Figures of speech revisited
Introducing syntonymy and syntaphor
The aim of the paper is to add the terms and
concepts of synecdochic metonymy (syntonymy) and synecdochic
metaphor (syntaphor) to the traditional typology of figures of
speech. It is argued that the two additional terms are useful as
they cover important intermediate categories of transfers of meaning
between synecdoche, understood as vertical transfer based on various
levels of taxonomy, and two other “master tropes”, namely metonymy
and metaphor. The proposed concepts and terms may not only help
identify and designate certain borderline cases of figurative
language, but also add precision and adequacy to the analyses of
lexical polysemy. They may also contribute to a cognitive account of
catachresis.
Article outline
- 1.Between synecdoche and metonymy – syntonymy
- 2.From analogy to syntaphor and metaphor
- 2.1Syntaphor vs. schematization and specialization
- 3.Catachresis and conceptual niches vs. syntaphor and other figures
of speech
- 4.Conclusions
-
Notes
-
References
References (41)
Ariel, M.
(
2002)
The
demise of a unique concept of literal
meaning.
Journal of
Pragmatics, 34, 361–402.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Arystoteles
(
1988)
Retoryka.
Poetyka. Translated
by
H. Podbielski. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Barcelona, A.
(
2000)
On
the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for
conceptual
metaphor. In
A. Barcelona (Ed.)
Metaphor
and Metonymy at the
Crossroads (pp. 31–58). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Barnden, J. A.
(
2010)
Metaphor
and metonymy: making their connections more
slippery.
Cognitive
Linguistics 21 (1): 1–34.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bierwiaczonek, B.
(
2013)
Metonymy
in Language, Thought and
Brain. Sheffield: Equinox.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bierwiaczonek, B.
(
2014)
Representation
of polysemy as a basis of contrastive lexical
semantics. In
A. Łyda &
G. Drożdż (Eds.)
Dimesions
of a
Word (pp. 12–27). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Blank, A.
(
2003)
Polysemy
in the lexicon and in
discourse. In
B. Nerlich,
Z. Todd,
V. Herman &
D. Clarke (Eds.)
Polysemy:
Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and
language (pp. 267–293). Mouton de Gruyter: Berlin.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brdar, M. & Brdar-Shabó, R.
Brugman, C.
(
1988)
The
Story of ‘over’: Polysemy, Semantics and the Structure of
the Lexicon. New York: Garland.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Burkhardt, A.
(
1996)
Zwischen
Poesie und Ökonomie. Die Metonymie als semantisches
Prinzip.
Euphorion.
Zeitschrift für
germanistische
Linguistik 24 (2), 175–194.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, W.
(
2006 [1993])
The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. In
D. Geeraerts (Ed.).
Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings (pp. 269–302). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, W. & Cruse, A.
(
2004)
Cognitive
Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cruse, A.
(
2000)
Meaning
in Language. An Introduction to Semantics and
Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dancygier, B. & Sweetser, E.
(
2014)
Figurative
Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dirven, R. & Verspoor, M.
Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M.
(
2002)
The
Way We Think. Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden
Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Geeraerts, D.
(
2010)
Theories
of Lexical
Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gibbs, R. & Colston, H.
(
2012)
Interpreting
Figurative
Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M. A. K.
(
1994
[1985])
An Introduction to Functional
Grammar. 2nd
edition. London, New York, Sydney, Auckland: Edward Arnold.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jakobson, R. & Halle, M.
(
1956/64)
Podstawy języka [
Fundamentals of
Language]. Wrocław: Ossolineum.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, G.
(
1987)
Women,
Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the
Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, G. & Turner, M.
(
1989)
More
than cool reason: A field guide to poetic
metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R.
(
1990)
Concept,
Image, and Symbol. The Cognitive Basis of
Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nerlich, B. & Clarke, D.
(
1999)
Synecdoche as a cognitive and communicative strategy. In
A. Blank &
P. Koch (Eds.).
Historical Semantics and Cognition (pp. 197–213). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nerlich, B.
(
2010)
Synecdoche:
A trope, a whole trope, and nothing but a
trope? In
A. Burkhardt, &
B. Nerlich (Eds.)
Tropical
Truth(s) The Epistemology of Metaphor and other
Tropes (pp. 297–319). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Panther, K. & Thornburg, L.
Peirsman, Y. & Geererts, D.
(
2006)
Metonymy
as a prototypical
category.
Cognitive
Linguistics 17, No 3, 269–316.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Radden, G. & Kövecses, Z.
(
1999)
Towards
a theory of
metonymy. In
K. Panther &
G. Radden (Eds.),
Metonymy
in Language and
Thought (pp. 17–59). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rosch, E.
(
1978)
Principles
of
categorization. In
B. Lloyd and
E. Rosch (eds.)
Cognition
and
Categorization (pp. 27–48). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rosch, E., C. Mervis, W. Grey, D. Johnson, and P. Boyes-Braem
(
1976)
Basic
objects in natural
categories,
Cognitive
Psychology 8, 382–439.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. & Galera Masegosa, A.
(
2014)
Cognitive
Modeling. A linguistic
perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Seto, K.
(
2003)
Metonymic
polysemy and its place in meaning
extension. In
Nerlich et al. (Eds), pp. 195–214.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schönefeld, D.
(
2005)
Zero
derivation – functional change –
metonymy. In
L. Bauer &
S. Varela (Eds.) (2005)
Approaches
to Conversion/Zero
Derivation pp. 131–157. Münster/ New York/ München/ Berlin: Waxmann.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taylor, J.
(
1989)
Linguistic
Categorization. Prototypes in Linguistic
Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Todorov, T.
(
1979)
Synecdoques. In
T. Todorov &
G. Genette (Eds.).
Sémantique
de la
Poésie, 7–26. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wittgenstein, L.
(
2009
[1953])
Philosophical
Investigations. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ziomek, J.
(
1990)
Retoryka
opisowa. Wrocław, Warszawa, Kraków: Ossolineum.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (2)
Cited by 2 other publications
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 june 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.