UNDERSTANDING METAPHORICAL LANGUAGE: PRAGMATICS AND BEYOND

Beyond the Frontiers: Perspectives on Pragmatic Theory and Practice (2026) [pp. 1-35]  

AUTHOR(S) / AUTOR(I): Robyn Carston
Download Full Pdf   
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46793/BeyondFront.001C
ABSTRACT / SAŽETAK:

This paper charts developments in the relevance-theoretic account of the communication and interpretation of metaphorical language from the early days of the theory to current work, including recent experimental testing of aspects of the theory. Consistent features of the evolving account are: (a) that metaphor is a kind of loose use of language, albeit of a radical sort, and (b) that what is communicated by many cases of metaphor is an array of weak implicatures. However, three significant developments have led to a more fine-grained account: (a) metaphor has been shown to have certain characteristics that distinguish it from other kinds of loose use, including hyperbole; (b) metaphors differ along several dimensions (familiarity vs novelty, single word vs extended, spontaneous/conversational vs crafted/literary), and there are, arguably, different routes to their comprehension depending on these factors; (c) the fact that many metaphors have significant non-propositional effects (imagistic, affective, attitudinal) is being drawn more centrally into the account.

KEYWORDS / KLJUČNE REČI:

metaphor, loose use, hyperbole, weak implicatures, ad hoc concepts, literal meaning, processing routes, imagery, non-propositional effects

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT / PROJEKAT:
REFERENCES / LITERATURA:
  • Asch 1955: S. Asch, On the use of metaphor in the description of persons, in: H. Werner (ed.), On Expressive Language. Worcester, Mass.: Clark University Press.
  • Asch 1958: S. Asch, The metaphor: A Psychological Inquiry, in: R. Tagiuri & L. Petrullo (eds.), Person Perception and Interpersonal Behavior, Stanford University Press.
  • Bambini, Bara 2012: V. Bambini & B. Bara, Neuropragmatics, in: J-O. Östman & J. Verschueren (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Bambini, Resta 2012: V. Bambini & D. Resta, Metaphor and experimental Pragmatics: When theory meets empirical investigation, Humana.Mente Journal of Philosophical Studies 23, 37–60.
  • Bambini, Canal, Resta, Grimaldi 2018: V. Bambini, P. Canal, D. Resta, & M. Grimaldi, Time course and neurophysiological underpinnings of metaphor in literary context, Discourse Processes, 56 (1), 77–97.
  • Bezuidenhout 2001: A. Bezuidenhout, Metaphor and what is said: A defense of a direct expression view of metaphor, Midwest Studies in Philosophy XXV, 156–186.
  • Bowerman 2021: J. Bowerman, Referential metonymy: Cognitive bases and communicative functions, UCL PhD thesis.
  • Brooks 1947: C. Brooks, The Well Wrought Urn: Studies in the Structure of Poetry, New York: Reynal & Hitchcock.
  • Camp 2006: E. Camp, Metaphor and that certain ‘je ne sais quoi’, Philosophical Studies 129, 1‒25.
  • Camp 2013: E. Camp, Metaphor and varieties of meaning, in: K. Ludwig & E. Lepore (eds.), A Companion to Donald Davidson, Wiley-Blackwell, 361‒378.
  • Camp, E. 2016. Metaphors in literature. Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Literature.
  • Carston 1997: R. Carston, Enrichment and loosening: Complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed?, Linguistische Berichte 8, 103–127.
  • Carston 2002: R. Carston, Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication, Blackwell.
  • Carston 2010: R. Carston, Metaphor: ad hoc concepts, literal meaning and mental images, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 110 (3), 295‒321.
  • Carston 2012: R. Carston, Metaphor: Conceptual or communicative?, in: A. Yoshimura et al. (eds.), Observing Linguistic Phenomena: A Festschrift for Professor Seiji Uchida on the Occasion of His Retirement from Nara Women’s University, Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishers, 31–51.
  • Carston 2016: R. Carston, Linguistic conventions and the role of pragmatics, Review of Imagination and Convention by Ernie Lepore & Matthew Stone, Mind & Language 31 (5): 612‒624.
  • Carston 2017: R. Carston, Relevance theory and metaphor, in: E. Semino & Z. Demjén (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language, London: Routledge, 42‒55.
  • Carston 2018: R. Carston, Figurative language, mental imagery, and pragmatics, Metaphor and Symbol 33, 3, 198‒217.
  • Carston 2019: R. Carston, Ad hoc concepts, polysemy and the lexicon, in: K. Scott, B. Clark & R. Carston (eds.), Relevance, Pragmatics and Interpretation, Cambridge University Press, 150‒162.
  • Carston forthcoming-a: R. Carston, Perspectives on ‘what is said’, in: N. Allott & T. Wharton (eds), Cambridge Companion to Grice.
  • Carston forthcoming-b: R. Carston, Metaphor and non-propositional effects: Insights into ‘What it is like …’, Inquiry (Special issue on metaphor).
  • Carston, Wearing 2011: R. Carston & C. Wearing, Metaphor, hyperbole and simile: A pragmatic approach, Language and Cognition, 3, 283‒312.
  • Carston, Wearing 2015: R. Carston & C. Wearing, Hyperbole and its relation to metaphor and irony, Journal of Pragmatics 79, 79‒92.
  • Carston, Yan, 2023: R. Carston and X. Yan, Metaphor processing: Referring and predicating, Cognition 238, 105534.
  • Cave 2016: T. Cave, Thinking with Literature: Towards a Cognitive Criticism, Oxford University Press.
  • Crisp 2008: P. Crisp, Between extended metaphor and allegory: Is blending enough?, Language and Literature 17 (4), 291–308
  • Davidson 1978: D. Davidson, What metaphors mean, Critical Inquiry 5, 31‒47.
  • Damasio 1989: A. Damasio, Concepts in the brain, Mind and Language 4, 24–8.
  • Desai et al. 2011: R. H. Desai, J. R. Binder, L. L. Conant, Q. R. Mano & M. S. Seidenberg, The neural career of sensory-motor metaphors, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 23 (9), 2376–2386.
  • de Groot, Haggort 2017: A. de Groot & P. Haggort (eds.), Research Methods in Psycholinguistics and the Neurobiology of Language: A Practical Guide, Wiley-Blackwell.
  • de Vega, Glenberg, Graesser 2008: M. de Vega, A, Glenberg & A. Graesser (eds.), Symbols and Embodiment, Oxford University Press.
  • Gibbs 1990: R. W. Gibbs, Comprehending figurative referential expressions, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 16, 56‒66.
  • Gibbs 1994: R. W. Gibbs, The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding, Cambridge University Press.
  • Gibbs 2002: R. W. Gibbs, A new look at literal meaning in understanding what is said and implicated, Journal of Pragmatics 34 (4), 457‒486.
  • Gibbs 2006: R. W. Gibbs, Metaphor interpretation as embodied simulation, Mind & Language 21
  • (3), 434‒458.
  • Gibbs 2017: R. W. Gibbs, Experimental pragmatics, in: Y. Huang (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, Oxford University Press, 310‒325.
  • Gibbs 2021: R. W. Gibbs, Metaphorical embodiment, in: M. D. Robinson & L. E. Thomas (eds.), Handbook of Embodied Psychology: Thinking, Feeling, and Acting, Springer Nature Switzerland AG, 101–123, <https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78471-3_5>.
  • Gibbs, Matlock 2008: R. W. Gibbs & T. Matlock, Metaphor, imagination, and simulation: Psycholinguistic evidence, in: R. W. Gibbs (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge University Press, 161–176.
  • Gibbs, Tendahl 2006: R. W. Gibbs & M. Tendahl, Cognitive effort and effects in metaphor comprehension: Relevance Theory and psycholinguistics, Mind and Language 21 (3): 379‒403.
  • Gineste et al. 2000: M-D. Gineste, B. Indurkhya & V. Scart, Emergence of features in metaphor comprehension, Metaphor and Symbol 15, 117‒135.
  • Giora 2003: R. Giora, On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language, New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Glucksberg 2001: S. Glucksberg, Understanding Figurative Language: From Metaphors to Idioms, New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Glucksberg, Haught 2006: S. Glucksberg & C. Haught, On the relation between metaphor and simile: When comparison fails, Mind & Language 21 (3), 360‒378.
  • Grice 1967: H. P. Grice, Logic and Conversation, William James Lectures, reprinted in: Grice 1989: 1–143.
  • Grice 1975: H. P. Grice, Logic and conversation, in: P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, New York: Academic Press, 41‒58, reprinted in Grice 1989: 22‒40.
  • Grice 1989: H. P. Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Just 2008: M. A. Just, What brain imaging can tell us about embodied meaning, in: M. de Vega et al. (eds.), Symbols and Embodiment: Debates on Meaning and Cognition, 75‒84.
  • Kaplan 1989: D. Kaplan, Demonstratives: An essay on the semantics, logic, metaphysics, and epistemology of demonstratives and other indexicals, in: J. Almog, J. Perry & H. Wettstein (eds.), Themes from Kaplan, New York: Oxford University Press, 481‒563.
  • Kolaiti 2022: P. Kolaiti, Perceptual relevance and art: Some tentative suggestions, Journal of Literary Semantics 49, 2.
  • Kompa 2021: N. Kompa, Insight by metaphor – The epistemic role of metaphor in science, in: A. Heydenreich & K. Meck (eds.), Physics and Literature: Concepts – Transfer – Aestheticization, De Gruyter, 23‒48.
  • Kosslyn et al. 2006: S. Kosslyn, W. Thompson & G. Ganis, The Case for Mental Imagery, New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Lai, Curran & Menn 2009: V. T. Lai, T. Curran & L. Menn, Comprehending conventional and novel metaphors: An ERP study. Brain Research, 1284, 145–155, <https://doi.org/10.1016/j. brainres.2009.05.088>.
  • Lakoff 1993: G. Lakoff, The contemporary theory of metaphor, in: A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought, 2nd edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 202‒251.
  • Lakoff 2008: G. Lakoff, The neural theory of metaphor, in: R. Gibbs (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 17‒38.
  • Lakoff, Johnson 1980: G. Lakoff & M. Johnson, Metaphors We Live By, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Lakoff, Turner 1989: G. Lakoff & M. Turner, More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Lepore, Stone 2010: E. Lepore & M. Stone, Against metaphorical meaning, Topoi 29 (2), 165–180.
  • Lepore, Stone 2015: E. Lepore & M. Stone, Imagination and Convention: Distinguishing Grammar and Inference in Language, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Liu 2023: M. Lui, Mental imagery and poetry, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 81, 24–34.
  • Liu forthcoming: M. Lui, Ad hoc concepts: Definition and applications.
  • McGinn 2004: C. McGinn, Mindsight, Harvard University Press.
  • Neale 1992: S. Neale, Paul Grice and the Philosophy of Language, Linguistics and Philosophy 15 (5), 509‒559.
  • McGlone, Manfredi 2001: M. McGlone & D. Manfredi, Topic-vehicle interaction in metaphor comprehension, Memory & Cognition 29 (8), 1209‒1219.
  • McGlone, Manfredi 2001: M. McGlone & D. Manfredi, The costs and benefits of metaphor, Metaphor and Symbol 16, 109–121.
  • Noveck, Sperber 2004: I. Noveck & D. Sperber, Experimental Pragmatics, Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Onishi, Murphy 1993: K. Onishi & G. Murphy, Metaphoric reference: When metaphors are not understood as easily as literal expressions, Memory & Cognition 21(6), 763–772.
  • Panther, Radden 2005: K-U. Panther & G. Radden, Metonymy, in: Jan-Ola Östman Panther & Jef Verschueren (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins, 1‒14. Pilkington 1992: A. Pilkington, Poetic Effects: A Relevance Theory Perspective, John Benjamins.
  • Pilkington 2022: A. Pilkington, Poetic Communication: Contemplating Attitudes and Apprehending the Transcendental, MA thesis, University of Buckingham.
  • Recanati 1995: F. Recanati, The alleged priority of literal interpretation, Cognitive Science 19, 207‒232.
  • Recanati 2004: F. Recanati, Literal Meaning, Cambridge University Press.
  • Reimer, Camp: M. Reimer & E. Camp, Metaphor, in: E. Lepore & B. C. Smith (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Language, Oxford University Press, 845–863.
  • Ronderos, Falkum 2023: C. Ronderos & I. L. Falkum, Suppression of literal meaning in single and extended metaphors, Frontiers in Psychology, <https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2023.1135129>.
  • Rubio-Fernández 2007: P. Rubio-Fernández, Suppression in metaphor interpretation: Differences between meaning selection and meaning construction, Journal of Semantics 24 (4), 345–371, <https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffm006>.
  • Rubio-Fernández, Wearing, Carston, 2015: P. Rubio-Fernández, C. Wearing & R. Carston, Metaphor and hyperbole: Testing the Continuity Hypothesis, Metaphor and Symbol 30 (1), 24–40.
  • Rubio-Fernández, Cummins, Tian 2016: P. Rubio-Fernández, C. Cummins & Y. Tian, Are single and extended metaphors processed differently? A test of two Relevance-Theoretic accounts, Journal of Pragmatics 94, 15‒28.
  • Sander 2025: E. Sander, Metaphors for Education, Wiley.
  • Searle 1979: J. R. Searle, Metaphor, in: J. R Searle, Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts, Cambridge University Press, 76–116.
  • Shinjo, Myers 1987: M. Shinjo & J. Myers, The role of context in metaphor comprehension, Journal of Memory and Language 26, 226‒241.
  • Sperber, Wilson 2015: D. Sperber & D. Wilson, Beyond speaker’s meaning,  Croatian Journal of Philosophy 15(44), 117‒149.
  • Sperber, Wilson 1986a/95: D. Sperber & D. Wilson, Communication and Cognition, Blackwell.
  • Sperber, Wilson 1986b: D. Sperber & D. Wilson, Loose talk, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 86 (1), 153–172, <https://doi.org/10.1093/ar>.
  • Sperber, Wilson 2008: D. Sperber & D. Wilson, A deflationary account of metaphors, in: R. W. Gibbs (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge University Press, 84‒105.
  • Stemmer 2017: B. Stemmer, Neuropragmatics, in: Y. Huang (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, OUP, 362‒379.
  • Stern 2000: J. Stern, Metaphor in Context, Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
  • Swinney 1979: D. Swinney, Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18 (6), 645‒659.
  • Tendahl, Gibbs 2008: M. Tendahl & R. Gibbs, Complementary perspectives on metaphor: Cognitive linguistics and relevance theory, Journal of Pragmatics 40 (11), 1823–1864, <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.02.001>.
  • Unger 2017: C. Unger, Towards a Relevance-Theoretic account of allegory, in: A. Piskorska & E. Wałaszewska (eds.), Applications of Relevance Theory: From Discourse to Morphemes, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Unger 2019: C. Unger, Allegory in relation to metaphor and irony, in: K. Scott, B. Clark & R. Carston (eds.), Relevance, Pragmatics and Interpretation, Cambridge University Press, 240–252, <https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108290593.021>.
  • Wearing 2014: C. Wearing, Interpreting novel metaphors, International Review of Pragmatics 6 (1), 78‒102.
  • Wearing 2022: C. Wearing, Allegory, metaphor, and analogy, Journal of Pragmatics 202, 66–79. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.10.014>.
  • Wharton, de Saussure 2023: T. Wharton & L. de Saussure, Pragmatics and Emotion, Cambridge University Press.
  • Wilson 2009: D. Wilson, Parallels and differences in the treatment of metaphor in Relevance Theory and Cognitive Linguistics, Studies in Pragmatics (Journal of the Pragmatics Society of Japan) 11, 42‒60.
  • Wilson 2018: D. Wilson, Relevance theory and literary interpretation, in: T. Cave & D. Wilson (eds.), Reading Beyond the Code, Oxford University Press, 185‒204.
  • Wilson, Carston 2007: D. Wilson & R. Carston, A unitary approach to lexical pragmatics: Relevance, inference and ad hoc concepts, in: N. Burton-Roberts (ed.) Pragmatics, Basingstoke: Palgrave, 230−260.
  • Wilson, Carston 2008: D. Wilson & R. Carston, Metaphor and the ‘emergent property’ problem: A Relevance-Theoretic approach, The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition Logic and Communication 3 (1): 1−40.
  • Wilson, Carston 2019: D. Wilson & R. Carston, Pragmatics and the challenge of non-propositional effects, Journal of Pragmatics 145, 31‒38.
  • Wilson, Sperber 2002: D. Wilson & D. Sperber, Truthfulness and relevance, Mind 111 (443), 583–632, <https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/111.443.583>.
  • Yan 2024: X. Yan, From Likeness to Meaning: A Relevance-Theoretic Account of Similes and Other Comparison Statements, PhD thesis, UCL Linguistics.
  • Yan, Carston under review: X. Yan & R. Carston, Metaphorical referring is costly: Evidence from self-paced reading and eye-tracking.
  • Zwaan, Stanfield, Yaxley 2002: R. A. Zwaan, R. A. Stanfield & R. H. Yaxley, Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects, Psychological Science 13, 168‒171.
Post Views: 23