ABSTRACT 

Studies of metaphor have largely focused on the processes determining its comprehension, production and formal features.  Our study attempts to show how metaphor also contributes to cohesion in discourse. Metaphor has traditionally been considered as an organizing principle of rhetorical texts but we would like to focus on its role in discourse and conversation. In our opinion, figurative language can contribute to integrate the information that speaker and listener share. Additionally as metaphors are grounded on partial metonymic associations (Barcelona: 2000), the use of different linguistic metaphoric expressions with a common ground in discourse, are examples of associative anaphor, and thus, an instance of cohesion (Peña, G &Olivares, Mª Amparo. 2008).

In our paper we will examine different examples of how linguistic metaphorical expressions are a key factor to improve and organize cohesion in discourse. In order to do so we will follow Ponterotto (2000) and Kövecses (2009) criteria. It will also be observed if the use of these expressions is a response to our needs to communicate ideas in a new and more efficient way, and the role that context plays in the selection of linguistic metaphorical expressions.

We expect to find evidence that metonymic associations between non conventional and conventional linguistic metaphors are examples of associative anaphor and that context plays a fundamental role in the selection of the first cognitive metaphor. This first metaphor will function as a frame for the rest of linguistic metaphorical expressions in discourse. We would like to suggest that this is a mainly pragmatic phenomenon and that the use of figurative language is a response to our communicative needs.

 REFERENCES

Bielenia-Grajewska, Magdalena. (2009). The role of metaphors in the language of investment banking. Ibérica. 17 (-), 139-156.

Bodner, Glen E. & Lindsay, Stephen. (2003). Remembering and knowing in Context. Journal of Memory and Language. 48 (-), 563-580.

Bühler, K. (1990). Theory of language. Ámsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamin´s Publishing Company.

Escavy, Ricardo. (1999). La anáfora asociativa como mecanismo de cohesión textual. Revista de investigación lingúística. 2 (2), 111-128.

Hidalgo Downing, Laura & Kraljevic Mujic, Blanca. (2009). INFECTIOUS DISEASES ARE SLEEPING MONSTERS: Conventional and culturally adapted new metaphors in a corpus of abstracts on immunology. Ibérica . 17 (-), 61-82.

Holtgraves, Thomas. (2005). Diverging interpretations associated with the perspectives of the speaker and recipient in conversations. Journal of memory and language. 53 (-), 551-566.

Holtgraves, Thomas. (2008). Automatic intention recognition in conversation processing. Journal of memory and Language. 58 (-), 627-645.

Kleiber, G & Ujma, L.. (1991). "Anaphor associative: d´une conception l´autre. In: C. Schnedecker, M. Charolles, G. Kleiber & J. David L´anaphore associative. Aspects linguistiques, psycholinguistiques et automatiques.. Paris: klincksieck. 5-64.

Kövecses, Zoltán. (2009). The effect of context on the use of metaphor in discourse. Ibérica. 17 (1), 11-24.

Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor, a practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lakoff, G & Johnson, M (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Stanford: Stanford University Press. -.

Ortony, A. (1993). Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p561-621.

Peña, G &Olivares, Mª Amparo. (2008). L´anaphore associative: contigúit´w métonymique. Ibérica . 15 (-), 135-150.

Ponterotto, D. (2000). The cohesive role of cognitive metaphor in discourse and conversation. In: Barcelona, A Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 283-298.

Ruiz Mendoza, Francisco J. (2000). The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. In: Barcelona, A Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 109-132.

Shinjo, Makiko & Myers, Jerome L.. (1987). The role of context in Metaphor Comprenhensio. Journal of Memory and Language. 26 (-), 226-241.

Skorcynska, Hanna. (2001). Metaphor in scientific business journals and business periodicals: an example of the scientific discourse popularization. Ibérica. 3 (-), 43-60.

Thibodeau, Paul & Durgin, Frank H. (2008). Productive figurative communication: Conventional metaphors facilitate the comprenhension of related novel metaphors. Journal of Memory and Language. 58 (-), 521-540.

Turner, M & Fauconnier, G. (2000). Metaphor, metonymy and Binding. In: Barcelona, A Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 133-145.

Ungerer, F. (2000). Muted metaphors and the activation of metonymies in advertising. In: Barcelona, A Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 321-340.