Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-31T11:56:42.578Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Metaphors and Constructions

from Part I - The Constructional View of Language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2025

By
Karen Sullivan
Edited by
Mirjam Fried  and
Kiki Nikiforidou
Mirjam Fried
Affiliation:
Univerzita Karlova
Kiki Nikiforidou
Affiliation:
University of Athens, Greece
Get access

Summary

Many constructions have both metaphoric and non-metaphoric uses. For example, English transitives can either involve metaphor, as in she devoured the experience, or be non-metaphoric, as in she devoured the meat. On the other hand, constructions such as the idiom glutton for punishment or the compound verb greenlight can never be literal. This chapter argues that ‘optionally metaphoric’ constructions, such as transitives, show how metaphoric meaning is often based on non-metaphoric meaning, whereas ‘inherently metaphoric’ constructions, as in greenlight, demonstrate the role of conceptual metaphors in constructional semantics.

Keywords

idiomcompoundlexically filledconceptual autonomyconceptual dependence
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Construction Grammar , pp. 129 - 146
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boas, H. C. (2003). A Constructional Approach to Resultatives. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric structuring: understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75(1), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brdar, M., Raffaelli, I., & Žic Fuchs, M., eds. (2012). Cognitive Linguistics between Universality and Variation. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Brooke-Rose, C. (1958). A Grammar of Metaphor. London: Secker and Warburg.Google Scholar
Casasanto, D. (2008). Similarity and proximity: When does close in space mean close in mind? Memory and Cognition, 36(6), 1047–1056.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corpas Pastor, G. (2022). You are driving me up the wall! A corpus-based study of a special class of resultative constructions. Lexis, 19, 1–34.Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2003). The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. In Dirven, R. & Pörings, R., eds., Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 161–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W. & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language, 64(3), 501–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D., Imai, M., & Boroditsky, L. (2002). As time goes by: Evidence for two systems in processing space-time metaphors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(5), 537–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2013). Constructionist approaches. In Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 14–31.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. & Jackendoff, R. (2004). The English resultative as a family of constructions. Language, 80, 532–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grady, J. E. (1997). Foundations of Meaning: Primary Metaphors and Primary Scene. PhD Dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Grady, J. E. (1998). The conduit metaphor revisited: A reassessment of metaphors for communication. In Koenig, J. P., ed., Discourse and Cognition: Bridging the Gap. Stanford: CSLI Publications, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2013). The relationship between conceptual metaphor and culture. Intercultural Pragmatics, 10(2), 315–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kay, P. & Fillmore, C. J. (1999). Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What’s X doing Y? construction. Language, 75(1), 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2001). Discourse in Cognitive Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 12(2), 143–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2002). Concept, Image and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Materna, J. (2010). Building FrameNet in Czech. PhD dissertation. Masaryk University.Google Scholar
Moore, K. (2011). Frames and the experiential basis of the moving time metaphor. Constructions and Frames, 24, 80–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, C. (2008). Metaphors Dead and Alive, Sleeping and Waking: A Dynamic View. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E. (1973). Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 4(3), 328–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (2008). A deflationary account of metaphor. In Gibbs, R. W., ed., Handbook of Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 84–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, K. (2007a). Grammar in Metaphor: A Construction Grammar Account of Metaphoric Language. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Sullivan, K. (2007b). Lexical filledness and metaphor in idioms. In Nenonen, M., Niemi, S., & Niemi, J., eds., Collocations and Idioms 1: Papers from the First Nordic Conference on Syntactic Freezes. Joensuu: Joensuu University Press, pp. 330–341.Google Scholar
Sullivan, K. (2009). Grammatical constructions in metaphoric language. In Lewandowska–Tomaszczyk, B. & Dziwirek, K., eds., Cognitive Corpus Linguistics. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 57–80.Google Scholar
Sullivan, K. (2013). Frames and Constructions in Metaphoric Language. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, K. (2019). Mixed Metaphors: Their Use and Abuse. London: Bloomsbury Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, K. & Sweetser, E. (2009). Is generic is specific a metaphor? In Parrill, F., Tobin, V., & Turner, M., eds., Meaning, Form and Body. Stanford: CSLI Publications, pp. 309–327.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R. (1989). Linguistic Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Turner, M. (1987). Death Is the Mother of Beauty: Mind, Metaphor, Criticism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Turner, M. (1991). Reading Minds: The Study of English in the Age of Cognitive Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valenzuela, J. & Soriano, C. (2008). Is friendship more important than money? A psycholinguistic exploration of the important is big metaphor. Paper presented at the 6th AELCO Conference, Castellón.Google Scholar
Wachowski, W. & Sullivan, K. (2021). Metonymies and Metaphors for Death Around the World. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winter, B. & Matlock, T. (2017). Primary metaphors are both cultural and embodied. In Hampe, B., ed., Metaphor: Embodied Cognition and Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 99–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×