Abstract
The aim of this article is to propose a usage-based model of linguistic metaphors. Unlike Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980) Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), the model rests on the premises that a data-driven approach is more telling about the cognitive conceptualizations of individuals than a theory-driven one. To prepare the ground for our proposal, a critical evaluation of CMT is presented both on the general level as well as within a domain of our interest, which is education. The model emerged as a result of our studies on metaphorical conceptualizations of educational variables (e.g. teacher, learner, classroom, learning, teaching) in the time of educational reforms launched in Poland as a result of a sociopolitical reorientation. Essentially, the linguistic data from the studies in question support the usage-based model.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Cameron, L. 2003. Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.
Caine, R. and G. Caine. 1997. Unleashing the power of educational change. The potential of brain-based teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: The MIT press.
Cortazzi, M. and J. Lixian. 1999. Bridges to learning: Metaphors of teaching, learning and language. In Researching and applying metaphor, eds. L. Cameron and G. Low, 149–176. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dakowska, M. 2005. Teaching English as a foreign language: A guide for professionals. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Deignan, A. 2005. Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dobrovol’skij, D. O. and E. Piirainen. 2005. Figurative language: Cross-cultural and cross-linguistic perspectives. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Geeraerts, D. 2010. Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Givón, T. 2005. Context as other minds: The pragmatics of sociality, cognition, and communication. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Goatly, A. 2007. Washing the brain. Metaphor and hidden ideology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Guerrero, M. C. M. and O. S. Villamil. 2002. Exploring teachers’ roles through metaphor analysis. TESOL Quarterly 34: 341–351.
Haser, V. 2005. Metaphor, metonymy, and experientialist philosophy. Berlin and New York: Mounton de Gruyter.
Jäkel, O. 2002. Hypotheses revisited: The cognitive theory of metaphor applied to religious texts. In metaphoric. de 02, 20–42. [http://www.metaphorik.de/02/jaekel.pdf (last accessed 12 December 2010)].
Johnson, M. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination and reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Kemmer, S. 2005. Constructional profiles as the basis of semantic analysis. Paper presented at the International conference on converging and diverging trends in cognitive linguistics, Dubrovnik, 17–18 October. [http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kemmer/DUB3.ppt (last accessed 30 July 2009)].
Kertész, A. and C. Rákosi. 2009. Cyclic vs. circular argumentation in the conceptual metaphor theory. Cognitive Linguistics 20(4): 703–732.
Kövecses, Z. 2000. Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kövecses, Z. 2002. Metaphor. A practical introduction. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Kövecses, Z. 2006. Language, mind, and culture. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Kövecses, Z. 2008. Metaphor and emotion. In The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, ed. R. W. Gibbs, 380–396. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Martínez, M. A., N. Sauleda and G. L. Huber. 2001. Metaphors as blueprints of thinking about teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher Education 17: 965–977.
Musiał, A. 2002. Exploring teacher trainees’ metaphors of language teaching. In PASE papers in language studies, ed. D. Stanulewicz, 463–470. Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego.
Nerlich, B. 2007. A Review of Zoltán Kövecses. 2006. Language, mind and culture: A practical introduction. metaphoric. de 12: 94–99. [http://www.metaphorik.de/12/rezensionkovecses.pdf (accessed 18 January 2011)].
Rakova, M. 2003. The extent of the literal: Metaphor, polysemy and theories of concepts. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Siek-Piskozub, T. and A. Strugielska. 2007. Jak kształcić nauczyciela autonomicznego. Historia pewnego seminarium [How to educate an autonomous teacher. A story of one seminar]. In Dydaktyka języków obcych na początku XXI wieku, eds. M. Jodłowiec and A. Niżegorodcew, 337–346. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
Siek-Piskozub, T. and A. Strugielska. 2008a. The teaching/learning experience at the university level—a case study in educational discourse. In Studies in language and methodology of teaching foreign language, eds. J. Arabski, D. Gabryś-Barker and A. Łyda, 485–498. Katowice: PARA.
Siek-Piskozub, T. and A. Strugielska. 2008b. Osobiste teorie ucznia i nauczyciela. [Learners’ and teachers’ personal theories] In Kultury i języki: poznawać—uczyć się—nauczać. Księga Jubileuszowa dla Pani Profesor Elżbiety Zawadzkiej-Bartnik z okazji 65 urodzin, eds. A. Jaroszewska and M. Torenc, 129–136. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
Siek-Piskozub, T. and A. Strugielska. 2008c. Autonomy, experience and concepts: A study in educational discourses. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 44(4): 597–616. [http://www.versita.com/science/socialsciences/psicl/].
Siek-Piskozub, T. and A. Strugielska. 2010. Capturing educational change in conceptual metaphors. Implications for teacher education. The International Journal of Research in Teacher Education 2(2): 61–69. [http://ijrte.eab.org.tr/1/2/teresasieg.pdf].
Stanulewicz, D. 2008. On some linguistic metaphors from a cognitive perspective. In Metaphor and cognition. Philologica wratislaviensia: From grammar to discourse. Vol. 1, eds. Z. Wąsik and T. Komendziński, 63–73. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Stanulewicz, D. 2009. Metaphorically speaking, they are travelers, wild animals, clay, and tabula rasa: How teachers conceptualize learners. In On language structure, acquisition and teaching, ed. M. Wysocka, 474–483. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
Stefanowitsch, A. 2006. Words and their metaphors: A corpus-based approach. In Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy, eds. A. Stefanowitsch and S. Th. Gries, 61–105. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Stern, J. 2000. Metaphor in context. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Strugielska, A. 2008a. The teacher, the learner, and the classroom as reflections of contemporary cultural models: A study in metaphorical conceptualizations. Acta Universitatis Nicolai Copernici, English Studies XV: 99–110.
Strugielska, A. 2008b. Coherence relations and concept dynamics in learners’ personal theories. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics 5: 107–129.
Strugielska, A. 2010. Metafora konceptualna—między kategorią klasyczną a modelem potocznym [Conceptual metaphor—between an expert taxonomy and a folk model]. In Heteronomie glottodydaktyki: Domeny, pogranicza i specjalizacje nauczania języków obcych. Księga jubileuszowa z okazji sześćdziesięciolecia urodzin prof. dr hab. Teresy Siek-Piskozub, eds. Z. Wąsik and A. Wach, 109–121. Poznań: Instytut Filologii Angielskiej UAM.
Strugielska, A. and K. Strzemeski. 2010. Metafora pojęciowa w interpretacji teorii osobistych—analiza krytyczna [Conceptual metaphor in the interpretation of personal theories—a critical approach]. Neofilolog. Czasopismo Polskiego Towarzystwa Neofilologicznego 34: 123–132.
Ungerer, F. and H. J. Schmid. 1996. An introduction to cognitive linguistics. London: Longman.
Van Geert, P. 1994. A dynamic system development: Change between complexity and chaos. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wierzbicka, A. 1972. Semantic primitives. Frankfurt: Athenaeum.
Zlatev, J. 2005. What’s in a schema? Bodily mimesis and the grounding of language. In From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics, eds. B. Hampe and J. E. Grady, 313–342. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Strugielska, A., Siek-Piskozub, T. (2013). A Usage-Based Model of Linguistic Metaphors. Inferences for the Cognitive Theory of Metaphor and Teacher Education. In: Piątkowska, K., Kościałkowska-Okońska, E. (eds) Correspondences and Contrasts in Foreign Language Pedagogy and Translation Studies. Second Language Learning and Teaching. Springer, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00161-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00161-6_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-00160-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-00161-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)