---
title: "AraMIP: Extending MIPVU Towards Metaphor — Marathe 2026"
description: "Arabic has no standardized, replicable procedure for marking metaphor, and the few existing Arabic datasets say little about how they were built."
authors: ["Mandar Marathe", "Manar Ali", "Sara Nabhani", "Raia Abu Ahmad", "Ibrahim Baroud", "Omar Momen"]
year: 2026
venue: "arXiv:2609.17235"
source: "https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.17235"
doi: "10.48550/arxiv.2609.17235"
arxiv: "2609.17235"
licence: "CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (arXiv)"
licence_url: "http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/"
summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License"
canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/marathe-2026-aramip-extending-mipvu-towards-metaphor/"
---
[Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/marathe-2026-aramip-extending-mipvu-towards-metaphor/)

[home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/) / [2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2026/page/2/) / AraMIP: Extending MIPVU Towards Metaphor Identification in Arabic

# AraMIP: Extending MIPVU Towards Metaphor Identification in Arabic

**Authors:** [Mandar Marathe](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/mandar-marathe/), Manar Ali, Sara Nabhani, Raia Abu Ahmad, Ibrahim Baroud, [Omar Momen](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/omar-momen/) · **Year:** 2026 · **Venue:** arXiv:2609.17235 · **Licence:** [CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (arXiv)](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

**Links:** [Publisher's page](https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.17235) · [PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.17235) · [DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2609.17235](https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2609.17235) · [arXiv 2609.17235](https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.17235) · [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W7205651907)

**Citations:** 0 citations (openalex-snapshot · 2026-10-14)

## Summary
Arabic has no standardized, replicable procedure for marking metaphor, and the few existing Arabic datasets say little about how they were built. The authors propose AraMIP, a guideline that adapts MIPVU to Arabic in two stages. Stage 1 applies the MIPVU word-level decision codes, using a single modern MSA dictionary to fix each word's basic sense. Stage 2 marks spans with the classical Arabic rhetorical categories isti‘āra (metaphor), kināya (metonymy or indirect expression) and tashbīh (simile), and rates how conventional each construction is on a five-point scale. They tested the scheme on a pilot of 300 sentences (5277 words) drawn from BAREC-10M. Agreement turned out lower than in several MIPVU adaptations for other languages. The authors trace the difficulty to:
- a single annotation round,
- gaps in dictionary coverage between MSA and Classical Arabic,
- unclear sense transfer from roots to derived forms,
- inconsistent sense ordering in the dictionary,
- uncontrolled consultation of outside context.

The guidelines, data and code are public. They serve as a diagnostic starting point for larger Arabic metaphor resources and detection models.

## Key points
- Pilot corpus: 300 sentences (5277 words) from BAREC-10M, balanced across domains, readership levels and text categories. Each sentence was labeled by three of six annotators; five were native speakers of four Arabic varieties and one was an advanced L2 speaker.
- Stage 1 uses the MIPVU codes MRW-direct, MRW-indirect, MRW-implicit, MRW-negative, MFlag, WIDLII and DFMA. Basic senses come from Mu‘jam al-Lugha al-‘Arabiyya al-Mu‘āṣira (Omar et al., 2008), accessed through almaany.com.
- Stage 2 allows overlapping spans labeled isti‘āra, kināya or tashbīh, each with a 1–5 conventionality rating.
- Over 90% of tokens were jointly labeled negative. Observed agreement was therefore high while Fleiss' κ stayed low, because chance agreement on the dominant class is inflated.
- Agreement did not vary in any consistent way with annotators' discipline or dialect, and the L2 annotator scored similarly to the native speakers.

## Interesting ideas
- AraMIP stacks a language-independent word-level layer under a tradition-specific span layer with overlapping spans, so the data stays comparable with other MIPVU corpora while keeping local categories. — For Mova (frames): prag could keep a per-token literal/non-literal flag beneath separate span-level figure types (metaphor, metonymy, simile, irony). This would let implicature and irony reasoning cite both layers.
- A word counts as metaphorical when its contextual sense contrasts with a basic sense taken from one fixed reference dictionary, which makes the decision checkable. — For Mova (world): fixing a "basic" WordNet sense per lemma and recording when the contextual sense differs would give an explainable non-literalness signal. The world builder could then avoid creating literal entities, such as a mouth or a thief, from figurative uses.
- Each figurative construction gets a graded conventionality rating instead of a single yes/no label. — For Mova (frames): a conventionality score on figurative frames would let the system treat lexicalized metaphors almost literally and reserve deeper reinterpretation for novel ones.
- The paper shows that a dominant negative class can produce high raw agreement alongside a low chance-corrected κ, so both numbers must be reported. — For Mova (learn): when witness parsers vote on silver data, agreement should also be measured on the non-trivial labels and chance-corrected. Otherwise easy majority cases hide real disagreement.
- The authors recommend giving all annotators one shared, fixed set of context materials, so private look-ups do not become a hidden confounding variable. They also test whether disagreement clusters by annotator background. — For Mova (learn): LLM teacher tiers should receive identical frozen context. Disagreements should then be checked for clustering by parser or teacher family before they are treated as label noise.

*Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.*

Fields: [Linguistics & languages](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/linguistics/)

## Cite

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

```bibtex
@misc{marathe2026aramip,
  title = {{AraMIP: Extending MIPVU Towards Metaphor Identification in Arabic}},
  author = {Marathe, Mandar and Ali, Manar and Nabhani, Sara and Ahmad, Raia Abu and Baroud, Ibrahim and Momen, Omar},
  year = {2026},
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2609.17235},
  eprint = {2609.17235},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2609.17235}
}
```

- [← previous ARAFA: An LLM-Generated Arabic Fact-Checking Dataset](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/khalil-2026-arafa-llm-generated-arabic-fact/)
- [next → AraMS-28k: The Largest Publicly Released Line-Level Dataset of Historical Arabic Manuscripts with Margin and Insertion-Anchor Annotations](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/guechaoui-2026-arams-28k-largest-publicly-released/)
- [↑ back to papers of 2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2026/page/2/)

## References

40 references, 5 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Hussein Abdul-Raof. 2006. Arabic Rhetoric: A Pragmatic Analysis. Routledge, London. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hussein+Abdul%2DRaof%2E+2006%2E+Arabic+Rhetoric%3A+A+Pragmatic+Analysis%2E+Routledge%2C+London%2E)
2. Manar Alkhatib and Khaled Shaalan. 2016. Natural language processing for arabic metaphors: a conceptual approach. In International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Systems and Informatics, pages 170–181. Springer. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Manar+Alkhatib+and+Khaled+Shaalan%2E+2016%2E+Natural+language+processing+for+arabic+metaphors%3A+a+conceptual+approach%2E+In+International+Conference+on+Advanced+Intelligent+Systems+and+Informatics%2C+pages+170)
3. Israa Alsiyat and Scott Piao. 2020. Metaphorical expressions in automatic Arabic sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, pages 4911–4916, Marseille, France. European Language Resources Association. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Israa+Alsiyat+and+Scott+Piao%2E+2020%2E+Metaphorical+expressions+in+automatic+Arabic+sentiment+analysis%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+Twelfth+Language+Resources+and+Evaluation+Conference%2C+pages+4911%E2%80%934916%2C+Marsei) [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/alsiyat-2020-metaphorical-expressions-automatic-arabic-sentiment/)
4. Israa Alsiyat, Scott Piao, and Mansour Almansour. 2023. Arabic metaphor corpus (amc) with semantic and sentiment annotation. page 1. The twelfth International Corpus Linguistics Conference, CL2023 ; Conference date: 03-07-2023 Through 06-07-2023. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Israa+Alsiyat%2C+Scott+Piao%2C+and+Mansour+Almansour%2E+2023%2E+Arabic+metaphor+corpus+%28amc%29+with+semantic+and+sentiment+annotation%2E+page+1%2E+The+twelfth+International+Corpus+Linguistics+Conference%2C+CL2023+%3B+C)
5. Aristotle. 1996. Poetics. Penguin Books, London. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Aristotle%2E+1996%2E+Poetics%2E+Penguin+Books%2C+London%2E)
6. Ron Artstein and Massimo Poesio. 2008. Inter-coder agreement for computational linguistics. Computational Linguistics, 34(4):555–596. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1162/coli.07-034-r2) [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/artstein-2008-survey-article-inter-coder-agreement/)
7. Yulia Badryzlova, Natalia Shekhtman, Yekaterina Isaeva, and Ruslan Kerimov. 2013. Annotating a Russian corpus of conceptual metaphor: a bottom-up approach. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Metaphor in NLP, pages 77–86, Atlanta, Georgia. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Yulia+Badryzlova%2C+Natalia+Shekhtman%2C+Yekaterina+Isaeva%2C+and+Ruslan+Kerimov%2E+2013%2E+Annotating+a+Russian+corpus+of+conceptual+metaphor%3A+a+bottom%2Dup+approach%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+First+Workshop+on+Meta)
8. Zouheir Banou, Sanaa El Filali, El Habib Benlahmar, Fatima-Zahra Alaoui, and Laila Eljiani. 2025. Memphis: Towards a new benchmark for arabic figurative speech classification. Data Science. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Zouheir+Banou%2C+Sanaa+El+Filali%2C+El+Habib+Benlahmar%2C+Fatima%2DZahra+Alaoui%2C+and+Laila+Eljiani%2E+2025%2E+Memphis%3A+Towards+a+new+benchmark+for+arabic+figurative+speech+classification%2E+Data+Science%2E)
9. Beata Beigman Klebanov, Chee Wee (Ben) Leong, and Michael Flor. 2018. A corpus of non-native written English annotated for metaphor. In NAACL, pages 86–91, New Orleans, Louisiana. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Beata+Beigman+Klebanov%2C+Chee+Wee+%28Ben%29+Leong%2C+and+Michael+Flor%2E+2018%2E+A+corpus+of+non%2Dnative+written+English+annotated+for+metaphor%2E+In+NAACL%2C+pages+86%E2%80%9391%2C+New+Orleans%2C+Louisiana%2E+Association+for+Comp)
10. Max Black. 1955. Metaphor. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 55(1):273–294. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Max+Black%2E+1955%2E+Metaphor%2E+Proceedings+of+the+Aristotelian+Society%2C+55%281%29%3A273%E2%80%93294%2E)
11. Verna Dankers, Marek Rei, Martha Lewis, and Ekaterina Shutova. 2019. Modelling the interplay of metaphor and emotion through multitask learning. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP), pages 2218– 2229, Hong Kong, China. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Verna+Dankers%2C+Marek+Rei%2C+Martha+Lewis%2C+and+Ekaterina+Shutova%2E+2019%2E+Modelling+the+interplay+of+metaphor+and+emotion+through+multitask+learning%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+2019+Conference+on+Empirical+Meth)
12. Erik-Lân Do Dinh, Hannah Wieland, and Iryna Gurevych. 2018. Weeding out conventionalized metaphors: A corpus of novel metaphor annotations. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1412–1424, Brussels, Belgium. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Erik%2DL%C3%A2n+Do+Dinh%2C+Hannah+Wieland%2C+and+Iryna+Gurevych%2E+2018%2E+Weeding+out+conventionalized+metaphors%3A+A+corpus+of+novel+metaphor+annotations%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+2018+Conference+on+Empirical+Methods+i)
13. Markus Egg and Valia Kordoni. 2022. Metaphor annotation for German. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, pages 2556–2562, Marseille, France. European Language Resources Association. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Markus+Egg+and+Valia+Kordoni%2E+2022%2E+Metaphor+annotation+for+German%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+Thirteenth+Language+Resources+and+Evaluation+Conference%2C+pages+2556%E2%80%932562%2C+Marseille%2C+France%2E+European+Language)
14. Khalid N. Elmadani, Adel Mahmoud Wizani, Hanada Taha Thomure, and Nizar Habash. 2026. A large and balanced multi-domain arabic corpus annotated for morphology, syntax, and readability. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC 2026), pages 11761–11775, Palma, Mallorca, Spain. European Language Resources Association (ELRA). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Khalid+N%2E+Elmadani%2C+Adel+Mahmoud+Wizani%2C+Hanada+Taha+Thomure%2C+and+Nizar+Habash%2E+2026%2E+A+large+and+balanced+multi%2Ddomain+arabic+corpus+annotated+for+morphology%2C+syntax%2C+and+readability%2E+In+Proceedings+)
15. Mengshi Ge, Rui Mao, and Erik Cambria. 2023. A survey on computational metaphor processing techniques: From identification, interpretation, generation to application. Artificial Intelligence Review, 56(Suppl 2):1829–1895. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Mengshi+Ge%2C+Rui+Mao%2C+and+Erik+Cambria%2E+2023%2E+A+survey+on+computational+metaphor+processing+techniques%3A+From+identification%2C+interpretation%2C+generation+to+application%2E+Artificial+Intelligence+Review%2C+5)
16. Sam Glucksberg. 1998. Understanding metaphors. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(2):39–43. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Sam+Glucksberg%2E+1998%2E+Understanding+metaphors%2E+Current+Directions+in+Psychological+Science%2C+7%282%29%3A39%E2%80%9343%2E)
17. Pere-Lluís Huguet Cabot, Verna Dankers, David Abadi, Agneta Fischer, and Ekaterina Shutova. 2020. The Pragmatics behind Politics: Modelling Metaphor, Framing and Emotion in Political Discourse. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2020, pages 4479–4488, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics. [↗](https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.findings-emnlp.402) [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/cabot-2020-pragmatics-behind-politics-modelling-metaphor/)
18. Jan-Christoph Klie, Michael Bugert, Beto Boullosa, Richard Eckart de Castilho, and Iryna Gurevych. 2018. The inception platform: Machine-assisted and knowledge-oriented interactive annotation. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, pages 5–9. Association for Computational Linguistics. Event Title: The 27th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 2018). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jan%2DChristoph+Klie%2C+Michael+Bugert%2C+Beto+Boullosa%2C+Richard+Eckart+de+Castilho%2C+and+Iryna+Gurevych%2E+2018%2E+The+inception+platform%3A+Machine%2Dassisted+and+knowledge%2Doriented+interactive+annotation%2E+In+Proc) [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/klie-2018-inception-platform-machine-assisted-knowledge/)
19. George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=George+Lakoff+and+Mark+Johnson%2E+1980%2E+Metaphors+We+Live+By%2E+University+of+Chicago+Press%2C+Chicago%2E)
20. Margaret Larkin. 1995. The Theology of Meaning: ‘Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani’s Theory of Discourse, volume 79 of American Oriental Series. American Oriental Society, New Haven, CT. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Margaret+Larkin%2E+1995%2E+The+Theology+of+Meaning%3A+%E2%80%98Abd+al%2DQahir+al%2DJurjani%E2%80%99s+Theory+of+Discourse%2C+volume+79+of+American+Oriental+Series%2E+American+Oriental+Society%2C+New+Haven%2C+CT%2E)
21. Jens Lemmens, Ilia Markov, and Walter Daelemans. 2021. Improving hate speech type and target detection with hateful metaphor features. In Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on NLP for Internet Freedom: Censorship, Disinformation, and Propaganda, pages 7–16, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics. [↗](https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.nlp4if-1.2)
22. Chee Wee (Ben) Leong, Beata Beigman Klebanov, Chris Hamill, Egon Stemle, Rutuja Ubale, and Xianyang Chen. 2020. A report on the 2020 VUA and TOEFL metaphor detection shared task. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Figurative Language Processing, pages 18–29, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Chee+Wee+%28Ben%29+Leong%2C+Beata+Beigman+Klebanov%2C+Chris+Hamill%2C+Egon+Stemle%2C+Rutuja+Ubale%2C+and+Xianyang+Chen%2E+2020%2E+A+report+on+the+2020+VUA+and+TOEFL+metaphor+detection+shared+task%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the)
23. Chee Wee (Ben) Leong, Beata Beigman Klebanov, and Ekaterina Shutova. 2018. A report on the 2018 VUA metaphor detection shared task. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Figurative Language Processing, pages 56–66, New Orleans, Louisiana. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Chee+Wee+%28Ben%29+Leong%2C+Beata+Beigman+Klebanov%2C+and+Ekaterina+Shutova%2E+2018%2E+A+report+on+the+2018+VUA+metaphor+detection+shared+task%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+Workshop+on+Figurative+Language+Processing%2C+pa)
24. Xiaofei Lu and Ben Pin-Yun Wang. 2017. Towards a metaphor-annotated corpus of Mandarin Chinese. Language Resources and Evaluation, 51(3):663–694. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Xiaofei+Lu+and+Ben+Pin%2DYun+Wang%2E+2017%2E+Towards+a+metaphor%2Dannotated+corpus+of+Mandarin+Chinese%2E+Language+Resources+and+Evaluation%2C+51%283%29%3A663%E2%80%93694%2E)
25. Samar Mohamed Magdy, Fakhraddin Alwajih, Sang Yun Kwon, Reem Abdel-Salam, and Muhammad Abdul-Mageed. 2024. Gazelle: An instruction dataset for Arabic writing assistance. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024, pages 16027–16054, Miami, Florida, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Samar+Mohamed+Magdy%2C+Fakhraddin+Alwajih%2C+Sang+Yun+Kwon%2C+Reem+Abdel%2DSalam%2C+and+Muhammad+Abdul%2DMageed%2E+2024%2E+Gazelle%3A+An+instruction+dataset+for+Arabic+writing+assistance%2E+In+Findings+of+the+Association)
26. Yann Mathet, Antoine Widlöcher, and Jean-Philippe Métivier. 2015. The unified and holistic method gamma for inter-annotator agreement measure and alignment. Computational Linguistics, 41(3):437–479. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Yann+Mathet%2C+Antoine+Widl%C3%B6cher%2C+and+Jean%2DPhilippe+M%C3%A9tivier%2E+2015%2E+The+unified+and+holistic+method+gamma+for+inter%2Dannotator+agreement+measure+and+alignment%2E+Computational+Linguistics%2C+41%283%29%3A437%E2%80%93479%2E)
27. Saif Mohammad, Ekaterina Shutova, and Peter Turney. 2016. Metaphor as a medium for emotion: An empirical study. In Proceedings of the Fifth Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics, pages 23–33, Berlin, Germany. Association for Computational Linguistics. [↗](https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/s16-2003) [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/mohammad-2016-metaphor-as-medium-emotion-empirical/)
28. Ahmad Mukhtar Omar and 1 others. 2008. Mu‘jam al-lugha al-‘arabiyya al-mu‘as.ira. ‘Alam al-Kutub, Cairo, Egypt. Dictionary of Contemporary Arabic. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ahmad+Mukhtar+Omar+and+1+others%2E+2008%2E+Mu%E2%80%98jam+al%2Dlugha+al%2D%E2%80%98arabiyya+al%2Dmu%E2%80%98as%2Eira%2E+%E2%80%98Alam+al%2DKutub%2C+Cairo%2C+Egypt%2E+Dictionary+of+Contemporary+Arabic%2E)
29. W. Gudrun Reijnierse, Christian F. Burgers, Tina Krennmayr, and Gerard J. Steen. 2018. DMIP: A method for identifying potentially deliberate metaphor in language use. Corpus Pragmatics, 2(2):129–147. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=W%2E+Gudrun+Reijnierse%2C+Christian+F%2E+Burgers%2C+Tina+Krennmayr%2C+and+Gerard+J%2E+Steen%2E+2018%2E+DMIP%3A+A+method+for+identifying+potentially+deliberate+metaphor+in+language+use%2E+Corpus+Pragmatics%2C+2%282%29%3A129%E2%80%93147%2E)
30. Elisa Sanchez-Bayona and Rodrigo Agerri. 2022. Leveraging a new Spanish corpus for multilingual and cross-lingual metaphor detection. In Proceedings of the 26th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL), pages 228–240, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (Hybrid). Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Elisa+Sanchez%2DBayona+and+Rodrigo+Agerri%2E+2022%2E+Leveraging+a+new+Spanish+corpus+for+multilingual+and+cross%2Dlingual+metaphor+detection%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+26th+Conference+on+Computational+Natural+Lan)
31. John R. Searle. 1979. Metaphor. In Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts, pages 76–116. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=John+R%2E+Searle%2E+1979%2E+Metaphor%2E+In+Expression+and+Meaning%3A+Studies+in+the+Theory+of+Speech+Acts%2C+pages+76%E2%80%93116%2E+Cambridge+University+Press%2C+Cambridge%2E)
32. Gerard J. Steen, Aletta G. Dorst, J. Berenike Herrmann, Anna A. Kaal, Tina Krennmayr, and Trijntje Pasma. 2010. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Number 14 in Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Gerard+J%2E+Steen%2C+Aletta+G%2E+Dorst%2C+J%2E+Berenike+Herrmann%2C+Anna+A%2E+Kaal%2C+Tina+Krennmayr%2C+and+Trijntje+Pasma%2E+2010%2E+A+Method+for+Linguistic+Metaphor+Identification%3A+From+MIP+to+MIPVU%2E+Number+14+in+Converg)
33. The Pragglejaz Group. 2007. Mip: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1):1–39. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=The+Pragglejaz+Group%2E+2007%2E+Mip%3A+A+method+for+identifying+metaphorically+used+words+in+discourse%2E+Metaphor+and+Symbol%2C+22%281%29%3A1%E2%80%9339%2E)
34. Paul H Thibodeau and Lera Boroditsky. 2011. Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PloS one, 6(2):e16782. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Paul+H+Thibodeau+and+Lera+Boroditsky%2E+2011%2E+Metaphors+we+think+with%3A+The+role+of+metaphor+in+reasoning%2E+PloS+one%2C+6%282%29%3Ae16782%2E)
35. Xiaoyu Tong, Ekaterina Shutova, and Martha Lewis. 2021. Recent advances in neural metaphor processing: A linguistic, cognitive and social perspective. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 4673–4686, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics. [↗](https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.naacl-main.372)
36. R. Vogel, J. Cholin, J. Hartmann, O. Bott, J. Häussler, T. Solstad, P. Wagner, S. Zarrieß, T. Ackermann, A. Bárány, C. de Beer, H. Buschmeier, B. Herrmann, M. Hielscher-Fastabend, F. Jabeen, B. Job, A. Jorschick, J. Kißler, H. Knerich, and 12 others. 2026. Linguistic creativity in communication. conceptions and challenges. Working Paper Series of the Collaborative Research Center CRC 1646, 1. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=R%2E+Vogel%2C+J%2E+Cholin%2C+J%2E+Hartmann%2C+O%2E+Bott%2C+J%2E+H%C3%A4ussler%2C+T%2E+Solstad%2C+P%2E+Wagner%2C+S%2E+Zarrie%C3%9F%2C+T%2E+Ackermann%2C+A%2E+B%C3%A1r%C3%A1ny%2C+C%2E+de+Beer%2C+H%2E+Buschmeier%2C+B%2E+Herrmann%2C+M%2E+Hielscher%2DFastabend%2C+F%2E+Jabeen%2C+B%2E+Job%2C+A)
37. Shun Wang, Ge Zhang, Han Wu, Tyler Loakman, Wenhao Huang, and Chenghua Lin. 2024. MMTE: Corpus and metrics for evaluating machine translation quality of metaphorical language. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 11343–11358, Miami, Florida, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Shun+Wang%2C+Ge+Zhang%2C+Han+Wu%2C+Tyler+Loakman%2C+Wenhao+Huang%2C+and+Chenghua+Lin%2E+2024%2E+MMTE%3A+Corpus+and+metrics+for+evaluating+machine+translation+quality+of+metaphorical+language%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+20)
38. Jingjie Zeng, Liang Yang, Zekun Wang, Yuanyuan Sun, and Hongfei Lin. 2025. Sheep’s skin, wolf’s deeds: Are LLMs ready for metaphorical implicit hate speech? In Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 16657– 16677, Vienna, Austria. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jingjie+Zeng%2C+Liang+Yang%2C+Zekun+Wang%2C+Yuanyuan+Sun%2C+and+Hongfei+Lin%2E+2025%2E+Sheep%E2%80%99s+skin%2C+wolf%E2%80%99s+deeds%3A+Are+LLMs+ready+for+metaphorical+implicit+hate+speech%3F+In+Proceedings+of+the+63rd+Annual+Meeting+o)
39. Hang Zhu, Mitoki Ohara, Rei Kikuchi, Kanako Komiya, Masayuki Asahara, and Sachi Kato. 2026. Automatic detection of metaphorical expressions in classical japanese using wlsp-enhanced bert. In Proceedings of LT4HALA 2026 @ LREC 2026, page 89–95, Palma, Mallorca, Spain. European Language Resources Association (ELRA). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hang+Zhu%2C+Mitoki+Ohara%2C+Rei+Kikuchi%2C+Kanako+Komiya%2C+Masayuki+Asahara%2C+and+Sachi+Kato%2E+2026%2E+Automatic+detection+of+metaphorical+expressions+in+classical+japanese+using+wlsp%2Denhanced+bert%2E+In+Proceedin)
40. Aseel Zibin, Nabeeha Binhaidara, Hala Al-Shahwan, and Haneen Yousef. 2025. Metaphor interpretation in jordanian arabic, emirati arabic and classical arabic: artificial intelligence vs. humans. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1):1–12. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Aseel+Zibin%2C+Nabeeha+Binhaidara%2C+Hala+Al%2DShahwan%2C+and+Haneen+Yousef%2E+2025%2E+Metaphor+interpretation+in+jordanian+arabic%2C+emirati+arabic+and+classical+arabic%3A+artificial+intelligence+vs%2E+humans%2E+Humanit)