Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Cognitive Linguistics

Editor-in-Chief: Newman, John

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2013: 0.833
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.188
Rank 55 out of 169 in category Linguistics in the 2013 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Social Sciences Edition

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR): 0.718
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP): 1.356

ERIH category 2011: INT1

VolumeIssuePage

Issues

Metaphor and convention

*Affiliation: Department of Scandinavian Languages, Stockholm University

Citation Information: Cognitive Linguistics. Volume 18, Issue 1, Pages 47–89, ISSN (Online) 1613-3641, ISSN (Print) 0936-5907, DOI: 10.1515/COG.2007.003, March 2007

Publication History

Received:
2005-09-26
Revised:
2006-06-05
Published Online:
2007-03-20

Abstract

This article argues that lexical metaphors should be seen as graded: they differ in their conventionalized ability to activate concepts from the source domain. Such differences in metaphorical strength are analyzed, along with other (graded) dimensions of conventionality. Co-occurrence patterns for conventionalized metaphors from the WEIGHT domain in Swedish are investigated in some detail, making use of extensive corpus data. The results indicate large differences in metaphorical strength. This provides implications for the relation between conceptual and lexical levels of metaphor, which are found to be more dialectic than usually assumed, especially within Conceptual Metaphor Theory.

Keywords: lexical metaphor; conceptual metaphor; conventionality; lexical semantics; corpus linguistics; collocation; metaphorical strength

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.