Abstract
This contribution applies Steen’s (e.g., 2008, 2010, 2015, 2017a,b) notion of ‘deliberate metaphor’ to authentic language data from US-American academic lectures. The analysis of excerpts from these data demonstrates several problems with the concept of deliberate metaphor and its proposed ‘identification procedure’ (Reijnierse 2017, Reijnierse et al. 2018). As the analysis shows, problems in distinguishing deliberate from non-deliberate metaphors are posed by metaphorical technical terms, the assumption of ‘idealized language users’ inherent in the identification procedure of deliberate metaphors, and the dynamics of discourse. Thus, while in its current state, deliberate metaphor can draw our attention to important uses of striking metaphors, it appears to be inadequate for the analysis of less striking cases of metaphor whose use in particular discourse contexts nevertheless suggests important communicative functions for part of the participants.
References
Beger, Anke. 2011. Deliberate metaphors? An exploration of the choice and functions of metaphors in US-American college lectures. metaphorik.de 20. 39–61.Search in Google Scholar
Beger, Anke. 2016. Different functions of (deliberate) metaphor in teaching scientific concepts. In Olaf Jäkel, Martin Döring and Anke Beger (eds.), Science and Metaphor: A Truly Interdisciplinary Perspective (metaphorik.de 26), 61–87. Hannover: Wehrhahn Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Beger, Anke. In press. The role of (deliberate) metaphor in communicating knowledge in academic discourse: An analysis of college lectures from different disciplines. Berlin: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Beger, Anke and Olaf Jäkel. 2015. “The cognitive role of metaphor in teaching science: Examples from physics, chemistry, biology, psychology and philosophy”. Philosophical Inquiries 3 (1). 89–112.Search in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne. 2010a. The discourse dynamics framework for metaphor. In Lynne Cameron and Robert Maslen (eds.), Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities, 77–97. London: Equinox.Search in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne. 2010b. Metaphors and discourse activity. In Lynne Cameron and Robert Maslen (eds.), Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities, 147–161. London: Equinox.Search in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne and Robert Maslen (eds.). 2010. Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities. London: Equinox.Search in Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2012. Forensic deliberations on ‘purposeful metaphor’. Metaphor and the Social World 2(1). 1–21.10.1075/msw.2.1.01chaSearch in Google Scholar
Deignan, Alice. 2011. Deliberateness is not unique to metaphor: A response to Gibbs. Metaphor and the Social World 1(1). 57–60.10.1075/msw.1.1.05deiSearch in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. 2011a. Evaluating Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Discourse Processes 48(8). 529–562.10.1080/0163853X.2011.606103Search in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. 2011b. Are ‘deliberate’ metaphors really deliberate?: A question of human consciousness and action. Metaphor and the Social World 1(1). 26–52.10.1075/msw.1.1.03gibSearch in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. 2015a. Do pragmatic signals affect conventional metaphor understanding? A failed test of deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics 90. 77–87.10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.021Search in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. 2015b. Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future? Journal of Pragmatics 90. 73–76.10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.016Search in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. and Lynne Cameron. 2008. The social-cognitive dynamics of metaphor performance. Cognitive Systems Research 9. 64–75.10.1016/j.cogsys.2007.06.008Search in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. and Elaine Chen. 2017. Taking metaphor studies back to the Stone Age: A reply to Xu, Zhang, and Wu (2016). Intercultural Pragmatics 14(1). 117–124.10.1515/ip-2017-0005Search in Google Scholar
Giles, Timothy D. 2008. Motives for metaphor in scientific and technical communication. Amityville, New York: Baywood.10.2190/MFMSearch in Google Scholar
Hampe, Beate (ed.). 2017. Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108182324Search in Google Scholar
Knudsen, Susanne. 2003. Scientific metaphors going public. Journal of Pragmatics 35(8). 1247–1263.10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00187-XSearch in Google Scholar
Krennmayr, Tina. 2011. Metaphor in newspapers. Utrecht: LOT.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia. 2008. Metaphors dead and alive, sleeping and waking: A dynamic view. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226548265.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia. 2017. Waking metaphors: Embodied cognition in multimodal discourse. In Beate Hampe (ed.), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse, 297–317. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108182324.017Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia. 2011. Are ‘deliberate’ metaphors really special?: Deliberateness in the light of metaphor activation. Metaphor and the Social World 1(1). 61–66.10.1075/msw.1.1.06mulSearch in Google Scholar
Pragglejaz Group. 2007. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22(1). 1–39.10.1080/10926480709336752Search in Google Scholar
Reijnierse, Gudrun W. 2017. The value of deliberate metaphor. Utrecht: LOT.Search in Google Scholar
Reijnierse, Gudrun W., Christian Burgers, Tina Krennmayr and Gerard J. Steen. 2018. DMIP: A method for identifying potentially deliberate metaphor in language use. Corpus Pragmatics 2. 129–147.10.1007/s41701-017-0026-7Search in Google Scholar
Semino, Elena. 2008. Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511816802.015Search in Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J. 2008. The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol 23. 213–241.10.1080/10926480802426753Search in Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J. 2010. When is metaphor deliberate? In Christina Alm-Arvius, Nils-Lennart Johannesson and David C. Minugh (eds.), Selected papers from the 2008 Stockholm Metaphor Festival, 43–65. Stockholm: University of Stockholm.Search in Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J. 2011a. The contemporary theory of metaphor – now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics 9(1). 26–64.10.1075/rcl.9.1.03steSearch in Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J. 2011b. From three dimensions to five steps: the value of deliberate metaphor. metaphorik.de 21. 83–110.Search in Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J. 2011c. What does ‘really deliberate’ really mean?: More thoughts on metaphor and consciousness. Metaphor and the Social World 1(1). 53–56.10.1075/msw.1.1.04steSearch in Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J. 2015. Developing, testing and interpreting Deliberate Metaphor Theory. Journal of Pragmatics 90. 67–72.10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013Search in Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J. 2017a. Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues. Intercultural Pragmatics 14(1). 1–24.10.1515/ip-2017-0001Search in Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J. 2017b. Attention to metaphor: Where embodied cognition and social interaction can meet, but may not often do so. In Beate Hampe (ed.), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse, 279–297. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108182324.016Search in Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J., Aletta G. Dorst, Berenike J. Herrmann, Tina Krennmayr and Trijntje Pasma. 2010. A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/celcr.14Search in Google Scholar
©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Introduction
- L2-constructions that go together – more on valency constructions and learner language
- Using Cooperation Scripts and Animations to Teach Grammar in the Foreign Language Classroom
- The contested notion of ‘deliberate metaphor’: What can we learn from ‘unclear’ cases in academic lectures?
- Denotational Incongruencies in TEFL: Cognitive linguistic solutions for a didactic problem
- Metaphors in educational texts: A case study on history and chemistry teaching material
- The semantics of German posture and placement verbs in noun-verb phrases
- Emergent pseudo-coordination in spoken German. A corpus-based exploration
- Deriving the meaning of light verb constructions – a frame account of German stehen ‘stand’
- Conflicting Evidence for Mental Schemas in Language Production and Processing
- A usage-based perspective on public discourse: Towards a critical cognitive linguistics
- Constructicography at work: implementation and application of the German Constructicon
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Introduction
- L2-constructions that go together – more on valency constructions and learner language
- Using Cooperation Scripts and Animations to Teach Grammar in the Foreign Language Classroom
- The contested notion of ‘deliberate metaphor’: What can we learn from ‘unclear’ cases in academic lectures?
- Denotational Incongruencies in TEFL: Cognitive linguistic solutions for a didactic problem
- Metaphors in educational texts: A case study on history and chemistry teaching material
- The semantics of German posture and placement verbs in noun-verb phrases
- Emergent pseudo-coordination in spoken German. A corpus-based exploration
- Deriving the meaning of light verb constructions – a frame account of German stehen ‘stand’
- Conflicting Evidence for Mental Schemas in Language Production and Processing
- A usage-based perspective on public discourse: Towards a critical cognitive linguistics
- Constructicography at work: implementation and application of the German Constructicon