A Hybrid Theory of Metaphor : Relevance Theory and Cognitive Linguistics

A Provoking New Approach To How We Understand Metaphors Thoroughly Comparing And Contrasting The Claims Made By Relevance Theorists And Cognitive Linguists. The Resulting Hybrid Theory Shows The Complementarity Of Many Positions As Well As The Need And Possibility Of Achieving A Broader And More Realistic Theory Of Our Understanding. 1. Introduction -- 2. Relevance-theory Approach To Metaphor -- 2.1. Grice's Theory Of Meaning And Communication -- 2.2. Cognitive Turn In Pragmatics: Relevance Theory -- 2.3. Explicit, The Implicit And Metaphors -- 2.4. Pragmatics And The Implicit: A Conclusion -- 3. Cognitive Linguistics And Metaphor -- 3.1. General Assumptions Of Cognitive Linguistics -- 3.2. Metaphor As Conceptualization: Conceptual Metaphor Theory -- 3.3. Metaphor And Creative Thinking: Blending Theory -- 4. Relevance Theory Versus Cognitive Linguistics -- 4.1. Metaphor Generality -- 4.2. Metaphor Motivation -- 4.3. Representation Of Metaphorical Meaning -- 4.4. Online Processing Of Metaphorical Utterances -- 4.5. Context-sensitivity And Pragmatic Effects -- 4.6. Metaphor And Polysemy -- 4.7. Metaphor Acquisition -- 4.8. Relations To A Wider Theory Of Language Use -- 4.9. Theory Of Mind: Modularity Vs. Embodiment -- 4.10. New Challenges -- 5. Hybrid Theory Of Metaphor -- 5.1. Foundations -- 5.2. Lexical Semantics In The Hybrid Theory -- 5.3. Lexical Pragmatics In The Hybrid Theory -- 5.4. Lexical Metaphoricity -- 5.5. Online Dynamics Of Metaphor Interpretation -- 6. Conclusion And Future Challenges. By Markus Tendahl. Includes Bibliographical References And Index. Cover......Page 1 Contents......Page 6 List of Figures......Page 8 List of Tables......Page 9 Typographical Conventions......Page 10 Acknowledgements......Page 11 1 Introduction......Page 14 2.1 Grice’s theory of meaning and communication......Page 20 2.2.1 The epistemology of communication: mutual knowledge, mutual manifestness and mind-reading......Page 26 2.2.2 Relevance, ostension and inference......Page 49 2.2.3 The principles of relevance......Page 55 2.2.4 Relevance-theoretic utterance interpretation......Page 56 2.3.1 Pragmatics and the explicit/implicit distinction......Page 62 2.3.2 The standard pragmatic approach to metaphor......Page 81 2.3.3 The original relevance-theory approach to metaphor: descriptive and interpretive use......Page 94 2.3.4 Recent developments in relevance theory: ad hoc concepts......Page 97 2.3.5 The cognitive effort of processing metaphors......Page 101 2.3.6 Interactions between cognitive effects and effort......Page 109 2.3.7 Cognitive effects and metaphor processing: a study......Page 114 2.4 Pragmatics and the implicit: a conclusion......Page 123 3.1 General assumptions of cognitive linguistics......Page 125 3.2 Metaphor as conceptualization: conceptual metaphor theory......Page 127 3.2.1 A modified invariance hypothesis......Page 129 3.2.2 Why do we have the metaphoric concepts we have?......Page 135 3.3 Metaphor and creative thinking: blending theory......Page 143 4 Relevance Theory versus Cognitive Linguistics......Page 151 4.1 Metaphor generality......Page 152 4.2 Metaphor motivation......Page 155 4.3 Representation of metaphorical meaning......Page 157 4.4 The online processing of metaphorical utterances......Page 162 4.5 Context-sensitivity and pragmatic effects......Page 174 4.6 Metaphor and polysemy......Page 182 4.7 Metaphor acquisition......Page 188 4.8 Relations to a wider theory of language use......Page 192 4.9 Theory of mind: modularity vs. embodiment......Page 193 4.10 New challenges......Page 201 5.1 The foundations......Page 205 5.2 Lexical semantics in the hybrid theory......Page 210 5.3 Lexical pragmatics in the hybrid theory......Page 213 5.3.1 The example tree......Page 216 5.3.2 The example at......Page 219 5.4 Lexical metaphoricity......Page 223 5.4.1 Examples......Page 224 5.4.2 The construal of metaphorical ad hoc concepts......Page 231 5.5 The online dynamics of metaphor interpretation......Page 233 5.5.1 An unprecedented crusade......Page 235 5.5.2 The figurativeness of utterances......Page 252 5.5.3 Some predictions of the hybrid theory of metaphor......Page 255 6 Conclusion and Future Challenges......Page 261 Notes......Page 274 References......Page 277 Index......Page 288 C......Page 0 G......Page 290 K......Page 291 M......Page 292 R......Page 293 S......Page 294 Z......Page 295 Why do we talk in metaphors? What is systematic about metaphors? How do we process metaphors? In the past cognitive linguistics and relevance theorists have answered these questions in very different ways and have therefore been perceived as being radically different. The differences concerning goals and working assumptions are so great, in fact, that few metaphor scholars have tried to systematically compare these two theories to understand how and why they differ. Markus Tendahl shows that cognitive linguistic and relevance theory perspectives on metaphor may be complementary. Drawing from research in pragmatics, cognitive linguistics and psycholinguistics this work is the first that compares and contrasts relevance theory positions and cognitive linguistic positions on metaphor in a systematic way. The outcome is a broader and more realistic hybrid theory of metaphor that forces metaphor research into a new direction.--Résumé de l'éditeur This approach to how we understand metaphors compares and contrasts the claims made by relevance theorists and cognitive linguists. The resulting hybrid theory shows the complementarity of many positions as well as the need and possibility of achieving a broader and more realistic theory of our understanding