Metaphor and Figurative Language / Edition 1

Hardcover (Print)
Not Available on


With contributions from Aristotle to Lakoff and Johnson, and incorporating the work of philosophers, linguists, literary theorists, and cognitive psychologists, this wide-ranging and multidisciplinary six-volume collection on metaphor and figurative language is a new title from Routledge’s Critical Concepts in Linguistics series.

Metaphor and Figurative Language is fully indexed and has a comprehensive introduction, newly written by the editors, which places the collected material in its historical and intellectual context. It is an essential library purchase and is destined to be valued by scholars and students as a vital reference work and research tool.

Read More Show Less

Product Details

Meet the Author

Patrick Hanks is one of Britain’s leading lexicographers. He was responsible for the first editions of Collins English Dictionary, Cobuild, and The New Oxford Dictionary of English.

He is affiliated to the Computer Studies dept. at Brandeis University, focussing on corpus linguistics.

Read More Show Less

Table of Contents


Volume I: Theoretical issues

Part 1: Foundations

1. Aristotle, ‘Metaphor and Figurative Language’ (selected with commentary by Katerina Stathi).

2. Marcus Fabius Quintilianus, Institutio Oratoria (Institutes of Oratory), Bk. 8, Ch. 6 (translated by Patrick Hanks).

3. R. Jakobson, ‘Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasia Disturbances’, Fundamentals of Language (Mouton, 1956), pp. 67–96.

Part 2: Philosophy of Metaphor

4. Max Black, ‘Metaphor’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 1954–5, 55, 273–94.

5. Donald Davidson, ‘What Metaphors Mean’, in Sheldon Sacks (ed.), On Metaphor (Chicago University Press, 1979), pp. 31–47.

6. Max Black, ‘How Metaphors Work: A Reply to Donald Davidson’, Critical Inquiry, 1979, 6, 1, 131–43.

7. H. P. Grice, ‘Logic and Conversation’, in P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds.), Speech Acts: Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3 (Academic Press, 1975), pp. 41–58.

8. John R. Searle, ‘Metaphor’, Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts (Cambridge University Press, 1979), pp. 76–116.

Part 3: Beyond Similarity and Class Inclusion

9. Sam Glucksberg and Boaz Keysar, ‘Understanding Metaphorical Comparison: Beyond Similarity’, Psychological Review, 1990, 97, 3–18.

10. Y. Shen, ‘Metaphors and Categories’, Poetics Today, 1992, 13, 771–94.

Part 4: Conceptual Metaphor

11. George Lakoff and Zoltan Kövecses, ‘The Cognitive Model of Anger Inherent in American English’, in Dorothy Holland and Naomi Quinn (eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought (Cambridge University Press, 1987), pp. 195–221.

12. Joseph E. Grady, ‘Theories are Buildings Revisited’, Cognitive Linguistics, 1997, 8, 4, 267–90.

Part 5: Blending Theory

13. G. Fauconnier and M. Turner, ‘Conceptual Integration Networks’, Cognitive Science, 1998, 22, 133–87.

Part 6: Relevance Theory

14. Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson, ‘Loose Talk’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 1986, 86, 153–71.

15. Robyn Carston, ‘Metaphor, Ad Hoc Concepts and Word Meaning: More Questions than Answers’, UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 2002, 14.

16. Deirdre Wilson and Robyn Carston, ‘Metaphor, Relevance and the "Emergent Property" Issue’, Mind & Language, 2006, 21, 404–33.

Part 7: Metaphor and Context

17. A. Ortony et al., ‘Interpreting Metaphors and Idioms: Some Effects of Context on Comprehension’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1978, 17, 465–77.

18. R. W. Gibbs, Jr., ‘Spilling the Beans on Understanding and Memory for Idioms in Conversation’, Memory & Cognition, 1980, 8, 449–56.

19. A. N. Katz and P. Pexman, ‘Interpreting Figurative Statements: Speaker Occupation can Change Metaphor into Irony’, Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 1997, 12, 19–41.

Volume II: Typology of Figurative Language

Part 8: Metaphor and Simile

20. Dedre Gentner and Sergey S. Zharikov, ‘Why do Metaphors Seem Deeper than Similes?’, in W. D. Gray, and C. D. Schunn (eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (George Mason University, 2002), pp. 976–81.

21. D. L. Chiappe, J. M. Kennedy, and T. Smykowski, ‘Reversibility, Aptness, and the Conventionality of Metaphors and Similes’, Metaphor and Symbol, 2003, 18, 85–105.

22. Sam Glucksberg and Catrinel Haught, ‘On the Relation Between Metaphor and Simile: When Comparison Fails’, Mind and Language, 2006, 21, 3, 333–59.

Part 9: Metonymy

23. Louis Goossens, ‘Metonymy in the Pipeline’, in Keith Carlon (ed.), Perspectives on English: Studies in Honour of Professor Emma Vorlat (Peeters, 1994), pp. 386–94.

24. G. Radden and Z. Kövecses, ‘Towards a Theory of Metonymy’, in K.-U. Panther and G. Radden (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought (John Benjamins, 1999), pp. 17–59.

25. C. Paradis, ‘Where Does Metonymy Stop? Senses, Facets and Active Zones’, Metaphor and Symbol, 2004, 19, 4, 245–64.

26. B. Warren, ‘An Alternative Account of the Interpretation of Referential Metonymy and Metaphor’, in R. Dirven and R. Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast (Mouton de Gruyter, 2002), pp. 113–33.

Part 10: Pictorial Metaphor

27. John M. Kennedy, ‘Metaphor in Pictures’, Perception, 1982, 11, 589–605.

28. Alan F. Blackwell, ‘Pictorial Representation and Metaphor in Visual Language Design’, Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 2001, 12, 3, 223–252.

29. Charles Forceville, ‘Pictorial and Multimodal Metaphor in Commercials’, in Edward F. McQuarrie and Barbara J. Phillips (eds.), Go Figure! New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric (M. E. Sharpe, 2008), pp. 272–310.

Part 11: Conventional Metaphors and Idioms

30. Elisabeth C. Traugott, ‘"Conventional" and "Dead" Metaphors Revisited’, in René Dirven and Wolf Paprotté (eds.), The Ubiquity of Metaphor (John Benjamins, 1985), pp. 17–56.

31. Boaz Keysar and Bridget Martin Bly, ‘Intuitions about the Transparency of Idioms: Can One Keep a Secret by Spilling the Beans?’, Journal of Memory and Language, 1995, 34, 89–109.

32. Jan Svanlund, ‘Metaphor and Convention’, Cognitive Linguistics, 2007, 18, 1, 47–89.

Part 12: Time and Space

33. Lera Boroditsky, ‘Metaphoric Structuring: Understanding Time Through Spatial Metaphors’, Cognition, 2000, 75, 1–28.

34. Teenie Matlock, ‘Fictive Motion as Cognitive Simulation’, Memory & Cognition, 2004, 32, 1389–400.

35. Dedre Gentner, Mutsumi Imai, and Lera Boroditsky, ‘As Time Goes By: Evidence for Two Systems in Processing Space Time Metaphors’, Language and Cognitive Processes, 2002, 17, 5, 537–65.

Part 13: Embodied Metaphor

36. R. W. Gibbs, ‘Embodied Experience and Linguistic Meaning’, Brain and Language, 2003, 84, 1, 1–15.

Volume III: Literary and Cross-cultural Perspectives

Part 14: Metaphor in Literary Theory

37. Kenneth Burke, ‘Symbol and Association’, Hudson Review, 1956–7, 9, 212–25.

38. Monroe C. Beardsley, ‘The Metaphorical Twist’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 1962, 22, 3, 293–307.

39. Northrop Frye, ‘The Motive for Metaphor’, The Educated Imagination (Indiana University Press, 1964).

40. Cleanth Brooks, ‘Metaphor, Paradox, and Stereotype in Poetic Language’, British Journal of Aesthetics, 1965, 5, 315–28.

41. Tanya Reinhart, ‘On Understanding Poetic Metaphor’, Poetics, 1976, 5, 383–402.

42. Eva F. Kittay and Adrienne Lehrer, ‘Semantic Fields and the Structure of Metaphor’, Studies in Language, 1981, 5, 1, 31–63.

43. Gerard Steen, ‘Literary and Non-Literary Aspects of Metaphor’, Poetics Today, 1992, 13, 4, 687–705.

44. Naomi Quinn, ‘The Cultural Basis of Metaphor’, in James W. Fernandez (ed.), Beyond Metaphor: The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology (Stanford University Press, 1991), pp. 56–93.

45. Yeshayahu Shen, ‘Cognitive Constraints on Poetic Figures’, Cognitive Linguistics, 1997, 8, 1, 33–71.

46. Alice Deignan, ‘Metaphorical Expressions and Culture: An Indirect Link’, Metaphor and Symbol, 2003, 18, 4, 255–72.

Part 15: Case Studies

47. Stanley Stewart, ‘Marvell and the Ars Moriendi’, in Earl Miner (ed.), Seventeenth-Century Imagery: Essays on the Uses of Figurative Language from Donne to Farquhar (University of California Press, 1971), pp. 133–50.

48. E. Black, ‘Metaphor, Simile and Cognition in Golding’s "The Inheritors"’, Language and Literature, 1993, 2, 37–48.

49. Charles Forceville, ‘The Metaphor Colin is a Child in Ian McEwan’s, Harold Pinter’s, and Paul Schrader’s "The Comfort of Strangers"’, Metaphor and Symbol, 1999, 14, 3, 179–98.

50. Veronika Koller, ‘A Shotgun Wedding: Co-occurrence of War and Marriage Metaphors in Discourse of Mergers and Acquisitions’, Metaphor and Symbol, 2002, 17, 3.

Part 16: Cross-cultural Perspectives

51. K. Van Brabant, ‘The Cross-Cultural Study of Metaphor: Towards a Theoretical and Practical Analysis of Figurative Speech’, Communication & Cognition, 1986, 19, 3–4.

52. Ning Yu, ‘Metaphorical Expressions of Anger and Happiness in English and Chinese’, Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 1995, 10, 59–92.

53. Dmitrij Dobrovol’skij and Elisabeth Piirainen, ‘Animal Metaphors and Animal Symbols: Case Studies’, Figurative Language: Cross-Cultural and Cross-Linguistic Perspectives (Elsevier, 2005), pp. 323–51.

54. I. Kecskes, ‘Formulaic Language in English Lingua Franca’, in I. Kecskes and L. Horn (eds.), Explorations in Pragmatics: Linguistic, Cognitive and Intercultural Aspects (Mouton, 2007).

Volume IV: Cognition and Metaphor

Part 17: Processing

55. Patricia Gildea and Sam Glucksberg, ‘On Understanding Metaphor: The Role of Context’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1983, 22, 577–90.

56. Cristina Cacciari and Patrizia Tabossi, ‘The Comprehension of Idioms’, Journal of Memory and Language, 1988, 27, 6, 668–84.

57. P. Pexman, T. Ferretti, and A. Katz, ‘Discourse Factors that Influence Online Reading of Metaphor and Irony’, Discourse Processes, 2000, 29, 201–22.

58. S. Frisson and M. Pickering, ‘Obtaining a Figurative Interpretation of a Word: Support for Underspecification’, Metaphor and Symbol, 2001, 16, 149–72.

59. M. A. Gernsbacher et al., ‘The Role of Suppression and Enhancement in Understanding Metaphors’, Journal of Memory and Language, 2001, 45, 433–45.

60. P. Rubio Fernández, ‘Suppression in Metaphor Interpretation: Differences Between Meaning Selection and Meaning Construction’, Journal of Semantics, 2007, 1–27.

Part 18: Degrees of Salience

61. Brian F. Bowdle and Dedre Gentner, ‘The Career of Metaphor’, Psychological Review, 2005, 112, 1, 193–216.

62. R. Giora, ‘Understanding Figurative and Literal Language: The Graded Salience Hypothesis’, Cognitive Linguistics, 1997, 7, 183–206.

63. R. Giora, ‘On the Priority of Salient Meanings: Studies of Literal and Figurative Language’, Journal of Pragmatics, 1999, 31, 919–29.

Part 19: Is Metaphor Unique?

64. Raymond W. Gibbs, ‘Literal Meaning and Psychological Theory’, Cognitive Science, 1984, 8, 3, 275–304.

65. M. Dascal, ‘Defending Literal Meaning’, Cognitive Science, 1987, 11, 259–81.

66. B. Keysar, ‘On the Functional Equivalence of Literal and Metaphorical Interpretations in Discourse’, Journal of Memory and Language, 1989, 28, 375–85.

67. F. Récanati, ‘The Alleged Priority of Literal Meaning’, Cognitive Science, 1995, 19, 207–32.

68. B. Keysar et al., ‘Conventional Language: How Metaphorical is it?’, Journal of Memory and Language, 2000, 43, 576–93.

69. Rachel Giora et al., ‘Weapons of Mass Distraction: Optimal Innovation and Pleasure Ratings’, Metaphor and Symbol, 2004, 19, 115–41.

Part 20: Aptness

70. Robert J. Sternberg and Roger Tourangeau, ‘Aptness in Metaphor’, Cognitive Psychology, 1981, 13, 27–55.

71. D. L. Chiappe and J. M. Kennedy, ‘Aptness Predicts Preference for Metaphors or Similes, as Well as Recall Bias’, Psychonomics Bulletin and Review, 1999, 6, 668–76.

72. Lara L. Jones and Zachary Estes, ‘Roosters, Robins, and Alarm Clocks: Aptness and Conventionality in Metaphor Comprehension’, Journal of Memory and Language, 2006, 55, 18–32.

73. D. G. Blasko and C. M. Connine, ‘Effects of Familiarity and Aptness on Metaphor Processing’, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1993, 19, 2, 295–308.

Part 21: Developmental Aspects

74. F. C. Keil, ‘Conceptual Domains and the Acquisition of Metaphor’, Cognitive Development, 1986, 1, 73–96.

75. E. Winner et al., ‘Children’s Understanding of Nonliteral Language’, Journal of Aesthetic Education, 1988, 22, 51–63.

76. Maria C. Levorato and Cristina Cacciari, ‘The Effects of Different Tasks on the Comprehension and Production of Idioms in Children’, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1993, 60, 261–83.

Volume V: Brain and Metaphor

Part 22: Is the Right Hemisphere Uniquely Involved in Metaphor Comprehension?

77. E. Winner and H. Gardner, ‘The Comprehension of Metaphor in Brain-Damaged Patients’, Brain, 1977, 100, 717–29.

78. G. Bottini et al., ‘The Role of the Right Hemisphere in the Interpretation of Figurative Aspects of Language: A Positron Emission Tomography Activation Study’, Brain, 1994, 117, 1241–53.

79. Curt Burgess and Christine Chiarello, ‘Neurocognitive Mechanisms Underlying Metaphor Comprehension and Other Figurative Language’, Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 1996, 11, 1, 67–84.

80. M. Jung-Beeman, ‘Bilateral Brain Processes for Comprehending Natural Language’, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2005, 9, 512–18.

81. M. Oliveri, L. Romero, and C. Papagno, ‘Left but not Right Temporal Involvement in Opaque Idiom Comprehension: A Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Study’, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2004, 16, 848–55.

82. S. Lee and M. Dapretto, ‘Metaphorical vs. Literal Word Meanings: fMRI Evidence Against a Selective Role of the Right Hemisphere’, NeuroImage, 2006, 29, 536–44.

83. Seana Coulson and Cyma Van Petten, ‘A Special Role for the Right Hemisphere in Metaphor Comprehension? ERP Evidence from Hemifield Presentation’, Brain Research, 2007, 1146, 128–45.

84. K. Stringaris et al., ‘Deriving Meaning: Distinct Neural Mechanisms for Metaphoric, Literal, and Non-Meaningful Sentences’, Brain and Language, 2007, 100, 150–62.

85. A. Kacinik, Natalie and Christine Chiarello, ‘Understanding Metaphors: Is the Right Hemisphere Uniquely Involved?’, Brain and Language, 2007, 100, 188–207.

86. L. Schmidt et al., ‘Right Hemisphere Metaphor Processing? Characterizing the Lateralization Semantic Processes’, Brain and Language, 2007, 100, 127–41.

Part 23: Effects of Degree of Salience

87. R. Giora et al., ‘Differential Effects of Right- and Left-Hemisphere Damage on Understanding Sarcasm and Metaphor’, Metaphor and Symbol, 2000, 15, 63–83.

88. Kathleen Ahrens et al., ‘Functional MRI of Conventional and Anomalous Metaphors in Mandarin Chinese’, Brain and Language, 2007, 100, 163–71.

89. A. Goldstein, Y. Arzouan, and M. Faust, ‘Timing the Metaphoric Brain: Contribution of ERPs and Source Localization to Understanding Figurative Language’, in Z. Breznitz (ed.), Brain Research in Language (Springer, 2008), pp. 205–23.

90. Z. Eviatar and M. Just, ‘Brain Correlates of Discourse Processing: An fMRI Investigation of Irony and Metaphor Comprehension’, Neuropsychologia, 2006, 44, 2348–59.

91. Nira Mashal et al., ‘Hemispheric Differences in Processing the Literal Interpretation of Idioms: Converging Evidence from Behavioral and fMRI Studies’, Cortex, 2008, 44, 848–60.

Part 24: Clinical Populations

92. S. Spence, E. Zaidel, and A. Kasher, ‘The Right Hemisphere Communication Battery: Results from Commissurotomy Patients and Normal Subjects Reveal Only Partial Right Hemisphere Contribution’, Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 1990, 12, 42–3.

93. C. Papagno, ‘Comprehension of Metaphors and Idioms in Patients with Alzheimer’s Disease: A Longitudinal Study’, Brain, 2001, 124, 1450–60.

94. Martina Amanzio et al., ‘Metaphor Comprehension in Alzheimer’s Disease: Novelty Matters’, Brain and Language, 2009, 107, 1–10.

95. Hiram Brownell et al., ‘Assessing Quality of Metaphor Interpretation by Right Hemisphere Damaged Patients’, Brain and Language, 2007, 103, 197–8.

96. M. De Bonis et al., ‘The Comprehension of Metaphors in Schizophrenia’, Psychopathology, 1997, 30, 149–54.

97. T. T. Kircher et al., ‘Neural Correlates of Metaphor Processing in Schizophrenia’, NeuroImage, 2007, 34, 281–89.

98. Helen L. Gunter, Mohammad Ghaziuddin, and Hadyn D. Ellis, ‘Asperger Syndrome: Tests of Right Hemisphere Functioning and Interhemispheric Communication’, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2002, 32/4, 263–81.

Part 25: The Effect of Task

99. K. A. Stringaris et al., ‘How Metaphors Influence Semantic Relatedness Judgments: The Role of the Right Frontal Cortex’, NeuroImage, 2006, 33, 784–93.

100. M. Rapp et al., ‘Laterality in Metaphor Processing: Lack of Evidence from Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Right Hemisphere Theory’, Brain and Language, 2007, 100, 142–9.

Part 26: Methodologies

101. N. Mashal, M. Faust, and T. Hendler, ‘The Role of the Right Hemisphere in Processing Nonsalient Metaphorical Meanings: Application of Principal Components Analysis to fMRI Data’, Neuropsychologia, 2005, 43, 14, 2084–100.

102. M. Kutas, ‘One Lesson Learned: Frame Language Processing—Literal and Figurative—as a Human Brain Function’, Metaphor and Symbol, 2006, 21, 285–325.

103. Todd R. Ferretti, Christopher A. Schwint, and Albert N. Katz, ‘Electrophysiological and Behavioral Measures of the Influence of Literal and Figurative Contextual Constraints on Proverb Comprehension’, Brain and Language, 2007, 101, 1, 38–49.

104. Miriam Faust and Nira Mashal, ‘The Role of the Right Cerebral Hemisphere in Processing Novel Metaphoric Expressions Taken From Poetry: A Divided Visual Field Study’, Neuropsychologia, 2007, 45, 860–70.

105. G. Pobric et al., ‘The Causal Role of the Right Cerebral Hemisphere in Processing Novel Metaphoric Expressions Taken from Poetry: A TMS Study’, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2008, 20, 170–81.

106. M. Sotillo et al., ‘Neural Activity Associated with Metaphor Comprehension: Spatial Analysis’, Neuroscience Letters, 2005, 373, 1, 5–9.

Volume VI: Empirical Analysis of Figurative Language

Part 27: Corpus-Based Analyses

107. Rosamund Moon, ‘The Distribution of Idioms in English’, Studii italiani di linguistica teoretica e applicata, 2001, 30, 2, 229–41.

108. Alice Deignan, ‘A Corpus Linguistic Perspective on the Relationship Between Metaphor and Metonymy’, Style, 2005, 39/1, 72–91.

109. Patrick Hanks, ‘Similes and Sets: The English Preposition "Like"’, in R. Blatná and V. Petkevic (eds.), Jazyky a jazykoveda (Languages and Linguistics: Festschrift for Professor Fr. Cermak) (Philosophy Faculty of the Charles University, 2005).

110. Patrick Hanks, ‘Metaphoricity is Gradable’, in Anatol Stefanowitsch and Stefan Th. Gries (eds.), Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy (Mouton de Gruyter, 2006), pp. 17–35.

111. Elena Semino, ‘A Corpus-Based Study of Metaphors for Speech Activity in British English’, in Anatol Stefanowitsch and Stefan Th. Gries (eds.), Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy (Mouton de Gruyter, 2006), pp. 35–60.

112. James H. Martin, ‘A Corpus-Based Analysis of the Context Effect on Metaphor Processing’, in Anatol Stefanowitsch and Stefan Th. Gries (eds.), Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy (Mouton de Gruyter, 2006), pp. 214–36.

Part 28: Applied Metaphor Studies

113. Donald A. Schön, ‘Generative Metaphor: A Perspective on Problem-Setting in Social Policy’, in Andrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought (Cambridge University Press, 1979), pp. 137–63.

114. Michael J. Reddy, ‘The Conduit Metaphor: A Case of Frame Conflict in our Language about Language’, in Andrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought (Cambridge University Press, 1979), pp. 164–201.

115. Lynne Cameron, ‘Metaphors in the Learning of Science: A Discourse Focus’, British Educational Research Journal, 2002, 28/5.

116. Graham Low and Lynne Cameron, ‘Applied-Linguistic Comments on Metaphor Identification’, Language and Literature, 2002, 11, 1, 84–90.

Part 29: Computational Approaches

117. Jaime G. Carbonell, ‘Metaphor: An Inescapable Phenomenon in Natural-Language Comprehension’, in W. G. Lehnert and M. H. Ringle (eds.), Strategies for Natural Language Processing (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1982), pp. 415–34.

118. Dan Fass and Yorick Wilks, ‘Preference Semantics, Ill-Formedness, and Metaphor’, American Journal of Computational Linguistics, 1983, 9, 3–4, 178–87.

119. Afzal Ballim, Yorick Wilks, and John Barnden, ‘Belief Ascription, Metaphor, and Intensional Identification’, Cognitive Science, 1991, 15, 133–71.

120. John A. Barnden and Mark G. Lee, ‘An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Metaphor Understanding’, in Tomasz Komendzinski (ed.), ‘Metaphor: A Multidisciplinary Approach’, special issue of Theoria et Historia Scientiarum, 2002, 6, 1, 399–412.

121. John A. Barnden, ‘Artificial Intelligence, Figurative Language and Cognitive Linguistics’, in Gitte Kristiansen et al. (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Current Application and Future Perspectives (Mouton de Gruyter, 2006), pp. 431–59.

122. James H. Martin, ‘MetaBank: A Knowledge-Base of Metaphoric Language Conventions’, Computational Intelligence, 1994, 10, 2, 134–49.

123. James H. Martin, ‘Computational Approaches to Figurative Language’, Metaphor and Symbol, 1996, 11, 1, 85–100.

124. Matt Gedigian et al., ‘Catching Metaphors’, Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Scalable Natural Language Understanding (New York, 2006), pp. 41–8.

125. Astrid Reining and Birte Lönneker-Rodman, ‘Corpus-Driven Metaphor Harvesting’, Proceedings of the NAACL/HLT Workshop on Figurative Language (New York, 2007).

126. T. Veale, ‘An Analogy-Oriented Type Hierarchy for Linguistic Creativity’, Journal of Knowledge-Based Systems, 2006, 19, 7, 471–9.

127. T. Veale, ‘Re-Representation and Creative Analogy: A Lexico-Semantic Perspective’, New Generation Computing, 2006, 24, 223–40.

Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously

    If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
    Why is this product inappropriate?
    Comments (optional)