Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 3 - Direct or Indirect Emergence?

  • Zoltán Kövecses, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest
  • Book:
    Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory
    Published online:
    02 April 2020
    Print publication:
    23 April 2020, pp 34-49

  • Summary

    Primary metaphors form the foundation of conceptual metaphor theory. They are foundational, in that they are seen as directly emerging from our most basic embodied experiences and, also, in that they constitute complex metaphors. I will ask: Do they really emerge directly or do they emerge through a metonymic stage? There is a debate between scholars who suggest that many metaphors are based on, or derive from, metonymies, versus those who do not see such connection between the two. “Resemblance metaphors” do not seem to have anything to do with metonymy. However, in the case of “correlation metaphors” (on these, see, e.g., Lakoff and Johnson, 1980, 1999; Grady, 1997a, b, 1999), several researchers argue that metaphors arise from, and are not independent of, metonymies.