Conceptual Metaphor and Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: Theoretical Foundations, Interactions, and Cross-Domain Mappings
##semicolon##
https://doi.org/10.69760/aghel.026002013##semicolon##
conceptual metaphor##common.commaListSeparator## metonymy##common.commaListSeparator## cognitive linguistics##common.commaListSeparator## cross-domain mapping##common.commaListSeparator## embodied cognition##common.commaListSeparator## Lakoff and Johnson##common.commaListSeparator## figurative languageSantrauka
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.
##submission.citations##
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
##submission.downloads##
Publikuota
Numeris
Skyrius
##submission.license##
##submission.license.cc.by4.footer##Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms: Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which allows others to share, adapt, and build upon the work for any purpose, provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source. Authors are permitted to enter into separate agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the published version (e.g., post to a repository or publish in a book), with acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
