Example of Cognitive Linguistics format
Recent searches

Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format
Sample paper formatted on SciSpace - SciSpace
This content is only for preview purposes. The original open access content can be found here.
Look Inside
Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format Example of Cognitive Linguistics format
Sample paper formatted on SciSpace - SciSpace
This content is only for preview purposes. The original open access content can be found here.
open access Open Access

Cognitive Linguistics — Template for authors

Publisher: De Gruyter
Categories Rank Trend in last 3 yrs
Language and Linguistics #97 of 879 down down by 56 ranks
Linguistics and Language #108 of 935 down down by 62 ranks
Developmental and Educational Psychology #147 of 332 down down by 53 ranks
journal-quality-icon Journal quality:
High
calendar-icon Last 4 years overview: 87 Published Papers | 205 Citations
indexed-in-icon Indexed in: Scopus
last-updated-icon Last updated: 03/06/2020
Related journals
Insights
General info
Top papers
Popular templates
Get started guide
Why choose from SciSpace
FAQ

Related Journals

open access Open Access

SAGE

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 2.4
SJR: 0.75
SNIP: 0.941
open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

Cambridge University Press

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 3.2
SJR: 1.063
SNIP: 1.298
open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

Taylor and Francis

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 3.1
SJR: 0.832
SNIP: 1.154
open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

Taylor and Francis

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 6.5
SJR: 1.614
SNIP: 2.163

Journal Performance & Insights

CiteRatio

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR)

Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)

A measure of average citations received per peer-reviewed paper published in the journal.

Measures weighted citations received by the journal. Citation weighting depends on the categories and prestige of the citing journal.

Measures actual citations received relative to citations expected for the journal's category.

2.4

11% from 2019

CiteRatio for Cognitive Linguistics from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 2.4
2019 2.7
2018 3.3
2017 3.2
2016 2.4
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

0.662

6% from 2019

SJR for Cognitive Linguistics from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 0.662
2019 0.701
2018 1.075
2017 1.032
2016 1.272
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

1.736

12% from 2019

SNIP for Cognitive Linguistics from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 1.736
2019 1.962
2018 2.129
2017 2.275
2016 1.471
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

insights Insights

  • CiteRatio of this journal has decreased by 11% in last years.
  • This journal’s CiteRatio is in the top 10 percentile category.

insights Insights

  • SJR of this journal has decreased by 6% in last years.
  • This journal’s SJR is in the top 10 percentile category.

insights Insights

  • SNIP of this journal has decreased by 12% in last years.
  • This journal’s SNIP is in the top 10 percentile category.

Cognitive Linguistics

Guideline source: View

All company, product and service names used in this website are for identification purposes only. All product names, trademarks and registered trademarks are property of their respective owners.

Use of these names, trademarks and brands does not imply endorsement or affiliation. Disclaimer Notice

De Gruyter

Cognitive Linguistics

Cognitive Linguistics presents a forum for linguistic research of all kinds on the interaction between language and cognition. The journal focuses on language as an instrument for organizing, processing and conveying information. It is devoted to high-quality research on topic...... Read More

Linguistics and Semiotics

i
Last updated on
03 Jun 2020
i
ISSN
0936-5907
i
Impact Factor
High - 1.356
i
Open Access
No
i
Sherpa RoMEO Archiving Policy
Yellow faq
i
Plagiarism Check
Available via Turnitin
i
Endnote Style
Download Available
i
Bibliography Name
unsrt
i
Citation Type
Numbered
[25]
i
Bibliography Example
C. W. J. Beenakker. Specular andreev reflection in graphene. Phys. Rev. Lett., 97(6):067007, 2006.

Top papers written in this journal

Journal Article DOI: 10.1515/COGL.1990.1.1.39
The Invariance Hypothesis: is abstract reason based on image-schemas?
01 Jan 1990 - Cognitive Linguistics

Abstract:

I view cognitive linguistics äs defined by the commitment to characterize the füll ränge of linguistic generalizations while being faithful to empirical discoveries about the nature of the mind/brain. The Invariance Hypothesis is a proposed general principle intended to characterize a broad ränge or regularities in both our c... I view cognitive linguistics äs defined by the commitment to characterize the füll ränge of linguistic generalizations while being faithful to empirical discoveries about the nature of the mind/brain. The Invariance Hypothesis is a proposed general principle intended to characterize a broad ränge or regularities in both our conceptual and linguistic Systems. Given that all metaphorical mappings are partial, the Invariance Hypothesis claims that the portion of the source domain structure that is mapped preserves cognitive topology (though, of course, not all the cognitive topology ofthe source domain need be mapped). Since the cognitive topology of Image-Schemas determines their inference patterns, the Invariance Hypothesis claims that imagistic reasoning patterns are mapped onto abstract reasoning patterns via metaphorical mappings. It entails that at least some (and perhaps all) abstract reasoning is a metaphorical version of image-based reasoning. The data covered by the Invariance Hypothesis includes the metaphorical understanding of time, states, events, actions, purposes, means, causes, modalities, linear scales, and categories. Because the source domains of these metaphorical concepts are structured by image-schemas, the Invariance Hypothesis suggests that reasoning involving these concepts is fundamentally image-based. This includes the subject matter of Boolean, scalar, modal, temporal, and causal reasoning. These cases cover such a large ränge of abstract reasoning that the question naturally arises äs to whether all abstract human reasoning is a metaphorical version of imagistic reasoning. I see this äs a major question for future research in cognitive linguistics. 1. What is cognitive linguistics? I generally prefer not to engage in methodological discussions and would rather just get on with my work. But I feel that the Formation of a new Cognitive Linguistics 1-1 (1990), 39-74 0936-5907/90/0001-0039 $2.00 © Walter de Gruyter read more read less

Topics:

Cognitive linguistics (57%)57% related to the paper
748 Citations
Journal Article DOI: 10.1515/COGL.1997.8.3.183
Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis
01 Jan 1997 - Cognitive Linguistics

Abstract:

In this study I lest the prevalent Claims among contemporary psycholinguists that understanding metaphor does not involve a special process, and that it is essentially identical to understanding literal language. Particularly, I examine the claims that figurative language does not involve processing the surface literal meanin... In this study I lest the prevalent Claims among contemporary psycholinguists that understanding metaphor does not involve a special process, and that it is essentially identical to understanding literal language. Particularly, I examine the claims that figurative language does not involve processing the surface literal meaning (e.g., Gibbs 1984), and that its comprehension is not processing-intensive, because it does not involve a trigger (e.g., Keysar 1989). A critique, review and reinterpretation ofa number of contemporary researches on literal and figurative language reveal that figurative and literal language use are governed by a general principle of salience: Salient meanings (e.g., conventional frequent, familiär, enhanced by prior context) are processed first. Thus, for example, when the most salient meaning is intended (äs in, e.g., the figurative meaning of conventional Idioms), it is accessed directly, without having toprocess the less salient (literal) meaning first (Gibbs 1980). However, when a less rather than a more salient meaning is intended (e.g., the metaphoric meaning ofnovel metaphors, the literal meaning of conventional Idioms, or a novel Interpretation ofa highly conventional literal expression) comprehension seems to involve a sequential process, upon which the more salient meaning is processed initially, before the intended meaning is derived (Blasko and Connine 1993; Gerrig 1989; Gibbs 1980; Gregory and Mergler 1990). Parallel processing is induced when more than one meaning is salient. For instance, conventional metaphors whose metaphoric and literal meanings are equally salient, are processed initially both literally and metaphorically (Blasko and Connine 1993). The directl sequential process debate, then, can be reconciled: Different linguistic expressions ( salient-less salient) may tap different (direct/parallel/sequential) processes. read more read less

Topics:

Graded Salience Hypothesis (69%)69% related to the paper, Literal and figurative language (65%)65% related to the paper, Cognitive linguistics (62%)62% related to the paper
747 Citations
Journal Article DOI: 10.1515/COGL.1998.9.1.37
Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view
01 Jan 1998 - Cognitive Linguistics

Abstract:

In the traditionell view, metonymy is a matter of words (language); the metonymic process involves a transfer of the meaning of words which have reference; metonymy is a "stand~for" relationship between names; it is a relationship between two entities, where the nature of the relationship is generally assumed to be one of "co... In the traditionell view, metonymy is a matter of words (language); the metonymic process involves a transfer of the meaning of words which have reference; metonymy is a "stand~for" relationship between names; it is a relationship between two entities, where the nature of the relationship is generally assumed to be one of "contiguity" or "proximity". By contrast, we argue for a comprehensive and integrated cognitivist view which involves the following: (1) identifying the ontological realms in which metonymy can occur; (2) specifying the types of conceptual relationships that obtain between elements in a metonymic relationship; (3) establishing those cognitive and communicative principles that select the most "natural" vehicle-to-target routes; (4) discovering the conditions under which "non-default routes" can be selected. read more read less

Topics:

Metaphor and metonymy (69%)69% related to the paper, Metonymy (59%)59% related to the paper
527 Citations
Journal Article DOI: 10.1515/COGL.1993.4.1.1
Reference-point constructions
01 Jan 1993 - Cognitive Linguistics

Abstract:

Bö i h image-schematic abilities and conceptual ar ehe type s are essen tial t o the chciracierization of linguistic structures. Especially signißcant in this regard (and so ubiquitous in our everyday experience t hat we are largely oblivious t o it) is our capacity t o invoke t he conception of one entity äs a cognitive refe... Bö i h image-schematic abilities and conceptual ar ehe type s are essen tial t o the chciracierization of linguistic structures. Especially signißcant in this regard (and so ubiquitous in our everyday experience t hat we are largely oblivious t o it) is our capacity t o invoke t he conception of one entity äs a cognitive reference point for purposes of establishing mental contact with another. This image-schematic ability is proposed äs the abstract basis for possessives and affords a revelatory account of a broad ränge of possessive constructions. Other manifestations of this reference-point ability include topic and topic-like constructions, pronoun-antecedent relationships, metonymy, and the discrepancy typically encountered between t hose entities t hat ßgure rnost directly in a relationship and the explicitly coded relational participants. It is suggested that a wide array of linguistic and psychological phenomena might all be interpreted äs reflecting a fundamental aspect of cognitive processing. As one of its organizing principles, cognitive linguistics asserts the nonautonomy of linguistic structure. It Claims, in particular, that fundamental cognitive abilities and experientially derived cognitive models have direct and pervasive linguistic manifestations, and, conversely, that language structure furnishes important clues concerning basic mental phenomena. In recent years, cognitive linguists have in fact found strong linguistic evidence for positing a number of constructs whose general psychological significance is quite apparent. Examples include the notion of force dynamics (Talmy 1988); that of image Schemas (Johnson 1987; Lakoff 1987); of subjective vs. objective construal (Langacker 1985, 1990b); and of correspondences across cognitive domains (äs in metaphor) or mental spaces (Fauconnier 1985). My objective here is to explore the linguistic ramifications of another such construct: that of a cognitive reference Cognitive Linguistics 4-1 (1993), 1-38 0936-5907/93/0004-0001 $2.00 © Walter de Gruyter read more read less

Topics:

Cognitive linguistics (60%)60% related to the paper
440 Citations
Journal Article DOI: 10.1515/COGL.1993.4.4.335
The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies
01 Jan 1993 - Cognitive Linguistics

Abstract:

Metaphor and metonymy do not occur in Isolation; they are triggered in utterances in particular linguistic (and extralinguistic) contexts. They pose an interesting problem from the point of view of semantic composition in (hat ihe metaphorical or metonymic Interpretation of the parts (the individual words) appears to be deter... Metaphor and metonymy do not occur in Isolation; they are triggered in utterances in particular linguistic (and extralinguistic) contexts. They pose an interesting problem from the point of view of semantic composition in (hat ihe metaphorical or metonymic Interpretation of the parts (the individual words) appears to be determined by the Interpretation of the whole construction in which they are found. Much of this is determined by the domain in which the words are ίο be interpreted. Domainsplay a central role in the definition of a metaphor s a mapping of conceptual structure from one domain to another. Domains also play a significant (though not defining) role in most metaphors and some related lexical ambiguities, s the highlighting of particular domains in a domain matrix. The processes of domain mapping and domain highlighting are governed by the requirement that a dependent predication (in the sense of Langacker 1987) and all ofthe autonomous predications it is dependent on must be interpreted in a single domain; this is \"the conceptual unity of domain \\ This is only one ofseveral \"conceptual unities\" imposed by a whole construction on its component parts. read more read less

Topics:

Interpretation (philosophy) (56%)56% related to the paper, Cognitive linguistics (54%)54% related to the paper
409 Citations
Author Pic

SciSpace is a very innovative solution to the formatting problem and existing providers, such as Mendeley or Word did not really evolve in recent years.

- Andreas Frutiger, Researcher, ETH Zurich, Institute for Biomedical Engineering

Get MS-Word and LaTeX output to any Journal within seconds
1
Choose a template
Select a template from a library of 40,000+ templates
2
Import a MS-Word file or start fresh
It takes only few seconds to import
3
View and edit your final output
SciSpace will automatically format your output to meet journal guidelines
4
Submit directly or Download
Submit to journal directly or Download in PDF, MS Word or LaTeX

(Before submission check for plagiarism via Turnitin)

clock Less than 3 minutes

What to expect from SciSpace?

Speed and accuracy over MS Word

''

With SciSpace, you do not need a word template for Cognitive Linguistics.

It automatically formats your research paper to De Gruyter formatting guidelines and citation style.

You can download a submission ready research paper in pdf, LaTeX and docx formats.

Time comparison

Time taken to format a paper and Compliance with guidelines

Plagiarism Reports via Turnitin

SciSpace has partnered with Turnitin, the leading provider of Plagiarism Check software.

Using this service, researchers can compare submissions against more than 170 million scholarly articles, a database of 70+ billion current and archived web pages. How Turnitin Integration works?

Turnitin Stats
Publisher Logos

Freedom from formatting guidelines

One editor, 100K journal formats – world's largest collection of journal templates

With such a huge verified library, what you need is already there.

publisher-logos

Easy support from all your favorite tools

Cognitive Linguistics format uses unsrt citation style.

Automatically format and order your citations and bibliography in a click.

SciSpace allows imports from all reference managers like Mendeley, Zotero, Endnote, Google Scholar etc.

Frequently asked questions

1. Can I write Cognitive Linguistics in LaTeX?

Absolutely not! Our tool has been designed to help you focus on writing. You can write your entire paper as per the Cognitive Linguistics guidelines and auto format it.

2. Do you follow the Cognitive Linguistics guidelines?

Yes, the template is compliant with the Cognitive Linguistics guidelines. Our experts at SciSpace ensure that. If there are any changes to the journal's guidelines, we'll change our algorithm accordingly.

3. Can I cite my article in multiple styles in Cognitive Linguistics?

Of course! We support all the top citation styles, such as APA style, MLA style, Vancouver style, Harvard style, and Chicago style. For example, when you write your paper and hit autoformat, our system will automatically update your article as per the Cognitive Linguistics citation style.

4. Can I use the Cognitive Linguistics templates for free?

Sign up for our free trial, and you'll be able to use all our features for seven days. You'll see how helpful they are and how inexpensive they are compared to other options, Especially for Cognitive Linguistics.

5. Can I use a manuscript in Cognitive Linguistics that I have written in MS Word?

Yes. You can choose the right template, copy-paste the contents from the word document, and click on auto-format. Once you're done, you'll have a publish-ready paper Cognitive Linguistics that you can download at the end.

6. How long does it usually take you to format my papers in Cognitive Linguistics?

It only takes a matter of seconds to edit your manuscript. Besides that, our intuitive editor saves you from writing and formatting it in Cognitive Linguistics.

7. Where can I find the template for the Cognitive Linguistics?

It is possible to find the Word template for any journal on Google. However, why use a template when you can write your entire manuscript on SciSpace , auto format it as per Cognitive Linguistics's guidelines and download the same in Word, PDF and LaTeX formats? Give us a try!.

8. Can I reformat my paper to fit the Cognitive Linguistics's guidelines?

Of course! You can do this using our intuitive editor. It's very easy. If you need help, our support team is always ready to assist you.

9. Cognitive Linguistics an online tool or is there a desktop version?

SciSpace's Cognitive Linguistics is currently available as an online tool. We're developing a desktop version, too. You can request (or upvote) any features that you think would be helpful for you and other researchers in the "feature request" section of your account once you've signed up with us.

10. I cannot find my template in your gallery. Can you create it for me like Cognitive Linguistics?

Sure. You can request any template and we'll have it setup within a few days. You can find the request box in Journal Gallery on the right side bar under the heading, "Couldn't find the format you were looking for like Cognitive Linguistics?”

11. What is the output that I would get after using Cognitive Linguistics?

After writing your paper autoformatting in Cognitive Linguistics, you can download it in multiple formats, viz., PDF, Docx, and LaTeX.

12. Is Cognitive Linguistics's impact factor high enough that I should try publishing my article there?

To be honest, the answer is no. The impact factor is one of the many elements that determine the quality of a journal. Few of these factors include review board, rejection rates, frequency of inclusion in indexes, and Eigenfactor. You need to assess all these factors before you make your final call.

13. What is Sherpa RoMEO Archiving Policy for Cognitive Linguistics?

SHERPA/RoMEO Database

We extracted this data from Sherpa Romeo to help researchers understand the access level of this journal in accordance with the Sherpa Romeo Archiving Policy for Cognitive Linguistics. The table below indicates the level of access a journal has as per Sherpa Romeo's archiving policy.

RoMEO Colour Archiving policy
Green Can archive pre-print and post-print or publisher's version/PDF
Blue Can archive post-print (ie final draft post-refereeing) or publisher's version/PDF
Yellow Can archive pre-print (ie pre-refereeing)
White Archiving not formally supported
FYI:
  1. Pre-prints as being the version of the paper before peer review and
  2. Post-prints as being the version of the paper after peer-review, with revisions having been made.

14. What are the most common citation types In Cognitive Linguistics?

The 5 most common citation types in order of usage for Cognitive Linguistics are:.

S. No. Citation Style Type
1. Author Year
2. Numbered
3. Numbered (Superscripted)
4. Author Year (Cited Pages)
5. Footnote

15. How do I submit my article to the Cognitive Linguistics?

It is possible to find the Word template for any journal on Google. However, why use a template when you can write your entire manuscript on SciSpace , auto format it as per Cognitive Linguistics's guidelines and download the same in Word, PDF and LaTeX formats? Give us a try!.

16. Can I download Cognitive Linguistics in Endnote format?

Yes, SciSpace provides this functionality. After signing up, you would need to import your existing references from Word or Bib file to SciSpace. Then SciSpace would allow you to download your references in Cognitive Linguistics Endnote style according to Elsevier guidelines.

Fast and reliable,
built for complaince.

Instant formatting to 100% publisher guidelines on - SciSpace.

Available only on desktops 🖥

No word template required

Typset automatically formats your research paper to Cognitive Linguistics formatting guidelines and citation style.

Verifed journal formats

One editor, 100K journal formats.
With the largest collection of verified journal formats, what you need is already there.

Trusted by academicians

I spent hours with MS word for reformatting. It was frustrating - plain and simple. With SciSpace, I can draft my manuscripts and once it is finished I can just submit. In case, I have to submit to another journal it is really just a button click instead of an afternoon of reformatting.

Andreas Frutiger
Researcher & Ex MS Word user
Use this template