Conceptual Metaphor and Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: Theoretical Foundations, Interactions, and Cross-Domain Mappings

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69760/aghel.026002013

Keywords:

conceptual metaphor, metonymy, cognitive linguistics, cross-domain mapping, embodied cognition, Lakoff and Johnson, figurative language

Abstract

Since the publication of Lakoff and Johnson’s Metaphors We Live By in 1980, conceptual metaphor theory has fundamentally transformed the linguistic and cognitive understanding of figurative language. Rather than treating metaphor and metonymy as rhetorical ornaments confined to literary or poetic discourse, cognitive linguistics reconceptualizes them as basic mechanisms of human thought and conceptual organization that permeate everyday language, reasoning, and communication. This article examines the theoretical foundations of conceptual metaphor theory and conceptual metonymy, analyzes their structural properties and cognitive functions, and investigates the nature of their interaction in actual linguistic data. Drawing on corpus-based and discourse-analytical approaches, the study identifies the primary types of conceptual metaphor and metonymy, discusses the principles governing cross-domain mapping, and examines the relationship between metaphor and metonymy as partially overlapping cognitive mechanisms. The analysis demonstrates that conceptual metaphor and metonymy are not merely linguistic phenomena but reflect deep-seated patterns of human embodied cognition, cultural knowledge, and experiential grounding. The article argues that their systematic study contributes not only to theoretical linguistics but also to applied fields including discourse analysis, cognitive semantics, and language pedagogy.

Author Biography

  • Shehla Salmanova, Azerbaijan State Pedagogical University, Azerbaijan

    Salmanova, S. Azerbaijan State Pedagogical University, Azerbaijan. Email: shehlasalmanova@gmail.com. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-1692-9996

References

Aristotle. (1984). Poetics (I. Bywater, Trans.). In J. Barnes (Ed.), The complete works of Aristotle (Vol. 2, pp. 2316–2340). Princeton University Press. (Original work published ca. 335 BCE)

Barcelona, A. (Ed.). (2003). Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective. Mouton de Gruyter.

Barcelona, A. (2011). Reviewing the properties and prototype structure of metonymy. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona, & F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds.), Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics (pp. 7–57). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.28.02bar

Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. Basic Books.

Forceville, C., & Urios-Aparisi, E. (Eds.). (2009). Multimodal metaphor. Mouton de Gruyter.

Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neurodynamics, 22(3–4), 455–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515080500266913

Glucksberg, S. (2001). Understanding figurative language: From metaphors to idioms. Oxford University Press.

Goossens, L. (1990). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(3), 323–342. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.323

Grady, J. E. (1997). Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of California, Berkeley.

Grady, J., Oakley, T., & Coulson, S. (1999). Blending and metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs Jr. & G. J. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in cognitive linguistics (pp. 101–124). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.175.07gra

Hampe, B. (Ed.). (2005). From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics. Mouton de Gruyter.

Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. University of Chicago Press.

Kövecses, Z. (2000). Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge University Press.

Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford University Press.

Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in culture: Universality and variation. Cambridge University Press.

Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 202–251). Cambridge University Press.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. Basic Books.

Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Vol. 1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford University Press.

Mammadova, İ. (2023). Struggle and lonely sorrow in Byron’s romanticism (Based on poems “The Giaour”, “The Corsair”, “The Bride of Abydos” and “The Prisoner of Chillon”). Akademik Tarih ve Düşünce Dergisi, 10(2), 355–363. https://izlik.org/JA59DM63XM

Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752

Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17–59). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.03rad

Richards, I. A. (1936). The philosophy of rhetoric. Oxford University Press.

Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Díez Velasco, O. I. (2002). Patterns of conceptual interaction. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 489–532). Mouton de Gruyter.

Sadiqzade, Z. (2025). Idiomatic expressions and their impact on lexical competence. Journal of Azerbaijan Language and Education Studies, 2(1), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.69760/jales.2025001002

Steen, G. J. (2011). The contemporary theory of metaphor — now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 26–64. https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.9.1.03ste

Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14

Yu, N. (1995). Metaphorical expressions of anger and happiness in English and Chinese. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10(2), 59–92. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1002_1

Downloads

Published

2026-05-05

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Salmanova, S. (2026). Conceptual Metaphor and Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: Theoretical Foundations, Interactions, and Cross-Domain Mappings. Acta Globalis Humanitatis Et Linguarum, 3(2), 144-154. https://doi.org/10.69760/aghel.026002013

Similar Articles

1-10 of 99

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.