Complementary perspectives on metaphor: Cognitive linguistics and relevance theory.

234 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Parallels and differences in the treatment of metaphor in relevance theory and cognitive linguistics (2011, unknown): “(Tendahl and Gibbs 2008: 1824)”
Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues (2017, background): “For instance, when Gibbs engaged with Relevance Theory, which is much further removed from cognitive-linguistic and psychological findings on metaphor than DMT, he never used metaphorical overstatement like this (Tendahl and Gibbs 2008).”
Evaluating Conceptual Metaphor Theory (2011, background): “My own belief is that other theories of metaphor may also have some relevant role in describing all we know about the complex topic of metaphor (see Tendahl & Gibbs, 2008 ).”
The Paradox of Metaphor: Why We Need a Three-Dimensional Model of Metaphor (2008, background): “From that perspective, all metaphor is part of intentional language use, and this is a notion that has been broadly used in linguistics as well as in psycholinguistics (eg, Gibbs & Tendahl, 2006 ; Tendahl & Gibbs, in press ).”