---
title: "Metaphor as a Medium for Emotion — Mohammad 2016"
description: "People often assume that metaphors carry more feeling than plain wording, but no one had measured this or shown where a metaphor's emotional charge comes…"
authors: ["Saif Mohammad", "Ekaterina Shutova", "Peter Turney"]
year: 2016
venue: "Proceedings of the Fifth Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics"
source: "https://aclanthology.org/S16-2003/"
doi: "10.18653/v1/s16-2003"
licence: "CC BY 4.0 (ACL Anthology)"
licence_url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"
summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License"
canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/papers/mohammad-2016-metaphor-as-medium-emotion-empirical/"
---
[Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/papers/mohammad-2016-metaphor-as-medium-emotion-empirical/)

[home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/) / [2016](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/2016/page/2/) / Metaphor as a Medium for Emotion: An Empirical Study

# Metaphor as a Medium for Emotion: An Empirical Study

**Authors:** [Saif Mohammad](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/authors/saif-mohammad/), [Ekaterina Shutova](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/authors/ekaterina-shutova/), Peter Turney · **Year:** 2016 · **Venue:** Proceedings of the Fifth Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics · **Licence:** [CC BY 4.0 (ACL Anthology)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

**Links:** [Publisher's page](https://aclanthology.org/S16-2003/) · [PDF](https://aclanthology.org/S16-2003.pdf) · [DOI 10.18653/v1/s16-2003](https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/s16-2003) · [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W2515860461)

**Citations:** 173 citations (openalex-snapshot · 2026-10-14) · [112](#cited-by) in our library, of the 140673 papers whose bibliographies we read

## Summary
People often assume that metaphors carry more feeling than plain wording, but no one had measured this or shown where a metaphor's emotional charge comes from. The authors study verb metaphors, the most frequent type, and test two hypotheses. Hypothesis 1 holds that a verb used metaphorically is more emotional than a literal substitute in the same context. Hypothesis 2 holds that a verb's metaphorical sense is more emotional than its own literal sense used in a literal context. They took example sentences for verb senses from WordNet and had CrowdFlower workers label each usage as metaphorical or literal. They then built single instances and instance pairs, which annotators rated for emotion both individually and comparatively. Both hypotheses were confirmed: on average, metaphorical usages are significantly more emotional than literal ones. Metaphors also outscore the literal sense of the same verb. The authors take this to mean the emotion is not simply inherited from the source domain but emerges from combining source and target. The released dataset supports work on metaphor processing, sentiment analysis and regular polysemy.

## Key points
- **Data:** 1639 WordNet senses of 440 verbs were annotated for metaphoricity via CrowdFlower. About 38% of these senses were judged metaphorical, which the authors cite as evidence that the metaphorical/literal split is a major form of regular polysemy.
- **Hypothesis 1 data:** 342 instances, organised into 171 metaphor–literal paraphrase pairs that share the same context. The metaphorical uses are paired with human-validated literal paraphrases.
- **Hypothesis 2 data:** 460 instances, 355 marked pairs and 629 unmarked pairs that contrast metaphorical and literal senses of the same verb.
- **Annotation:** four questionnaires were used:
  - metaphorical vs. literal;
  - which instance is more metaphorical;
  - emotional vs. not;
  - which instance is more emotional.
- **Outcome and availability:** both hypotheses were supported for verb metaphors. The authors call for joint models of metaphor and emotion, and all annotated files are freely available from saifmohammad.com.

*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/shelves/linguistics/)

## Cited by

Cited by

112 papers of our library cite it (of the 140673 whose bibliographies we read); 2 of them have a page here, 110 not yet.

- [The Pragmatics behind Politics: Modelling Metaphor, Framing and Emotion in Political Discourse](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/cabot-2020-pragmatics-behind-politics-modelling-metaphor/)
- [IMPLI: Investigating NLI Models' Performance on Figurative Language](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/stowe-2022-impli-investigating-nli-models-performance/)

## Cite

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

```bibtex
@inproceedings{mohammad2016metaphor,
  title = {{Metaphor as a Medium for Emotion: An Empirical Study}},
  author = {Mohammad, Saif and Shutova, Ekaterina and Turney, Peter},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the Fifth Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics},
  year = {2016},
  doi = {10.18653/v1/s16-2003},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/s16-2003}
}
```

- [← previous Merged bilingual trees based on Universal Dependencies in Machine Translation](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/marecek-2016-merged-bilingual-trees-based-universal/)
- [next → MIMIC-III, a freely accessible critical care database](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/johnson-2016-mimic-iii-freely-accessible-critical/)
- [↑ back to papers of 2016](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/2016/page/2/)

## References

50 references, 4 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Paul Ekman and Wallace V Friesen. 2003. Unmasking the face: A guide to recognizing emotions from facial clues. Ishk. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Paul+Ekman+and+Wallace+V+Friesen%2E+2003%2E+Unmasking+the+face%3A+A+guide+to+recognizing+emotions+from+facial+clues%2E+Ishk%2E)
2. Alan Agresti. 1996. Categorical data analysis, volume 996. New York: John Wiley & Sons. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Alan+Agresti%2E+1996%2E+Categorical+data+analysis%2C+volume+996%2E+New+York%3A+John+Wiley+%26+Sons%2E)
3. Paul Ekman. 1992. An Argument for Basic Emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6(3):169–200. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Paul+Ekman%2E+1992%2E+An+Argument+for+Basic+Emotions%2E+Cognition+and+Emotion%2C+6%283%29%3A169%E2%80%93200%2E) [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/ekman-1992-argument-basic-emotions/)
4. Cecilia Ovesdotter Alm, Dan Roth, and Richard Sproat. 2005. Emotions from text: Machine learning for text-based emotion prediction. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on HLT–EMNLP, Vancouver, Canada. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Cecilia+Ovesdotter+Alm%2C+Dan+Roth%2C+and+Richard+Sproat%2E+2005%2E+Emotions+from+text%3A+Machine+learning+for+text%2Dbased+emotion+prediction%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+Joint+Conference+on+HLT%E2%80%93EMNLP%2C+Vancouver%2C+Cana)
5. Raymond W Gibbs, John S Leggitt, and Elizabeth A Turner. 2002. Whats special about figurative language in emotional communication. The verbal communication of emotions. Interdisciplinary perspectives, pages 125–149. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Raymond+W+Gibbs%2C+John+S+Leggitt%2C+and+Elizabeth+A+Turner%2E+2002%2E+Whats+special+about+figurative+language+in+emotional+communication%2E+The+verbal+communication+of+emotions%2E+Interdisciplinary+perspectives%2C)
6. Lisa Aziz-Zadeh and Antonio Damasio. 2008. Embodied semantics for actions: findings from functional brain imaging. Journal of Physiology - Paris, 102(1-3). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Lisa+Aziz%2DZadeh+and+Antonio+Damasio%2E+2008%2E+Embodied+semantics+for+actions%3A+findings+from+functional+brain+imaging%2E+Journal+of+Physiology+%2D+Paris%2C+102%281%2D3%29%2E)
7. Andrew Hardie, Veronika Koller, Paul Rayson, and Elena Semino. 2007. Exploiting a semantic annotation tool for metaphor analysis. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference, Birmingham, UK. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Andrew+Hardie%2C+Veronika+Koller%2C+Paul+Rayson%2C+and+Elena+Semino%2E+2007%2E+Exploiting+a+semantic+annotation+tool+for+metaphor+analysis%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+Corpus+Linguistics+Conference%2C+Birmingham%2C+UK%2E)
8. Beata Beigman Klebanov and Michael Flor. 2013. Argumentation-relevant metaphors in test-taker essays. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Metaphor in NLP, pages 11–20, Atlanta, Georgia. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Beata+Beigman+Klebanov+and+Michael+Flor%2E+2013%2E+Argumentation%2Drelevant+metaphors+in+test%2Dtaker+essays%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+First+Workshop+on+Metaphor+in+NLP%2C+pages+11%E2%80%9320%2C+Atlanta%2C+Georgia%2E)
9. Lars E. Holzman and William M. Pottenger. 2003. Classification of emotions in internet chat: An application of machine learning using speech phonemes. Technical report, Leigh University. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Lars+E%2E+Holzman+and+William+M%2E+Pottenger%2E+2003%2E+Classification+of+emotions+in+internet+chat%3A+An+application+of+machine+learning+using+speech+phonemes%2E+Technical+report%2C+Leigh+University%2E)
10. Isabelle Blanchette, Kevin Dunbar, John Hummel, and Richard Marsh. 2001. Analogy use in naturalistic settings: The influence of audience, emotion and goals. Memory and Cognition, 29(5). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Isabelle+Blanchette%2C+Kevin+Dunbar%2C+John+Hummel%2C+and+Richard+Marsh%2E+2001%2E+Analogy+use+in+naturalistic+settings%3A+The+influence+of+audience%2C+emotion+and+goals%2E+Memory+and+Cognition%2C+29%285%29%2E)
11. Sattar Izwaini. 2003. Corpus-based study of metaphor in information technology. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Corpus-based Approaches to Figurative Language, Corpus Linguistics 2003, Lancaster. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Sattar+Izwaini%2E+2003%2E+Corpus%2Dbased+study+of+metaphor+in+information+technology%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+Workshop+on+Corpus%2Dbased+Approaches+to+Figurative+Language%2C+Corpus+Linguistics+2003%2C+Lancaster%2E)
12. Gemma Boleda, Sebastian Padó, and Jason Utt. 2012. Regular polysemy: A distributional model. In Proceedings of the First Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics-Volume 1: Proceedings of the main conference and the shared task, and Volume 2: Proceedings of the Sixth International Wor… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Gemma+Boleda%2C+Sebastian+Pado%CC%81%2C+and+Jason+Utt%2E+2012%2E+Regular+polysemy%3A+A+distributional+model%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+First+Joint+Conference+on+Lexical+and+Computational+Semantics%2DVolume+1%3A+Proceedings+)
13. Mbemba Jabbi, Jojanneke Bastiaansen, and Christian Keysers. 2008. A common anterior insula representation of disgust observation, experience and imagination shows divergent functional connectivity pathways. PLoS ONE, 3(8):e2939. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Mbemba+Jabbi%2C+Jojanneke+Bastiaansen%2C+and+Christian+Keysers%2E+2008%2E+A+common+anterior+insula+representation+of+disgust+observation%2C+experience+and+imagination+shows+divergent+functional+connectivity+pat)
14. Michael Brooks, Katie Kuksenok, Megan K Torkild-son, Daniel Perry, John J Robinson, Taylor J Scott, Ona Anicello, Ariana Zukowski, Paul Harris, and Cecilia R Aragon. 2013. Statistical affect detection in collaborative chat. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Michael+Brooks%2C+Katie+Kuksenok%2C+Megan+K+Torkild%2Dson%2C+Daniel+Perry%2C+John+J+Robinson%2C+Taylor+J+Scott%2C+Ona+Anicello%2C+Ariana+Zukowski%2C+Paul+Harris%2C+and+Cecilia+R+Aragon%2E+2013%2E+Statistical+affect+detection)
15. Adam Kilgarriff. 1997. I don’t believe in word senses. Computers and the Humanities, 31(2):91–113. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Adam+Kilgarriff%2E+1997%2E+I+don%E2%80%99t+believe+in+word+senses%2E+Computers+and+the+Humanities%2C+31%282%29%3A91%E2%80%93113%2E) [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/lex-1997-kilgarriff-word-senses/)
16. Lynne Cameron. 2003. Metaphor in Educational Discourse. Continuum, London. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Lynne+Cameron%2E+2003%2E+Metaphor+in+Educational+Discourse%2E+Continuum%2C+London%2E)
17. Veronika Koller. 2004. Metaphor and Gender in Business Media Discourse: A Critical Cognitive Study. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke: New York. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Veronika+Koller%2E+2004%2E+Metaphor+and+Gender+in+Business+Media+Discourse%3A+A+Critical+Cognitive+Study%2E+Palgrave+Macmillan%2C+Basingstoke%3A+New+York%2E)
18. Svetlana Kiritchenko, Xiaodan Zhu, and Saif M. Mohammad. 2014. Sentiment analysis of short informal texts. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 50:723–762. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Svetlana+Kiritchenko%2C+Xiaodan+Zhu%2C+and+Saif+M%2E+Mohammad%2E+2014%2E+Sentiment+analysis+of+short+informal+texts%2E+Journal+of+Artificial+Intelligence+Research%2C+50%3A723%E2%80%93762%2E)
19. Jonathan Charteris-Black. 2000. Metaphor and vocabulary teaching in esp economics. English for Specific Purposes, 19(2):149–165. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jonathan+Charteris%2DBlack%2E+2000%2E+Metaphor+and+vocabulary+teaching+in+esp+economics%2E+English+for+Specific+Purposes%2C+19%282%29%3A149%E2%80%93165%2E)
20. Z. Kovecses. 2003. Metaphor and Emotion Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Z%2E+Kovecses%2E+2003%2E+Metaphor+and+Emotion+Language%2C+Culture%2C+and+Body+in+Human+Feeling%2E+Cambridge+University+Press%2C+Cambridge%2E)
21. Francesca MM Citron and Adele E Goldberg. 2014. Metaphorical sentences are more emotionally engaging than their literal counterparts. Journal of cognitive neuroscience. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Francesca+MM+Citron+and+Adele+E+Goldberg%2E+2014%2E+Metaphorical+sentences+are+more+emotionally+engaging+than+their+literal+counterparts%2E+Journal+of+cognitive+neuroscience%2E)
22. Zornitsa Kozareva. 2013. Multilingual affect polarity and valence prediction in metaphor-rich texts. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 682–691, Sofia, Bulgaria, August. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Zornitsa+Kozareva%2E+2013%2E+Multilingual+affect+polarity+and+valence+prediction+in+metaphor%2Drich+texts%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+51st+Annual+Meeting+of+the+Association+for+Computational+Linguistics+%28Volume+)
23. Elizabeth Crawford. 2009. Conceptual Metaphors of Affect. Emotion Review, 1(2). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Elizabeth+Crawford%2E+2009%2E+Conceptual+Metaphors+of+Affect%2E+Emotion+Review%2C+1%282%29%2E)
24. Li Dong, Furu Wei, Chuanqi Tan, Duyu Tang, Ming Zhou, and Ke Xu. 2014. Adaptive recursive neural network for target-dependent twitter sentiment classification. In Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 49–54. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Li+Dong%2C+Furu+Wei%2C+Chuanqi+Tan%2C+Duyu+Tang%2C+Ming+Zhou%2C+and+Ke+Xu%2E+2014%2E+Adaptive+recursive+neural+network+for+target%2Ddependent+twitter+sentiment+classification%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+52nd+Annual+Meetin)
25. 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)
26. George Lakoff and Elisabeth Wehling. 2012. The Little Blue Book: The Essential Guide to Thinking and Talking Democratic. Free Press, New York. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=George+Lakoff+and+Elisabeth+Wehling%2E+2012%2E+The+Little+Blue+Book%3A+The+Essential+Guide+to+Thinking+and+Talking+Democratic%2E+Free+Press%2C+New+York%2E)
27. Ekaterina Shutova and Simone Teufel. 2010. Metaphor corpus annotated for source - target domain mappings. In Proceedings of LREC 2010, pages 3255–3261, Malta. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ekaterina+Shutova+and+Simone+Teufel%2E+2010%2E+Metaphor+corpus+annotated+for+source+%2D+target+domain+mappings%2E+In+Proceedings+of+LREC+2010%2C+pages+3255%E2%80%933261%2C+Malta%2E) [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/shutova-2010-metaphor-corpus-annotated-source-target/)
28. George Lakoff, Jane Espenson, and Alan Schwartz. 1991. The master metaphor list. Technical report, University of California at Berkeley. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=George+Lakoff%2C+Jane+Espenson%2C+and+Alan+Schwartz%2E+1991%2E+The+master+metaphor+list%2E+Technical+report%2C+University+of+California+at+Berkeley%2E)
29. Birte Lönneker. 2004. Lexical databases as resources for linguistic creativity: Focus on metaphor. In Proceedings of the LREC 2004 Workshop on Language Resources for Linguistic Creativity, pages 9–16, Lisbon, Portugal. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Birte+Lo%CC%88nneker%2E+2004%2E+Lexical+databases+as+resources+for+linguistic+creativity%3A+Focus+on+metaphor%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+LREC+2004+Workshop+on+Language+Resources+for+Linguistic+Creativity%2C+pages+9%E2%80%9316)
30. Hanna Skorczynska Sznajder and Jordi Pique-Angordans. 2004. A corpus-based description of metaphorical marking patterns in scientific and popular business discourse. In Proceedings of European Research Conference on Mind, Language and Metaphor (Euresco Conference), Granada, Spain. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hanna+Skorczynska+Sznajder+and+Jordi+Pique%2DAngordans%2E+2004%2E+A+corpus%2Dbased+description+of+metaphorical+marking+patterns+in+scientific+and+popular+business+discourse%2E+In+Proceedings+of+European+Researc)
31. Graham Low, Zazie Todd, Alice Deignan, and Lynne Cameron. 2010. Researching and Applying Metaphor in the Real World. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Graham+Low%2C+Zazie+Todd%2C+Alice+Deignan%2C+and+Lynne+Cameron%2E+2010%2E+Researching+and+Applying+Metaphor+in+the+Real+World%2E+John+Benjamins%2C+Amsterdam%2FPhiladelphia%2E)
32. Richard Socher, Alex Perelygin, Jean Y. Wu, Jason Chuang, Christopher D. Manning, Andrew Y. Ng, and Christopher Potts. 2013. Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP ’13.… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Richard+Socher%2C+Alex+Perelygin%2C+Jean+Y%2E+Wu%2C+Jason+Chuang%2C+Christopher+D%2E+Manning%2C+Andrew+Y%2E+Ng%2C+and+Christopher+Potts%2E+2013%2E+Recursive+deep+models+for+semantic+compositionality+over+a+sentiment+treeba)
33. Louis Lu and Kathleen Ahrens. 2008. Ideological influences on building metaphors in taiwanese presidential speeches. Discourse and Society, 19(3):383– 408. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Louis+Lu+and+Kathleen+Ahrens%2E+2008%2E+Ideological+influences+on+building+metaphors+in+taiwanese+presidential+speeches%2E+Discourse+and+Society%2C+19%283%29%3A383%E2%80%93+408%2E)
34. James Martin. 2006. A corpus-based analysis of context effects on metaphor comprehension. In A. Stefanowitsch and S. T. Gries, editors, Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy, Berlin. Mouton de Gruyter. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=James+Martin%2E+2006%2E+A+corpus%2Dbased+analysis+of+context+effects+on+metaphor+comprehension%2E+In+A%2E+Stefanowitsch+and+S%2E+T%2E+Gries%2C+editors%2C+Corpus%2DBased+Approaches+to+Metaphor+and+Metonymy%2C+Berlin%2E+Mouton)
35. 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. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia. [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+John+Benjamins%2C+Amst)
36. Saif M. Mohammad and Peter D. Turney. 2013. Crowdsourcing a word–emotion association lexicon. Computational Intelligence, 29(3):436–465. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Saif+M%2E+Mohammad+and+Peter+D%2E+Turney%2E+2013%2E+Crowdsourcing+a+word%E2%80%93emotion+association+lexicon%2E+Computational+Intelligence%2C+29%283%29%3A436%E2%80%93465%2E)
37. Carlo Strapparava and Alessandro Valitutti. 2004. Wordnet affect: an affective extension of wordnet. In LREC, volume 4, pages 1083–1086. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Carlo+Strapparava+and+Alessandro+Valitutti%2E+2004%2E+Wordnet+affect%3A+an+affective+extension+of+wordnet%2E+In+LREC%2C+volume+4%2C+pages+1083%E2%80%931086%2E) [our card](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/strapparava-2004-wordnet-affect-affective-extension-wordnet/)
38. Saif M. Mohammad, Svetlana Kiritchenko, and Xiaodan Zhu. 2013. NRC-Canada: Building the state-of-the-art in sentiment analysis of tweets. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation, SemEval ’13, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, June. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Saif+M%2E+Mohammad%2C+Svetlana+Kiritchenko%2C+and+Xiaodan+Zhu%2E+2013%2E+NRC%2DCanada%3A+Building+the+state%2Dof%2Dthe%2Dart+in+sentiment+analysis+of+tweets%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+International+Workshop+on+Semantic+Evalu)
39. Tomek Strzalkowski, Samira Shaikh, Kit Cho, George Aaron Broadwell, Laurie Feldman, Sarah Taylor, Boris Yamrom, Ting Liu, Ignacio Cases, Yuliya Peshkova, and Kyle Elliot. 2014. Computing affect in metaphors. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Metaphor in NLP, pages 42–51, Baltimore, MD, June.… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Tomek+Strzalkowski%2C+Samira+Shaikh%2C+Kit+Cho%2C+George+Aaron+Broadwell%2C+Laurie+Feldman%2C+Sarah+Taylor%2C+Boris+Yamrom%2C+Ting+Liu%2C+Ignacio+Cases%2C+Yuliya+Peshkova%2C+and+Kyle+Elliot%2E+2014%2E+Computing+affect+in+met)
40. Saif M. Mohammad. 2012. \#emotional tweets. In Proceedings of the First Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics, *SEM ’12, pages 246–255, Montréal, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Saif+M%2E+Mohammad%2E+2012%2E+%5C%23emotional+tweets%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+First+Joint+Conference+on+Lexical+and+Computational+Semantics%2C+%2ASEM+%E2%80%9912%2C+pages+246%E2%80%93255%2C+Montre%CC%81al%2C+Canada%2E+Association+for+Computation)
41. Jared Suttles and Nancy Ide. 2013. Distant supervision for emotion classification with discrete binary values. In Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing, pages 121–136. Springer. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jared+Suttles+and+Nancy+Ide%2E+2013%2E+Distant+supervision+for+emotion+classification+with+discrete+binary+values%2E+In+Computational+Linguistics+and+Intelligent+Text+Processing%2C+pages+121%E2%80%93136%2E+Springer%2E)
42. Saif M. Mohammad. 2016. Sentiment analysis: Detecting valence, emotions, and other affectual states from text. In Herb Meiselman, editor, Emotion Measurement. Elsevier. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Saif+M%2E+Mohammad%2E+2016%2E+Sentiment+analysis%3A+Detecting+valence%2C+emotions%2C+and+other+affectual+states+from+text%2E+In+Herb+Meiselman%2C+editor%2C+Emotion+Measurement%2E+Elsevier%2E)
43. Paul H. Thibodeau and Lera Boroditsky. 2011. Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PLoS ONE, 6(2):e16782, 02. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Paul+H%2E+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%2C+02%2E)
44. Roberto Navigli. 2009. Word sense disambiguation: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 41(2):10. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Roberto+Navigli%2E+2009%2E+Word+sense+disambiguation%3A+A+survey%2E+ACM+Computing+Surveys+%28CSUR%29%2C+41%282%29%3A10%2E)
45. Peter D. Turney, Yair Neuman, Dan Assaf, and Yohai Cohen. 2011. Literal and metaphorical sense identification through concrete and abstract context. In Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on the Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 680–690. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Peter+D%2E+Turney%2C+Yair+Neuman%2C+Dan+Assaf%2C+and+Yohai+Cohen%2E+2011%2E+Literal+and+metaphorical+sense+identification+through+concrete+and+abstract+context%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+2011+Conference+on+the+Empiri)
46. Robert Plutchik. 1980. A General Psychoevolutionary Theory of Emotion. Emotion: Theory, research, and experience, 1(3):3–33. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Robert+Plutchik%2E+1980%2E+A+General+Psychoevolutionary+Theory+of+Emotion%2E+Emotion%3A+Theory%2C+research%2C+and+experience%2C+1%283%29%3A3%E2%80%9333%2E)
47. Robert Plutchik. 1991. The emotions. University Press of America. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Robert+Plutchik%2E+1991%2E+The+emotions%2E+University+Press+of+America%2E)
48. Tony Veale and Guofu Li. 2012. Specifying viewpoint and information need with affective metaphors: A system demonstration of the metaphor magnet web app/service. In Proceedings of the ACL 2012 System Demonstrations, ACL ’12, pages 7–12. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Tony+Veale+and+Guofu+Li%2E+2012%2E+Specifying+viewpoint+and+information+need+with+affective+metaphors%3A+A+system+demonstration+of+the+metaphor+magnet+web+app%2Fservice%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+ACL+2012+System+)
49. Pragglejaz Group. 2007. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22:1–39. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Pragglejaz+Group%2E+2007%2E+MIP%3A+A+method+for+identifying+metaphorically+used+words+in+discourse%2E+Metaphor+and+Symbol%2C+22%3A1%E2%80%9339%2E)
50. Otto Santa Ana. 1999. Like an animal I was treated?: anti-immigrant metaphor in US public discourse. Discourse Society, 10(2):191–224. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Otto+Santa+Ana%2E+1999%2E+Like+an+animal+I+was+treated%3F%3A+anti%2Dimmigrant+metaphor+in+US+public+discourse%2E+Discourse+Society%2C+10%282%29%3A191%E2%80%93224%2E)