This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ballim, A., Wilks, Y. &Barnden, J. (1990). Belief ascription, metaphor, and intensional identification. In S.L. Tsohadzidis (Ed.), Meanings and Prototypes: Studies in Linguistic Categorization. New York: Routledge, Chapman & Hall. pp. 91–131.
Ballim, A., Wilks, Y. &Barnden, J.A. (1991). Belief ascription, metaphor, and intensional identification. Cognitive Science, 15(1), 133–171.
Barnden, J.A. (1998). Combining uncertain belief reasoning and uncertain metaphor-based reasoning. In Procs. Twentieth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.p 114–119. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Barnden, J.A. (2001a). Uncertainty and conflict handling in the ATT-Meta context-based system for metaphorical reasoning. In V. Akman, P. Bouquet, R. Thomason &R.A. Young (Eds), Procs. Third International Conference on Modeling and Using Context, pp. 15–29. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 2116. Berlin: Springer.
Barnden, J.A. (2001b). Application of the ATT-Meta metaphor-understanding approach to selected examples from Goatly. Technical Report CSRP–01–01, School of Computer Science, The University of Birmingham, U.K.
Barnden, J.A. (2001c). Application of the ATT-Meta metaphor-understanding approach to various examples in the ATT-Meta project databank. Technical Report CSRP–01–02, School of Computer Science, The University of Birmingham, U.K.
Barnden, J.A. (to appear). Metaphor and artificial intelligence: Why they matter to each other. To appear in R.W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge University Press.
Barnden, J.A. (2006). Metaphor and metonymy: A practical deconstruction. Technical Report CSRP–06–1, School of Computer Science, The University of Birmingham, U.K.
Barnden, J.A., Glasbey, S.R., Lee, M.G. &Wallington, A.M. (2002). Reasoning in metaphor understanding: The ATT-Meta approach and system. In Procs. 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 1188–1193. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman.
Barnden, J.A., Glasbey, S.R., Lee, M.G. &Wallington, A.M. (2003). Domain-transcending mappings in a system for metaphorical reasoning. In Conference Companion to the 10th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL 2003), pp. 57–61. Association for Computational Linguistics.
Barnden, J.A., Glasbey, S.R., Lee, M.G. &Wallington, A.M. (2004). Varieties and directions of inter-domain influence in metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 19( 1), 1–30.
Barnden, J.A. &Lee, M.G. (2001). Understanding open-ended usages of familiar conceptual metaphors: An approach and artificial intelligence system. Technical Report CSRP–01–05, School of Computer Science, The University of Birmingham, U.K.
Cameron, L. (1999). Operationalising ‘‘metaphor’’ for applied linguistic research. In L. Cameron &G. Low (Eds.), Researching and Applying Metaphor, pp. 1–28. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Carbonell, J.G. (1982). Metaphor: an inescapable phenomenon in natural-language comprehension. In W. Lehnert &M. Ringle (Eds.), Strategies for Natural Language Processing, pp. 415–434. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Carston, R. &Wilson, D. (2005). Metaphor and relevance: The ‘‘emergent property’’ issue. Talk delivered at New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics: First UK Cognitive Linguistics Conference, University of Sussex, Brighton, U.K., October 2005.
Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K.D. &Gentner, D. (1989). The structure-mapping engine: algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41(1), 1–63.
Fass, D. (1997). Processing Metaphor and Metonymy. Greenwich, Connecticut: Ablex.
Fass, D. C. & Wilks, Y. (1983). Preference semantics, ill-formedness, and metaphor. J. Association for Computational Linguistics, 9(3&4), 178–187.
Gibbs, R.W., Jr. &Tendahl, M. (2006). Cognitive effort and effects in metaphor comprehension: Relevance theory and psycholinguistics. Mind and Language, 21(3), 379–403.
Giora, R. (1997). Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(3), 183–206.
Goatly, A. (1997). The Language of Metaphors. London and New York: Routledge.
Grady, J.E. (1997). THEORIES ARE BUILDINGS revisited. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(4), 267–290.
Hobbs, J.R. (1990). Literature and Cognition. Stanford University, CA: CSLI Press.
Katz, J. & Fodor, J. (1963). The structure of a semantic theory. Language, 39, 170–210.
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought, 2nd edition, pp. 202–251. New York and Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. &Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. &Turner, M. (1989). More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lee, M.G. &Barnden, J.A. (2001a). Reasoning about mixed metaphors with an implemented AI system. Metaphor and Symbol, 16(1&2), 29–42.
Lee, M.G. &Barnden, J.A. (2001b). Mental metaphors from the Master Metaphor List: Empirical examples and the application of the ATT-Meta system. Technical Report CSRP–01–03, School of Computer Science, The University of Birmingham, U.K.
Leezenberg, M. (1995). Contexts of metaphor. ILLC Dissertation Series, 1995–17, Institute for Language, Logic and Computation, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Martin, J.H. (1990). A Computational Model of Metaphor Interpretation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Mio, J.S. (1997). Metaphor and politics. Metaphor and Symbol, 12(2), 113–133.
Moon, R. (1998). Fixed Idioms and Expressions in English. Oxford, U.K.: Clarendon Press.
Musolff, A. (2004). Metaphor and Political Discourse: Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Peleg, O, Giora, R. &Fein, O. (2001). Salience and context effects: Two are better than one. Metaphor and Symbol, 16 (3&4), 173–192.
Sperber, D. &Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stern, J. (2000). Metaphor in Context. Cambridge, MA and London, UK: Bradford Books, MIT Press.
Vervaeke, J. &Kennedy, J.M. (2004). Conceptual metaphor and abstract thought. Metaphor and Symbol, 19(3), 213–231.
Wilks, Y. (1975). A preferential, pattern-seeking, semantics for natural language inference. Artificial Intelligence, 6, 53–74.
Wilks, Y. (1978). Making preferences more active. Artificial Intelligence, 11, 197–223.
Wilks, Y., Barnden, J. &Wang, J. (1991). Your metaphor or mine: belief ascription and metaphor interpretation. In Procs. 12th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (Sydney, Australia, Aug. 1991). pp. 945–950 San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann.
Wilks, Y., Barnden, J. & Wang, J. (1996). Your metaphor or mine: belief ascription and metaphor interpretation. In B.H. Partee &P. Sgall (Eds.), Discourse and Meaning: Papers in Honor of Eva Hajicov’, gives upturned circumflex, 141–161. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Zhang, L., Barnden, J.A., Hendley, R.J. &Wallington, A.M. (2006). Exploitation in affect detection in improvisational e-drama. Patrick Olivier. In Procs. 6th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4133, 68–79. Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Barnden, J.A. (2007). Metaphor, Semantic Preferences and Context-Sensitivity. In: Ahmad, K., Brewster, C., Stevenson, M. (eds) Words and Intelligence II. Text, Speech and Language Technology, vol 36. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-5833-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-5833-0_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-5832-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-5833-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)