaping function in the communication process with children, on the other side that this process is exclusively shaped by co-textual and contextual cues. With this aim in mind, in this study, first, the related literature on child language, non-literal comprehension, and the effect of context on non-literal comprehension were overviewed then the data collection process of the study was introduced. And then, the database that includes the transcription of the pieces of a natural conversation with children in a TV show was analyzed around three questions in terms of: i. What is the nature of the trigger questions directed to children? ii. What is the nature of the main questions directed to children? and iii. What is the role of the clues in the non-literal comprehension process of children? To achieve this end, firstly, the quantitative aspects of the database were revealed, and non-literal expressions were analyzed as cues for children to answer the related questions within specified classifications. Secondly, the overall data including the cases of successful or unsuccessful communication instances between adults and the children were interpreted within the contextual cue perspective. While the main hypothesis is that in the database of pieces of conversation that include non-literal questions directed to children, clue existence enhances the comprehension of the non-literal meaning (hence the correct answers given), the results of the study have shown that it’s not the case and it is the nature of the clue not the existence that is determining.

show abstract

Section: Non-literal Comprehension and The Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Çocuklarda imgesel anlama ve bağlam ipuçları: Türkçede bir çözümleme

Akcan

DEMİRHAN

2022

RumeliDE Dil Ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“Listening Enables Me to Connect with Others”: Exploring College Students’ (Mediated) Listening Metaphors

Vickery¹

2018

International Journal of Listening

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Linguistic synesthesia is metaphorical: a lexical-conceptual account

Zhao

Ahrens

Huang

2022

Cognitive Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study seeks to clarify the nature of linguistic synesthesia using a lexical-conceptual account. Based on a lexical analysis of Mandarin synesthetic usages, we find that (1) linguistic synesthesia maps the metaphorical meaning between two domains; and (2) linguistic synesthetic mappings and conceptual metaphoric mappings have similar behaviors when sense modalities are treated as conceptual domains that contain a set of mappings constrained by Mapping Principles. This lexical-conceptual account is designed to capture the fact that linguistic synesthesia involves mapping between lexicalized concepts of sensory properties, instead of the real-time sensory input that is processed in neurological synesthesia. The incorporation of a lexical semantic view with the framework of Conceptual Metaphor Theory not only offers a coherent and comprehensive account for the nature of linguistic synesthesia, but also handles aspects of linguistic synesthesia previously only accounted for by non-metaphorical accounts. These design features make this proposal the most comprehensive account to fit the current data. Furthermore, by showing linguistic synesthesia as a type of metaphor, our study strengthens the role of conceptual metaphors as the link between the perceived world and our conceptualization of that world.

show abstract

When Is a Metaphor Not a Metaphor? An Investigation Into Lexical Characteristics of Metaphoricity Among Uncertain Cases

Cited by 5 publications

References 16 publications

Çocuklarda imgesel anlama ve bağlam ipuçları: Türkçede bir çözümleme

Çocuklarda imgesel anlama ve bağlam ipuçları: Türkçede bir çözümleme

“Listening Enables Me to Connect with Others”: Exploring College Students’ (Mediated) Listening Metaphors

Linguistic synesthesia is metaphorical: a lexical-conceptual account

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About