The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics Part 60. In the past decade, Cognitive Linguistics has developed into one of the most dynamic and attractive frameworks within theoretical and descriptive linguistics The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics is a major new reference that presents a comprehensive overview of the main theoretical concepts and descriptive/theoretical models of Cognitive Linguistics, and covers its various subfields, theoretical as well as applied. | 560 JAN NWTS 22. The following not only applies to the established schools of grammar it characterizes the default view of linguistic knowledge not only syntactic but also semantic and discursive in Functional Linguistics in general. One of the established grammars namely Systemic-Functional Grammar stands somewhat apart in a few respects due to its systemic network formalism it is difficult to talk about procedures or rules in this framework in other than strongly metaphorical terms. Still the basic concept of a grammar described below as a device which composes rather than assembles utterances does apply to this model as well. 23. This is of course again a simplified rendering of a complicated situation since quite many cognitive linguists do not deny the role of metonymy in certain semantic relations see below and functional linguists do not deny the role of metaphor. Note by the way that this statement about the more intensive concern with metaphor versus metonymy in Cognitive versus Functional Linguistics applies at the object level it applies to what linguists actually do when describing semantic processes. At a metalevel there is even more concern with the nature of metonymy in relation to metaphor among cognitive linguists than among functional linguists. This is not surprisingly again especially true for the European functional-cognitive linguists. And correspondingly it is the latter group especially that deviates from the core cognitive linguists in tending toward a more balanced application of metonymy next to metaphor in the description of semantic phenomena see . Goossens 1990 Panther and Radden 1999 Barcelona 2000 . 24. Something comparable could be maintained for the metaphor versus metonymy issue one might consider metaphor to be a macrolevel characterization of global semantic relations which have however come into existence and can in principle be reconstructed through microlevel metonymic processes this is . how Heine Claudi and Hunnemeyer
