One small step for MIP towards automated metaphor identification?
Formulating general rules to determine basic meanings in large-scale approaches to metaphor
The manual annotation of large corpora is time-consuming and brings about issues of consistency. This paper aims to demonstrate how general rules for determining basic meanings can be formulated in large-scale projects involving multiple analysts applying MIP(VU) to authentic data. Three sets of problematic lexical units — chemical processes, colours, and sharp objects — are discussed in relation to the question of how the basic meaning of a lexical unit can be determined when human and non-human senses compete as candidates for the basic meaning; these analyses can therefore be considered a detailed case study of problems encountered during step 3.b. of MIP(VU). The analyses show how these problematic cases were tackled in a large corpus clean-up project in order to streamline the annotations and ensure a greater consistency of the corpus. In addition, this paper will point out how the formulation of general identification rules and guidelines could provide a first step towards the automatic detection of linguistic metaphors in natural discourse.
Keywords: mapping, human/non-human, concrete/abstract, basic meanings, MIP(VU)
Published online: 15 July 2013
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.3.1.04dor
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.3.1.04dor
Cited by
Cited by 7 other publications
Dorst, Aletta G. & W.Gudrun Reijnierse
Gibbs, Raymond W.
MacArthur, Fiona
MacArthur, Fiona
Nacey, Susan, Tina Krennmayr, Aletta G. Dorst & W. Gudrun Reijnierse
Reijnierse, W. Gudrun, Christian Burgers, Tina Krennmayr & Gerard J. Steen
Reijnierse, W. Gudrun, Christian Burgers, Tina Krennmayr & Gerard J. Steen
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 march 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.