logo
calendar17 Sentabr 2026
view31
Main language:English

Methodological Foundations of the Study of Conceptual Metaphor

Field of Science:Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
National field of science (HAC):05.01.01 — Engineering geometry and computer graphics. Audio and video technologies05.01.09 — Document studies. Archival science. Library science05.06.04 — Garment technology and costume design07.00.07 — Ethnography, ethnology and anthropology07.00.02 — History of science and technology07.00.01 — History of Uzbekistan07.00.03 — World history07.00.04 — Religious studies07.00.05 — History of international relations and foreign policy07.00.06 — Archaeology09.00.01 — Ontology, epistemology and logic09.00.03 — History of philosophy09.00.04 — Social philosophy09.00.05 — Technologies of national idea advocacy09.00.06 — History and methodology of ideas09.00.07 — History and theory of spirituality09.00.08 — Spiritual education09.00.09 — Spiritual processes and technologies10.00.01 — Uzbek language10.00.02 — Uzbek literature10.00.03 — Karakalpak language10.00.04 — Languages and literatures of the peoples of Europe, America and Australia10.00.05 — Languages and literatures of the peoples of Asia and Africa10.00.06 — Comparative literature, contrastive linguistics and translation studies10.00.07 — Literary theory10.00.08 — Folklore studies10.00.12 — Karakalpak literature17.00.04 — Fine and decorative applied arts17.00.01 — Theatre arts17.00.05 — Theory and history of design17.00.02 — Musical arts17.00.03 — Cinema arts. Television17.00.06 — Museum studies. Conservation, restoration and preservation of historical and cultural objects18.00.01 — Theory and history of architecture. Restoration and reconstruction of architectural monuments17.00.07 — Theory and history of culture. Cultural studies17.00.08 — Theory and history of art18.00.02 — Zoning. Urban planning. Planning of rural settlements. Landscape architecture. Architecture of buildings and structures19.00.07 — Psychology of religion21.02.22 — Military history24.00.02 — Quranic studies. Hadith studies24.00.01 — History of Islam and source studies24.00.03 — Fiqh, kalam. Theology24.00.04 — Classical Oriental literature and source studies07.00.08 — Historiography, source studies and methods of historical research09.00.02 — Philosophy of forms of consciousness, culture and practice (by designation)10.00.09 — Journalism10.00.10 — Textual criticism and literary source studies10.00.11 — Language theory. Applied and computational linguistics
pdf

15-21_9530274b.pdf

PDF

Problems of modern philology

Problems of modern philology

Publish Articlesee more

ARTICLE ANNOTATION

quote
The article examines the methodological foundations of the study of conceptual metaphor. The main approaches to the identification, description and verification of conceptual metaphors are compared, and an integrated research procedure is substantiated.

AUTHORS

Science ID: MNM-0826-0009

Tags

# mapping# cognitive linguistics# conceptual metaphor# source domain# target domain# metaphor identification# MIPVU# corpus analysis

SIMILAR ARTICLES

OTHER ARTICLES IN THIS JOURNAL

Rate Article

0
0 ratings
5
4
3
2
1

References

Arutyunova N. D. Language and the world of man. – Moscow: Yazyki russkoy kultury, 1999. – P. 896.

Deignan A. Metaphor and corpus linguistics. – Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2005. – P. 236.

Fauconnier G., Turner M. Conceptual integration networks. – Cognitive Science, 1998. – Vol. 22(2). – P. 133-187.

Gibbs R. W. Evaluating conceptual metaphor theory. – Discourse Processes, 2011. – Vol. 48(8). – P. 529-562.

Grady J. Theories are buildings revisited. – Cognitive Linguistics, 1997. – Vol. 8(4). – P. 267-290.

Kövecses Z. Metaphor: A practical introduction. 2nd ed. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. – P. 375.

Lakoff G. The contemporary theory of metaphor // Metaphor and thought / ed. A. Ortony. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. – P. 202-251.

Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors we live by. – Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. – P. 242.

Pragglejaz Group. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. – Metaphor and Symbol, 2007. – Vol. 22(1). – P. 1-39.

Semino E. Metaphor in discourse. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. – P. 247.

Steen G. J., Dorst A. G., Herrmann J. B., Kaal A. A., Krennmayr T., Pasma T. A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. – Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010. – P. 238.

Stefanowitsch A. Words and their metaphors: A corpus-based approach // Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy / eds. A. Stefanowitsch, S. Th. Gries. – Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2006. – P. 63-105.