The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics Part 64. 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. | 6oo BRIGITTE NERLICH AND DAVID D. CLARKE and Clarke 1999 . He was especially interested in the mysteries of language understanding which he saw as involving the integration of new structures into already existing structures of thought. For him meaning emerged from an integration of symbolic and encyclopedic knowledge. This is nowhere better demonstrated than in metaphor as in metaphor production and understanding we are dealing with a mixing of spheres Spharenmischung that is with the blending of linguistic and nonlinguistic knowledge A duality of spheres. and something like a transition from one to the other can often be detected in the experience of understanding and this often vanishes only when idiomatically familiar constructions are involved Buhler 1934 1990 343 . Buhler s favorite example of the mixing of spheres in metaphor is the following A boy eight years of age observes the motion of the long antennae of a butterfly and explains that the animal is knitting socks motion of knitting needles . This is no bad analogy but also no great effort from a psychological point of view merely an association by similarity Buhler 1930 105 see also Buhler 1934 1990 395 . To conceptualize or imagine how this mixing of spheres works Buhler tried out various analogies. The most suitable one for this procedure which he sometimes metaphorically calls Cocktailverfahren Buhler 1990 343 is the comparison with binocular vision. As such metaphorical meaning constitution is for him similar to visual projection passing through two filters which partially cover each other so that only those parts of the projection can be seen that are not covered or canceled out by either one of the filters. This filtering process is both projective and selective see Hulzer-Vogt 1989 36 . The listener creatively selects those semantic aspects in a metaphor that fit into his or her deictical field of communicative interests. The word or words used in the metaphorical speech act are drawn from .
