Kognitive Metapherntheorie und die Semantik der idiomatischen Mehrwortverbindungen
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.vi66.160848Keywords:
Metaphor, metonymy, idioms, Metapher, Metonymie, IdiomeAbstract
There are numerous points of intersection between Cognitive Linguistics and phraseology. Of particular relevance is Cognitive Theory of Metaphor, which forms a generally accepted and indispensable approach to the description of metaphors and metonymies, which in turn constitute the most important mechanism of semantic irregularity formation. Nevertheless, Cognitive Theory of Metaphor is often criticised in German phraseology: it is considered too general for understanding the meanings of idiomatic multi-word units and too unspecific for taking cultural specifics into account in phraseology. This article argues that the postulated shortcomings of Cognitive Metaphor Theory result from two circumstances: (i) On the one hand, Cognitive Metaphor Theory in phraseological research is still fundamentally limited to its early standard version, without reference to more recent developments in metaphor theory in cognitive research and the diversity of phenomena referred to as metaphors. (ii) Secondly, previous theories explaining the processes of meaning constitution in phraseology are based on an a priori assumption that the meanings of idiomatic multi-word combinations arise from a single metaphorical or metonymic shift in meaning. In contrast, cognitive linguistics, in particular Langacker's Cognitive Grammar (2008), provides convincing evidence that meanings (conceptualisations) arise in a complex structure of different domains of knowledge and experience and are understood as mental routines. Accordingly, the meanings of idiomatic multi-word combinations also arise fundamentally from several metaphorical or metonymic models. The aim of this article is to present a proposal for a multifactorial modelling of the meaning constitution and motivation processes of figurative idioms from a cognitive perspective. Using the example of the idiom money slips through someone's fingers, it is shown how conceptual metonymies and metaphors of varying degrees of generality and schematicity, together with the mental images evoke, constitute and motivate the meaning of a figurative multi-word unit at the system level.
References
Baldauf, Ch. (1997). Metapher und Kognition. Grundlagen einer neuen Theorie der Alltagsmetapher. Peter Lang.
Barcelona, A. (2000). On the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for conceptual metaphor. In A. Barcelona (Hg.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads (31-58). Mouton de Gruyter.
Barcelona, A. (2003). Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within cognitive linguistics: An up-date. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Hg.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast (207-278). Mouton de Gruyter.
Burger, H. (2004). Phraseologie – Kräuter und Rüben? Traditionen und Perspektiven der Forschung. In K. Steyer (Hg.), Wortverbindungen – mehr oder weniger fest (19-40). Walter de Gruyter.
Burger, H. (2015). Phraseologie. Eine Einführung am Beispiel des Deutschen. 5., neu bearbeitete Auflage. Erich Schmidt.
Burger, H., Häcki Buhofer, A. & Greciano, G. (Hg.) (2003). Flut von Texten - Vielfalt der Kulturen. Schneider.
Cacciari, C. & Glucksberg, S. (1995). Understanding idioms: Do visual images reflect figurative meanings? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 7(3), 283-305.
Dancygier, B. & Sweetser, E. (2014). Figurative Language. Cambridge University Press.
Dietz, H.-U. (1999). Rhetorik in der Phraseologie. Zur Bedeutung rhetorischer Stilelemente im idiomatischen Wortschatz des Deutschen. Niemeyer.
Dobrovol'skij, D. (1995a). Kognitive Aspekte der Idiom-Semantik. Studien zum Thesaurus der Idiom-Semantik. Narr.
Dobrovol'skij, D. (1995b). Schiß und Espenlaub. Idiome der Angst. Folia Linguistica XXIX(3-4), 317-346.
Dobrovol'skij, D. (1997). Idiome im mentalen Lexikon: Ziele und Methoden der kognitivbasierten Phraseologieforschung. Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.
Dobrovol'skij, D. (2004). Lexical Semantics and Combinatorial Profile: A Corpus-Based Approach. In G. Williams & S. Vessier (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th EURALEX International Congress (787-796). Faculté des Lettres et des Sciences Humaines, Université de Bretagne sud.
Dobrovol'skij, D. (2023). Zum Wesen der Idiomatizität in der Phraseologie. Verbum 45(1), 49-75.
Dobrovol'skij, D. & Piirainen, E. (2005). Figurative Language: Cross-cultural and Cross-linguistic Perspective. Elsevier.
Dobrovol'skij, D. & Piirainen, E. (2009). Zur Theorie der Phraseologie. Kognitive und kulturelle Aspekte. Stauffenburg.
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M. (1994). Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge University Press.
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M. (2002). The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities. Basic Books.
Feyaerts, K. (1999). Die Metonymie als konzeptuelles Strukturprinzip: eine kognitiv-semantische Analyse deutscher Dummheitsausdrücke. In R. Baur, Ch. Chlosta, & E. Piirainen (Hg.), Wörter in Bildern – Bilder in Wörtern. Beiträge zur Phraseologie und Sprichwortforschung aus dem Westfälischen Arbeitskreis (139-176). Schneider.
Gibbs, R. W. (1996). Why many concepts are metaphorical? Cognition, 61, 309-319.
Gibbs, R. W. & Colston, H. L. (2007). Psycholinguistic aspects of phraseology: American tradition. In H. Burger, D. Do-brovol’skij, P. Kühn, & N. R. Norrick (Hg.), Phraseologie – Phraseology. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitge-nössischen Forschung. Bd. 2 (819-836). Walter de Gruyter.
Gibbs, R. W. & O'Brien, E. (1990). Idioms and mental imagery: The metaphorical motivation for idiomatic meaning. Cogni-tion 36, 35-68.
Goosens, L. (2003). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Hg.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast (349-378). Mouton de Gruyter.
Grady, J. E. (1997). Foundations of Meaning: Primary Metaphors and Primary Scenes. Unveröffentlichte Diss. UC Berkeley, Dissertations, Department of Linguistics. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3g9427m2
Guławska-Gawkowska, M. (2013). Somatische und emotionale Konzepte in der deutschen und polnischen Phraseologie. Ein lexikographischer Ansatz zum phraseologischen Übersetzungswörterbuch. Peter Lang.
Jäkel, O. (2003). Wie Metaphern Wissen schaffen. Die kognitive Metapherntheorie und ihre Anwendung in Modell-Analysen der Diskursbereichen Geistestätigkeit, Wirtschaft, Wissenschaft und Religion. Dr. Kovač.
Kaczmarek, H. (2018). Konzeptualisierungsmuster des ÄRGER-Feldes an der Schnittstelle zwischen Kognition und Ver-sprachlichung. Dr. Kovač.
Kispál, T. (2013). Methodenkombination in der Metaphernforschung. Metaphorische Idiome des Lebens. Peter Lang.
Kispál, T. (2020). Linguistische Metapherntheorien und die Idiomforschung. In R. Mikuláš (Hg.), Metaphernforschung in interdisziplinären und interdiskursiven Perspektiven (441-453). Brill.
Komenda-Earle, B. (2015). Sprachhistorische Entwicklungsprozesse der Idiomatik. An Beispielen von realhistorisch moti-vier¬ten verbalen Idiomen des Deutschen. Schneider.
Kövecses, Z. (1986). Metaphors of anger, pride and love: a lexical approach to the structure of concepts. John Benjamins.
Kövecses, Z. (1990). Emotion concepts. Springer.
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.
Kövecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor and culture. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Philologica 2, 197-220.
Kövecses, Z., Ambrus, L., Hegedűs, D., Imai, R. & Sobczak, A. (2019). The lexical vs. the corpus-based method in the study of metaphors. In M. Bolognesi, M. Brdar & K. Despot (Hg.), Metaphor and Metonymy in the Digital Age (149-174). John Benjamins.
Kövecses, Z. (2019). Some consequences of a multi-level view of metaphor. In I. Navarro i Ferando (Hg.), Current ap-proaches to metaphor analysis in discourse (19-34). Mouton de Gruyter.
Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Oxford University Press.
Kövecses, Z. (2024). Metaphorical idioms in Extended CMT. Yearbook of Phraseology 15, 101-118.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Woman, Fire, and Dangerous Things. What Categories Reveal about the Mind. The University of Chi-cago Press.
Lakoff, G. (1990). The Invariance Hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on image-schemas? Cognitive Linguistics 1(1), 39-74.
Lakoff, G. (1993). The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. In A. Ortony (Hg.), Metaphor and Thought (202-251). Cam-bridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press. Deutsche Ausgabe (2000): Leben in Metaphern: Konstruktion und Gebrauch von Sprachbildern. Aus dem Amerikanischen übersetzt von A. Hildenbrand. 2., korrigierte Auflage. Kösel.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenges to western thought. University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1991). Concept, Image, and Symbol. The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Mouton de Gruyter.
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar. A Basic Introduction. Oxford University Press.
Mandler, J. M. (2005). How to build a baby. Image schemas and the transition to verbal thought. In B. Hampe (Hg.), From Perception to Meaning. Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics (137-164). Mouton de Gruyter.
Mellado Blanco, C. (2014). Die WEG-Metaphorik in der deutschen Phraseologie: ein Typologisierungsversuch. In M. Dalmas & E. Piirainen (Hg.), Figurative Sprache – Figurative Language – Langage figuré. Festgabe für Dmitrij O. Dobrovol'skij (59-78). Stauffenburg.
Mercier, H. & Sperber, D. (2009). Intuitive and reflective interferences. In J. Evans, S. Jonathan & K. Frankish (Hg.), In Two Minds: Dual Processes and Beyond (149-170). Oxford University Press.
Munske, H. H. (1993). Wie entstehen Phraseologismen? In K. J. Mattheier, K.-P. Wegera, W. Hoffmann, J. Macha, & H.-J. Solms (Hg.), Vielfalt des Deutschen. Festschrift für Werner Besch (481-515). Peter Lang.
Naciscione, A. (2010). Stylistic Use of Phraseological Units in Discourse. John Benjamins.
Panther, K.-U. & Radden, G. (1999). Introduction. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Hg.), Metonymy in Language and Thought (1-14). John Benjamins.
Panther, U. (2015). Metonymien im Sprachvergleich. In C. Spieß & K.-M. Köpcke (Hg.), Metapher und Metonymie. Theo-retische, methodische und empirische Zugänge (207-226). de Gruyter.
Poddig, F. (1995). Die Enkodierung und Dekodierung piktorieller Werbebotschaften: ein semiotisch-kognitiver Ansatz. Deutscher Universitätsverlag DUV.
Pragglejaz Group (2007). MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse. Metaphor and symbol 22, 1-39.
Radden, G. & Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a Theory of Metonymy. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Hg.), Metonymy in Language and Thought (17-59). John Benjamins.
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive Representations of Semantic Categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology 104(3), 192-233.
Rosch, E., Mervis, C., Gray, W., Johnson, D. & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic Objects in Natural Categories. Cognitive Psychology 8, 382-439.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F.H. & Pérez Hernández, L. (2011). The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: Myths, Develop-ments and Challenges. Metaphor and Symbol 26, 1-25.
Schafroth, E. (2019). Kollokationen 1. In Phraseologie-Tutorials – ein digitales Lehrprojekt. https://phraseologie.phil.hhu.de/lektion8-1/
Sharma, S. (2023). Konzeptuelle Metaphern in Phraseologismen des Deutschen und Hindi. Eine vergleichende Studie. Dr. Kovač.
Spieß, C. & Köpcke, K.-M. (2015). Metonymie und Metapher – Theoretische, methodische und empirische Zugänge. Eine Einführung in den Sammelband. In C. Spieß & K.-M. Köpcke (Hg.), Metapher und Metonymie (1-21). de Gruyter.
Sulikowska, A. (2019). Kognitive Aspekte der Phraseologie. Konstituierung der Bedeutung von Idiomen aus der Perspekti-ve der Kognitiven Linguistik. Peter Lang.
Sulikowska, A. (2020). Das semantische Potential der Idiome aus kognitiver Perspektive. Yearbook of Phraseology 11, 139-170.
Taylor, J.R. (2002). Cognitive Grammar. Oxford University Press.
Yu, N. (1998). The contemporary theory of metaphor: A perspective from Chinese. John Benjamins.
Zawisławska, M. (2011). Metafora w języku nauki. Na przykładzie nauk przyrodniczych. Uniwersytet Warszawski.
Ziem, Alexander (2008). Frames und sprachliches Wissen. Walter de Gruyter.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Anna Sulikowska
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
