Metaphor and Metonymy: a Cognitive Semantics Perspective, 7.5 credits
The course is discontinued from 2025-05-08
Finnish: Second cycle, has only first-cycle course/s as entry requirements
French: Second cycle, has only first-cycle course/s as entry requirements
Linguistics: Second cycle, has only first-cycle course/s as entry requirements
Russian: Second cycle, has only first-cycle course/s as entry requirements
Scandinavian Studies: Second cycle, has only first-cycle course/s as entry requirements
Scandinavian Languages: Second cycle, has only first-cycle course/s as entry requirements
Spanish: Second cycle, has only first-cycle course/s as entry requirements
German: Second cycle, has only first-cycle course/s as entry requirements
Required Knowledge
Univ: At least 75 ECTS with academic progression (corresponding to level 6190 hp in the Swedish academic system) in one of the academic subjects English, Finnish, French, German, Linguistics, Russian, Spanish or Swedish/Scandinavian Languages, or equivalent knowledge. Proficiency in English equivalent to Swedish Upper Secondary course English 6/English Course B.
Literature
Metaphor and corpus linguistics
Deignan Alice
Philadelphia :
J. Benjamins Pub. :
2005 :
viii, 235 s. :
ISBN: 1-58811-647-6 (hbk. : US)
Mandatory
Search the University Library catalogue
Artiklar som finns tillgängliga via internet eller UB:s digitala resurser (ca 150 s.).
Institutionen för språkstudier :
The Discourse Dynamics Approach to Metaphor and Metaphor-Led Discourse Analysis
Cameron , Lynne , Maslen Robert, Todd Zazie, Maule John, Stratton Peter, Stanley Neil
Metaphor and Symbol, 24:2 :
2009 :
Mandatory
Metaphor and corpus linguistics
Deignan Alice
Philadelphia :
J. Benjamins Pub. :
2005 :
viii, 235 s. :
ISBN: 1-58811-647-6 (hbk. : US)
Mandatory
Search the University Library catalogue
Do pragmatic signals affect conventional metaphor understanding? A failed test of deliberate metaphor theory.
Gibbs Jr. R.W.
Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 77-87. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.021 :
2015a :
Mandatory
Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future?
Gibbs Jr. R.W.
Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 73-76. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.016 :
2015b :
Mandatory
Evaluating Conceptual Metaphor Theory
Gibbs Jr. R.W.
Discourse Processes, 48(8), 529-562. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2011.606103 :
2011 :
Mandatory
Embodied motivations for metaphorical meanings.
Johansson Falck Marlene, Gibbs J.R.W.
Cognitive Linguistics, 23(2), 251-272. doi:10.1515/cog-2012-0008 :
2012 :
Mandatory
Conceptual metaphor theory: Some criticisms and alternative proposals
Kövecses Z.
Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6(1), 168-184. doi:10.1075/arcl.6.08kov :
2008 :
Mandatory
Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view.
Kövecses Z., Radden G.
Cognitive Linguistics (includes Cognitive Linguistic Bibliography), 9(1), 37-78. :
1998 :
Mandatory
Conceptual Metaphor in Everyday Language
Lakoff G., Johnson M.
The Journal of Philosophy, 77(8), 453-486. doi:10.2307/2025464 :
1980 :
Mandatory
MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse
Pragglejaz Group
Metaphor and Symbol, 22 :
2007 :
Mandatory
Metaphor in discourse
Semino Elena
Cambridge, UK :
Cambridge University Press :
2008 :
xii, 247 p. :
ISBN: 9780521867306
Mandatory
Search the University Library catalogue
Developing, testing and interpreting Deliberate Metaphor Theory
Steen G.
Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 67-72. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013 :
2015 :
Mandatory
The Discourse Dynamics Approach to Metaphor and Metaphor-Led Discourse Analysis
Cameron , Lynne , Maslen Robert, Todd Zazie, Maule John, Stratton Peter, Stanley Neil
Metaphor and Symbol, 24:2 :
2009 :
Mandatory
Metaphor and corpus linguistics
Deignan Alice
Philadelphia :
J. Benjamins Pub. :
2005 :
viii, 235 s. :
ISBN: 1-58811-647-6 (hbk. : US)
Mandatory
Search the University Library catalogue
Do pragmatic signals affect conventional metaphor understanding? A failed test of deliberate metaphor theory.
Gibbs Jr. R.W.
Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 77-87. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.021 :
2015a :
Mandatory
Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future?
Gibbs Jr. R.W.
Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 73-76. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.016 :
2015b :
Mandatory
Evaluating Conceptual Metaphor Theory
Gibbs Jr. R.W.
Discourse Processes, 48(8), 529-562. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2011.606103 :
2011 :
Mandatory
Embodied motivations for metaphorical meanings.
Johansson Falck Marlene, Gibbs J.R.W.
Cognitive Linguistics, 23(2), 251-272. doi:10.1515/cog-2012-0008 :
2012 :
Mandatory
Conceptual metaphor theory: Some criticisms and alternative proposals
Kövecses Z.
Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6(1), 168-184. doi:10.1075/arcl.6.08kov :
2008 :
Mandatory
Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view.
Kövecses Z., Radden G.
Cognitive Linguistics (includes Cognitive Linguistic Bibliography), 9(1), 37-78. :
1998 :
Mandatory
Conceptual Metaphor in Everyday Language
Lakoff G., Johnson M.
The Journal of Philosophy, 77(8), 453-486. doi:10.2307/2025464 :
1980 :
Mandatory
MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse
Pragglejaz Group
Metaphor and Symbol, 22 :
2007 :
Mandatory
Metaphor in discourse
Semino Elena
Cambridge, UK :
Cambridge University Press :
2008 :
xii, 247 p. :
ISBN: 9780521867306
Mandatory
Search the University Library catalogue
Developing, testing and interpreting Deliberate Metaphor Theory
Steen G.
Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 67-72. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013 :
2015 :
Mandatory