The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The contemporary theory of metaphor — now new and improved!
Abstract
This paper outlines a multi-dimensional/multi-disciplinary framework for the study of metaphor. It expands on the cognitive linguistic approach to metaphor in language and thought by adding the dimension of communication, and it expands on the predominantly linguistic and psychological approaches by adding the discipline of social science. This creates a map of the field in which nine main areas of research can be distinguished and connected to each other in precise ways. It allows for renewed attention to the deliberate use of metaphor in communication, in contrast with non-deliberate use, and asks the question whether the interaction between deliberate and non-deliberate use of metaphor in specific social domains can contribute to an explanation of the discourse career of metaphor. The suggestion is made that metaphorical models in language, thought, and communication can be classified as official, contested, implicit, and emerging, which may offer new perspectives on the interaction between social, psychological, and linguistic properties and functions of metaphor in discourse.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003) · University of Chicago Press eBooks · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001 · Cited by 20,632
Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought
(1999) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.37-0239 · Cited by 9,866
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315836010 · Cited by 6,082
Morgan, G. (1986) · Cited by 5,650
Strategies of Discourse Comprehension
Staczek, J. J., van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1985) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/326517 · Cited by 5,395
The contemporary theory of metaphor
Lakoff, G. (1993) · Metaphor and Thought · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173865.013 · Cited by 5,349
Variation across Speech and Writing
Biber, D. (1988) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511621024 · Cited by 5,227
The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding
Gibbs, R. W. (1994) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,979
MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse
Group, P. (2007) · Metaphor and Symbol · doi:10.1080/10926480709336752 · Cited by 2,157
Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis
Charteris-Black, J. (2004) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/9780230000612 · Cited by 1,840
Cited by
Figurative Framing: Shaping Public Discourse Through Metaphor, Hyperbole, and Irony
Burgers, C., Konijn, E. A., & Steen, G. J. (2016) · Communication Theory · doi:10.1111/comt.12096 · Cited by 308
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Steen, G. J.
- Venue
- Review of Cognitive Linguistics
- Publisher
- John Benjamins Publishing Company
- Published
- 2011-07-06
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 26-64
- ISSN
- 1877-9751 (ISSN-L)
- 1877-976X
- OpenAlex
- W2095400602
- Cited by
- 386
- References
- 65
- FWCI
- 22.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The contemporary theory of metaphor — now new and improved! https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1075/rcl.9.1.03ste
- The paper
- Steen, G. J. (2011). The contemporary theory of metaphor — now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.9.1.03ste
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.