Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues

Gerard Steen 1
  • 1 University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
Gerard Steen
  • Corresponding author
  • Netherlands
  • Email
  • Further information
  • Gerard Steen is professor of Language and Communication at the University of Amsterdam. He previous held chairs in Language and Communication (2013–2014) and Language Use and Cognition (2007–2013) at VU University Amsterdam. He is the director of the Metaphor Lab Amsterdam and has published 20 monographs, edited books and special issues as well as over 120 articles and book chapters on metaphor and discourse analysis.
  • Search for other articles:
  • degruyter.comGoogle Scholar


In response to two recent publications about Deliberate Metaphor Theory (DMT) in this journal, I argue that DMT advances metaphor studies into a period with new and exciting research challenges and possibilities for application between various disciplines. I will first spell out my basic assumptions about eleven core concepts in all verbal metaphor research. Then I will present the main tenets of DMT about the difference between deliberate and non-deliberate metaphor. Finally I will briefly discuss which urgent issues still need to be addressed.

  • Beger, Anke. 2011. Deliberate metaphors? An exploration of the choice and functions of metaphors in US-American College lectures. 20. 39–60.

  • Biber, Douglas & Susan Conrad. 2009. Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Bougher, Lori. 2012. The case for metaphor in political reasoning and cognition. Political Psychology 33. 145–163.

  • Bowdle, Brian F. and Dedre Gentner. 2005. The career of metaphor. Psychological Review 112. 193–216.

  • Burgers, Christian, Britta Carmen Brugman, Kiki Y. Renardel de Lavalette & Gerard Steen. 2016. HIP: A method for linguistic hyperbole identification in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 31. 163–178.

  • Butler, Chris. 2003. Structure and function: A guide to three major structural-functional theories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Chafe, Wallace. 1994. Discourse, consciousness and time. Chicago: University of Chicago.

  • Clark, Herbert. 1996. Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Dehaene, Stanislas. 2014. Consciousness and the brain. New York: Viking.

  • Deignan, Alice, Jeanette Littlemore, and Elena Semino. 2013. Figurative language, genre and register. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Dorst, A.G. 2011. Metaphor in fiction: Language, thought and communication. Oisterwijk: Box Press.

  • Gentner, Dedre & Brian Bowdle. 2008. Metaphor as structure mapping. In R.W. Gibbs (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 109–128. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Gibbs, Raymond. 1994. The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Gibbs, Raymond. 1999. Intentions and the experience of meaning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Gibbs, Raymond. 2006. Embodiment and cognitive science. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Gibbs, Raymond W. 2008. The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Gibbs, Raymond. 2011a. Are deliberate metaphors really deliberate? A question of human consciousness and action. Metaphor and the Social World 1. 26–52.

  • Gibbs, Raymond. 2011b. Advancing the debate on deliberate metaphor. Metaphor and the Social World 1. 67–69.

  • Gibbs, Raymond. 2011c. Evaluating conceptual metaphor theory. Discourse Processes 48. 529–562.

  • Gibbs, Raymond. 2013. Metaphoric cognition as social activity: Dissolving the divide between metaphor in thought and communication. Metaphor and the Social World 3. 54–76.

  • Gibbs, Raymond. 2015a. Do pragmatic signals affect conventional metaphor understanding? A failed test of deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics 90. 77–87.

  • Gibbs, Raymond W. 2015b. Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future? Journal of Pragmatics 90. 73–76.

  • Gibbs, Raymond & Lynne Cameron. 2008. The social cognitive dynamics of metaphor performance. Cognitive Systems Research 9. 64–75.

  • Gibbs, Raymond W., Jr. & Elaine Chen. 2017. Taking metaphor studies back to the stone age: A reply to Xu, Zhang and Wu 2016. Intercultural Pragmatics 14. 117–124.

  • Giora, Rachel. 2008. Is metaphor unique? In Raymond W. Gibbs (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 143–160. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Glucksberg, Sam. 2008. How metaphors create categories – quickly. In Raymond W. Gibbs (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 67–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Graziano, Michael. 2013. Consciousness and the social brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Herrmann, Berenike. 2013. Metaphor in academic discourse. Linguistic forms, conceptual structures, communicative functions and cognitive representations, vol. 333. Utrecht: LOT Dissertation Series.

  • Kaal, Anna. 2012. Metaphor in conversation. Oisterwijk: Box Press.

  • Krennmayr, Tina. 2011. Metaphors in newspapers, vol. 276. Utrecht: LOT Dissertation Series.

  • Krennmayr, Tina, Brian Bowdle, Gerben Mulder & Gerard Steen. 2014. Building metaphorical schemas when reading text. Metaphor and the Social World 4. 65–89.

  • Krennmayr, Tina & Gerard Steen. In press. The VU Amsterdam metaphor corpus. In N. Ide & J. Pustejovsky (eds.), Handbook of linguistic annotation. Berlin: Springer.

  • Lai, Vicky T. & Tim Curran. 2013. ERP evidence for conceptual mappings and comparison processes during the comprehension of conventional and novel metaphors. Brain and Language 127. 484–496.

  • Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.

  • Langacker, Ronald. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

  • Levelt, Willem. 1989. Speaking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • McGlone, Matthew. 2007. What is the explanatory value of a conceptual metaphor? Language and Communication 27. 109–126.

  • McNamara, Daniele & Joe Magliano. 2009. Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension. In Ross, B. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation, Vol. 51, 297–384. Burlington, VT: Academic Press.

  • Musolf, Andreas. 2011. Migration, media and “deliberate” metaphors. 21. 7–25.

  • Musolff, Andreas. 2016. Cross-cultural variation in deliberate metaphor interpretation. Metaphor and the Social World 6. 205–224.

  • Nacey, Susan. 2013. Metaphors in learner English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Ng Carl Jon Way & Veronika Koller. 2013. Deliberate conventional metaphor in images: The case of corporate branding discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 28. 131–147.

  • Ogden, C.K. & I.A. Richards. 1923. The meaning of meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Ortony, Andrew (ed.). 1979/1993. Metaphor and thought, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Pasma, Tryntje. 2011. Metaphor and register variation. The personalization of Dutch news discourse. Oisterwijk: Box Press.

  • Perrez, Julien & Min Reuchamps. 2014. Deliberate metaphors in political discourse: The case of citizen discourse. 25. 7–41.

  • Pragglejaz Group. 2007. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22. 1–39.

  • Read, S., I. Cesa, D. Jones & N. Collins. 1990. When is the federal budget like a baby? Metaphor in political rhetoric. Metaphor and Symbol 5. 125–149.

  • Reijnierse, Gudrun, Christian Burgers, Tina Krennmayr & Gerard Steen. 2015. In search of a framing effect. Metaphor and the Social World, special issue on ‘The political impact of metaphors’ 5. 245–263.

  • Reijnierse, Gudrun, Christian Burgers, Tina Krennmayr & Gerard Steen. Submitted a. DMIP: AS method for identifying potentially deliberate metaphor in language use.

  • Reijnierse, Gudrun, Christian Burgers, Tina Krennmayr & Gerard Steen. Submitted b. Metaphor in communication: The distribution of potentially deliberate metaphor across register and word class.

  • Šorm, Ester & Gerard Steen. 2013. Processing visual metaphor. Metaphor and the Social World 3. 1–34.

  • Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 2008. A deflationary account of metaphors. In Raymond W. Gibbs (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 84–104. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Steen, Gerard, 1994. Understanding metaphor in literature: An empirical approach. London: Longman.

  • Steen, Gerard. 1999. From linguistic to conceptual metaphor in five steps. In Raymond W. Gibbs & Gerard Steen (eds.), Metaphor in cognitive linguistics, 57–78. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2005. Basic discourse acts: Towards a psychological theory of discourse segmentation. In Francisco Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez & M. Sandra Pena Cervel (eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction, 283–312. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2007. Finding metaphor in grammar and usage: A methodological analysis of theory and research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2008. The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor & Symbol 23. 213–241.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2009. From linguistic form to conceptual structure in five steps: Analyzing metaphor in poetry. In Geert Brône & Jeroen Vandaele (eds.), Cognitive poetics: Goals, gains and gaps, 197–226. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2011a. What does ‘really deliberate’ really mean?: More thoughts on metaphor and consciousness. Metaphor & the Social World 1. 53–56.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2011b. From three dimensions to five steps: The value of deliberate metaphor. 21. 83–110.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2011c. Genre between the humanities and the sciences. In Marcus Callies, Wolfram R. Keller & Astrid Lohöfer (eds.), Bi-directionality in the cognitive sciences: Examining the interdisciplinary potential of cognitive approaches in linguistics and literary studies, 21–42. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2011d. The contemporary theory of metaphor – now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics 9. 26–64.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2013. Deliberate metaphor affords conscious metaphorical cognition. Journal of Cognitive Semiotics 5. 179–197.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2015. Developing, testing and interpreting Deliberate Metaphor Theory. Journal of Pragmatics 90. 67–72.

  • Steen, Gerard. 2016. Mixed metaphor is a question of deliberateness. In Raymond W. Gibbs (ed.), Mixing metaphor, 113–132. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Steen, Gerard. In press. Attention to metaphor: Where embodied cognition and social interaction can meet, but may not often do so. In B. Hampe (ed.), Embodied cognition and multimodal discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Steen, Gerard, Christian Burgers & Gudrun Reijnierse. 2014. When do natural language metaphors influence reasoning? A follow-up study to Thibodeau and Boroditsky 2013. PLoS ONE. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113536.

  • Steen, Gerard, A.G. Dorst, J.B. Herrmann, Anna Kaal, Tina Krennmayr & Tryntje Pasma. 2010a. A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Steen, Gerard, A.G. Dorst, J. Berenike Herrmann, Anna Kaal & Tina Krennmayr. 2010b. Metaphor in usage. Cognitive Linguistics 21. 765–796.

  • Stukker, Ninke, Wilbert Spooren & Gerard Steen (eds.). 2016. Genre in discourse and cognition: Concepts, models, methods. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Tendahl, Markus & Raymond Gibbs. 2008. Complementary perspectives on metaphor: Cognitive linguistics and relevance theory. Journal of Pragmatics 40. 1823–1864.

  • Xu, Cihua, Chuanrui Zhang & Wichen Wu. 2016. Enlarging the scope of metaphor studies. Intercultural Pragmatics 13. 439–447.

Purchase article
Get instant unlimited access to the article.
Log in
Already have access? Please log in.

Journal + Issues

Intercultural Pragmatics is a fully peer-reviewed forum for theoretical and applied pragmatics research. The journal promotes the development and understanding of pragmatic theory and intercultural competence by publishing research that focuses on general theoretical issues, more than one language and culture, or varieties of one language, while making a special effort to cross disciplinary boundaries.