Cover not available
Part of
Figurativity and Human Ecology
Edited by Alexandra Bagasheva, Bozhil Hristov and Nelly Tincheva
[Figurative Thought and Language 17] 2022
► pp. 209–249

Metonymy in multimodal discourse, or

How metonymies get piggybacked across modalities by other metonymies and metaphors

ORCID logo | ELTE
ORCID logo | University of Osijek

One of the most intriguing open issues in metonymy research is the nature of metonymies that transcend or do not appear in spoken/written language. More specifically, we should clarify the issue of whether there exist genuine multimodal (or polysemiotic) metonymies, parallel to multimodal metaphors. Taking into consideration their essence and the way that metonymies are defined, it is clear that, strictly speaking there could be no multimodal metonymies of the simplest kind. However, multimodality is possible in the case of complex metonymies, and metonymies interacting with metaphors. The results of all these processes that unsurprisingly leave the impression of novelty and creativity are regularly put to very effective uses, even leading to hyperbolic and/or ironic effects.

Keywords: metonymy, multimodality, metaphor, visual modality, complex metonymy, metaphor-metonymy interaction, resonance
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Why there are, and can be, no multimodal metonymies as such
    • 2.1Taking a look at multimodal metaphors
    • 2.2Metonymy and multimodality
  • 3.On (almost) multimodal metonymies
  • 4.Multimodal metonymies as, properly speaking, metonymies in multimodal discourse
    • 4.1Damasteel knives, sharper than you think
    • 4.2Where old clothes feel young again
    • 4.3You can be a hero after your death
    • 4.4Apple and fruit juice have never been so close
    • 4.5Sawing logs and zzz
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 10 November 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.17.09brd
References
Barnden, J. A.
(2012) Hyperbole-based account of the paradoxical usage of “literally”. In W. Alan, A. Foltz, & J. Ryan (Eds.), Selected Papers from the 6th UK Cognitive Linguistics Conference (pp. 111–130). London: UK Cognitive Linguistics Association.Google Scholar
Barnden, J.
(2017) A hyperbole-based account of the paradoxical usage of “literally”. In A. M. Wallington, A. Foltz, & J. Ryan (Eds.), Selected Papers from the 4th UK Cognitive Linguistics Conference (pp. 111–130). Bangor: UK Cognitive Linguistics Association.Google Scholar
Bierwiaczonek, B.
(2013) Metonymy in Language, Thought and Brain. Sheffield/Bristol: Equinox.Google Scholar
Brdar, M.
(2017) Metonymy and word-formation: Their interactions and complementation. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Brdar, M., & Brdar-Szabó, R.
(2020) The role of metaphors and metonymies in framing the transplantation discourse. Jezikoslovlje, 21(3), 305–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brdar-Szabó, R., & Brdar, M.
(2021) Metonymic indeterminacy and metalepsis: Getting two (or more) targets for the price of one vehicle. In A. Soares da Silva (Ed.), Figurative Language – Intersubjectivity and Usage (pp. 211–247). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brdar, M., & Brdar-Szabó, R.
(2022) Targetting metonymic targets. In M. Brdar & R. Brdar-Szabó (Eds.), Figurative Thought and Language in Action (pp. 59–86). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Broccias, C.
(2022) A Cognitive Grammar approach to ‘metonymy‘. In M. Brdar & R. Brdar-Szabó (Eds.), Figurative Thought and Language in Action (pp. 37–57). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, J. W.
(2014) Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 359–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, J. W., & Giora, R.
(2014) From cognitive-functional linguistics to dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 351–357. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G.
(1994) Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forceville, Ch.
(2005) From pictorial to multimodal metaphor. [Lecture 3 in A Course in Pictorial and Multimodal Metaphor.] [URL]]
(2009a) Non-verbal and multimodal metaphor in a cognitivist framework: Agendas for research. In Ch. Forceville & E. Urios-Aparisi (Eds.), Multimodal Metaphor (pp. 19–42). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009b) Metonymy in visual and audiovisual discourse. In E. Ventola & A. J. Moya Guijarro (Eds.), The world told and the world shown: Multisemiotic issues (pp. 56–74). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.Google Scholar
Forceville, Ch. & Urios-Aparis, E.
(2009) Introduction. In C. Forceville & E. Urios-Aparisi (Eds.), Multimodal metaphor (pp. 1–17). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, R.
(2020) How defaultness shapes our language production: A usage-based study of discoursal resonance with default interpretations of metaphor and sarcasm. In J. A. Barnden J. & A. Gargett (Eds.), Producing figurative expression: Theoretical, experimental and practical perspectives (pp. 211–236). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, R., & Balaban, N.
(2001) Lexical access in text production: On the role of salience in metaphor resonance. In T. Sanders, J. Schilperoord, & W. Spooren (Eds.), Text representation: Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects (pp. 111–124). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, R., Drucker, A., & Fein, O.
(2014) Resonating with default nonsalient interpretations. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 28, 3–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hidalgo Downing, L. & Mujic Kraljevic, B.
(2011) Multimodal metonymy and metaphor as complex discourse resources for creativity in ICT advertising discourse. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 153–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J.
(2015) Metonymy: Hidden Shortcuts in Language, Thought and Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J. & Tagg, C.
(2018) Metonymy and text messaging: a framework for understanding creative uses of metonymy. Applied Linguistics, 39, 481–507. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maalej, Z. A.
(2015) Mono-modal and multi-modal metaphors and metonymies in policy change: the case of the KSU2030 strategic plan. Language Sciences, 47, 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matzner, S.
(2016) Rethinking metonymy: Literary theory and poetic practice from Pindar to Jakobson. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCloud, S.
(1993) Understanding comics: The invisible art. Northampton, Mass: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Mittelberg, I.
(2019) Visuo-kinetic signs are inherently metonymic: How embodied metonymy motivates forms, functions, and schematic patterns in gesture. Frontiers in Psychology 10: article No. 254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mittelberg, I. & Waugh, L. R.
(2009) Metonymy first, metaphor second: A cognitive-semiotic approach to multimodal figures of thought in co-speech gesture. In Ch. Forceville & E. Urios-Aparisi (Eds.), Multimodal metaphor (pp. 329–356). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Gestures and metonymy. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill & J. Bressem (Eds.), Body – Language – Communication. An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction, Vol. 2 (pp. 1747–1766). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panther, K.-U.
(2005) Metonymy inside and outside language. In A. Makkai, W. J. Sullivan, & A. R. Lommel (Eds.), LACUS Forum XXXI: Interconnections (pp. 15–32). Houston, TX: The Linguistic Association of Canada and the United States.Google Scholar
Pérez-Sobrino, P.
(2016) Multimodal metaphor and metonymy in advertising: a corpus-based account. Metaphor and Symbol, 31(2), 73–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017) Multimodal metaphor and metonymy in advertising. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radden, G. & Kövecses, Z.
(1999) Towards a theory of metonymy. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17–59). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rocci, A., Mazzali-Lurati, S., & Pollaroli, Ch.
(2018) The argumentative and rhetorical function of multimodal metonymy. Semiotica, 220, 123–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J.
(1999) Introducción a la teoría cognitiva de la metonímia. Granada: Método Ediciones.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Díez Velasco, O. I.
(2002) Patterns of conceptual interaction. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 489–532). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F., & Díez Velasco, O. I.
(2004) Metonymic motivation in anaphoric reference. In G. Radden & K.-U. Panther (Eds.), Studies in linguistic motivation (pp. 293–320). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Otal Campo, J. L.
(2002) Metonymy, grammar, and communication. Albolote: Editorial Comares.Google Scholar
Urios-Aparisi, E.
(2010) The body of love in Almodóvar’s cinema: Metaphor and metonymy of the body and body parts. Metaphor and Symbol, 25(3), 181–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, Sh. W., Perrin, Ph. & Jarque, M. J.
(2003) Mappings in conceptual space: Metonymy, metaphor, and iconicity in two signed languages. Jezikoslovlje, 4(1), 139–156.Google Scholar
Yu, N.
(2009) Nonverbal and multimodal manifestation of metaphors and metonymies: A case study. Ch. Forceville & E. Urios-Aparisi (Eds.), Multimodal metaphor (pp. 119–143). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

O’Dowd, Niamh A
2024. The potential of creative uses of metonymy for climate protest. Discourse & Society DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.