ABSTRACTThe idea that metaphorical meaning is guided by speakers’ experiences of the world is central to Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Yet little is known about the ways in which speakers’ understandings of objects in the world around them influence how they use words in metaphorical and non-metaphorical ways. This article is a corpus linguistic analysis of the collocational patterns of metaphorical and non-metaphorical bridge instances from the Corpus of American English Corpus of Contemporary American English. The study shows that metaphorical and (...) non-metaphorical uses of words are systematically linked to different types of real world experiences. It is argued that lexical metaphors are, in fact, lexico-encyclopedic conceptual metaphors, and that they are constrained by cognitive salience. (shrink)

This paper explores the relationship between people's mental imagery for their experiences of paths and roads and the metaphorical use of path and road in discourse. We report the results of two studies, one a survey examining people's mental imagery about their embodied experiences with paths and roads, with the second providing a corpus analysis of the ways path and road are metaphorically used in discourse. Our hypothesis is that both people's mental imagery for path and road, and speakers' use (...) of these words in metaphorical contexts are strongly guided by their embodied understandings of real-world events related to travel on paths and roads. The results of these studies demonstrate how bodily experiences with artifacts partly constrains not only how specific conceptual metaphors emerge, but how different metaphorical understandings are applied in talk about abstract entities and events. (shrink)

This article tackles the tricky problem of identifying metaphors in language that includes prepositions. We demonstrate how the Procedure for Identifying Metaphorical Scenes (PIMS) reflected and evoked by linguistic expressions in discourse, Johansson Falck & Okonski, accepted) can be used to identify metaphorical relations reflected in language. The scenes evoked correspond to conceptualizations that are directly attested by the specific linguistic constructions in the sentences under analysis. We present two studies that test the reliability of the procedure and the sensitivity (...) of the tool for prepositions. Results show that PIMS provides a simple procedure that increases both reliability and sensitivity for prepositional constructions. By focusing on the scenes evoked by linguistic constructions, the procedure highlights the contextual meanings of the constructions and the specific experiences that they code. (shrink)