Here is a list of responses to the 3D model of DMT, which evolved from ‘The paradox of metaphor’ (Steen, 2008, in Metaphor & Symbol).
Jordan Zlatev and Kalina Moskaluk, in a 2022 book chapter, discuss how CMT and DMT compare regarding their translation validity, and how this can be improved by another new theory, the Motivation & Sedimentation Model. DOI: 10.1075/ftl.17.06zla.
Elisabeth Putterer, in Initium 2022, discusses the relation between Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Deliberate Metaphor Theory in its original 3D form:(99+) Von der Conceptual Metaphor Theory zur Deliberate Metaphor Theory
Zoltan Kővecses, in a 2019 book chapter, indicates how DMT can be related to some consequences of a multi-level view of metaphor that is oriented to CMT. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110629460-002
Benjamins Carcamo, in Estudios de Linguistica Aplicada 2018, addresses the question whether Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Deliberate Metaphor Theory can be seen as complementary proposals: (99+) Teoría de la metáfora conceptual y teoría de la metáfora deliberada: ¿propuestas complementarias? Conceptual metaphor theory and deliberate metaphor theory: Supplementary proposals
Ray Gibbs, in his Metaphor Wars (Cambridge: 2019)), is highly critical of the empirical status of DMT.
Cihua Xu, Chuanrui Zhang, and Wichen Wu, in Intercultural Pragmatics 2016, describe how Deliberate Metaphor Theory may be able to enlarge the scope of metaphor studies: Enlarging the scope of metaphor studies. This receives a highly critical reply from Raymond Gibbs jr. and Elaine Chen, in Intercultural Pragmatics 2017, which claims DMT does not advance metaphor studies but instead takes it back to the Stone Age: Taking metaphor studies back to the Stone Age: A reply to Xu, Zhang, and Wu (2016). This in turn is replied to critically in Gerard Steen, in Intercultural Pragmatics 2017, which sketches out the most important claims of DMT: Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues.
Ray Gibbs, in Journal of Pragmatics 2015, presents a failed test of Deliberate Metaphor Theory, and in the process coins the term ‘Deliberate Metaphor Theory’ itself: Do pragmatic signals affect conventional metaphor understanding? A failed test of deliberate metaphor theory – ScienceDirect. Gerard Steen offers a reply: Do pragmatic signals affect conventional metaphor understanding? A failed test of deliberate metaphor theory – ScienceDirect. Ray Gibbs has the last word: Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future? – ScienceDirect.
Jonathan Charteris-Black, in Metaphor and the Social World 2012, proposes the concept of ‘purposeful metaphor’ as an alternative to ‘deliberate metaphor’: (PDF) Forensic deliberations on ‘purposeful metaphor’.
Ray Gibbs, in the first issue of Metaphor and the Social World 2011, discusses the relation between deliberate metaphor and consciousness, and claims that deliberate metaphor is a vacuous notion: Are ‘deliberate’ metaphors really deliberate?: A question of human consciousness and action | John Benjamins. There are three reaction papers: one by Gerard Steen (What does ‘really deliberate’ really mean?: More thoughts on metaphor and consciousness | John Benjamins), one by Alice Deignan (Deliberateness is not unique to metaphor: A response to Gibbs | John Benjamins), and one by Cornelia Muller (Are ‘deliberate’ metaphors really special?: Deliberateness in the light of metaphor activation | John Benjamins). Ray Gibbs has the last word: Advancing the debate on deliberate metaphor | John Benjamins.