Part of
Defining Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: Towards a consensus viewEdited by Réka Benczes, Antonio Barcelona and Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
[Human Cognitive Processing 28] 2011
► pp. 7–58
Edited by Réka Benczes, Antonio Barcelona and Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
[Human Cognitive Processing 28] 2011
► pp. 7–58
Reviewing the properties and prototype structure of metonymy
Building on previous research (Barcelona, 2002, 2003), the author carefully discusses and takes a stand on the issues he finds problematic in the standard cognitive linguistic notion of metonymy. These include, among others, the status of metonymy as a mapping, as a stand-for relationship, as a type of activation, and as a type of “domain highlighting”; prototype-based vs. unitary definitions of metonymy; and the distinction of metonymy from metaphor, “modulation”, “facets”, and active zones. On the basis of his discussion of those issues, he puts forward a technical unitary (“schematic”) notion of metonymy, which he claims to coexist with three tightly interrelated prototype-based notions of metonymy that he proposes: “purely schematic”, “typical”, and “prototypical” metonymies, all parts of a continuum.
Cited by
Cited by 64 other publications
Barcelona, Antonio
2018. Chapter 1. General description of the metonymy database in the Córdoba project, with particular attention to the issues of hierarchy, prototypicality, and taxonomic domains. In Conceptual Metonymy [Human Cognitive Processing, 60], ► pp. 27 ff. 
Barcelona, Antonio
2019. Chapter 2. The tripartite typology and the Córdoba Metonymy Database. In Metaphor and Metonymy in the Digital Age [Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication, 8], ► pp. 49 ff.
Barcelona, Antonio, Olga Blanco Carrión & Rossella Pannain
Barnden, John A.
2022. Metonymy, reflexive hyperbole and broadly reflexive relationships. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 20:1 ► pp. 33 ff.
Benczes, Réka
Bierwiaczonek, Bogusław
2020. Figures of speech revisited. In Figurative Meaning Construction in Thought and Language [Figurative Thought and Language, 9], ► pp. 226 ff.
Blanco Carrión, Olga
2018. Chapter 2. Conventionality and linguistic domain(s) involved in the characterization of metonymies (for the creation of a detailed typology of metonymy). In Conceptual Metonymy [Human Cognitive Processing, 60], ► pp. 55 ff.
Brdar, Mario & Rita Brdar-Szabó
2022. Targetting metonymic targets. In Figurative Thought and Language in Action [Figurative Thought and Language, 16], ► pp. 59 ff.
Brdar, Mario, Rita Brdar-Szabó & Tanja Gradečak
Brink, Nina
2023. Metonymic relations underlying the one-word utterances of Afrikaans-speaking infants and toddlers. Language and Cognition 15:1 ► pp. 86 ff.
Broccias, Cristiano
2020. Falling to one’s death in multiple landscapes. In Figurative Meaning Construction in Thought and Language [Figurative Thought and Language, 9], ► pp. 108 ff.
Broccias, Cristiano
2022. A Cognitive Grammar approach to ‘metonymy’. In Figurative Thought and Language in Action [Figurative Thought and Language, 16], ► pp. 37 ff.
Catalano, Theresa
2017. When Children Are Water: Representation of Central American Migrant Children in Public Discourse and Implications for Educators. Journal of Latinos and Education 16:2 ► pp. 124 ff.
Catalano, Theresa & Linda R. Waugh
2013. The ideologies behind newspaper crime reports of Latinos and Wall Street/CEOs: a critical analysis of metonymy in text and image. Critical Discourse Studies 10:4 ► pp. 406 ff.
Catalano, Theresa & Linda R. Waugh
Devylder, Simon
2019. Chapter 8. Mereology in the flesh. In Metaphor and Metonymy in the Digital Age [Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication, 8], ► pp. 199 ff.
Diyanati, Masoumeh & Hadaegh Rezaei
2022. Metonymical noun-noun nominal compounds in Persian. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 54:2 ► pp. 194 ff.
Franceschi, Daniele
2014. Licensing and blocking factors in the use of BEGIN verbs. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 12:2 ► pp. 304 ff.
Eric Fredua-Kwarteng
2015. How Prospective Teachers Conceptualized Mathematics: Implications for Teaching. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education 10:2 ► pp. 77 ff.
Glebkin, Vladimir
2014. Cultural-historical psychology and the cognitive view of metonymy and metaphor. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 12:2 ► pp. 288 ff.
Golubeva, Tatiana
2023. The proper names ‘Assad’, ‘ISIL’, ‘ISIS’, ‘Daesh’ and ‘European’ as metonymic blends in political
discourse. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 21:1 ► pp. 115 ff.
Jodlowiec, Maria & Agnieszka Piskorska
2020. Chapter 2. Metonymic relations – from determinacy to indeterminacy. In Relevance Theory, Figuration, and Continuity in Pragmatics [Figurative Thought and Language, 8], ► pp. 45 ff.
Jodłowiec, Maria & Agnieszka Piskorska
2015. Metonymy revisited: Towards a new relevance-theoretic account. Intercultural Pragmatics 12:2
Jódar-Sánchez, José Antonio
2016. Review of Gutiérrez-Rubio (2014): Metonimia y derivación sufijal en español: Estudio multidimensional de los mecanismos conceptuales que rigen la formación de palabras mediante sufijación en español. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 29:1 ► pp. 332 ff.
Kos, Petr
Martin, Paul & Pam Papadelos
2017. Who stands for the norm? The place of metonymy in androcentric language. Social Semiotics 27:1 ► pp. 39 ff.
Martín‐Gascón, Beatriz
2022. Why in Spanish “Nos Ponemos Contentos” But not “Satisfechos”: A Cognitive‐Linguistic Review of The “Change‐of‐State Verb Ponerse + Adjective” Construction*. Studia Linguistica 76:2 ► pp. 552 ff.
Morras, Javier & Antonio Barcelona
2019. Conceptual structuring of the English prepositionsbetween, among, andamid, and their Spanish equivalententre. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 6:1 ► pp. 103 ff.
Morras Cortés, Javier A. & Xu Wen
2021. Unweaving the embodied nature of English temporal prepositions. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 8:1 ► pp. 60 ff.
Muñoz, Carmen Portero
O'Mara‐Shimek, Michael
2017. Levels of Ethical Quality of Metaphor in Stock Market Reporting. Business and Society Review 122:1 ► pp. 93 ff.
O’Mara-Shimek, Michael
2020. Chapter 1. Crisis Marketing through conceptual ontology in metaphor in financial reporting. In The Language of Crisis [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 87], ► pp. 23 ff.
Pannain, Rossella
Pannain, Rossella
2018. Chapter 9. The mouth of the speaker. In Conceptual Metonymy [Human Cognitive Processing, 60], ► pp. 237 ff.
Pannain, Rossella & Lucia di Pace
2022. Metonymy and the polysemy ofCovidin Italian. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 20:1 ► pp. 231 ff.
Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Linda L. Thornburg
2018. Chapter 5. What kind of reasoning mode is metonymy?. In Conceptual Metonymy [Human Cognitive Processing, 60], ► pp. 121 ff.
Park, Chongwon
2022. Metonymy in the Korean internally headed relative clause construction. Linguistics Vanguard 8:1 ► pp. 355 ff.
PARK, CHONGWON & DANIEL TURNER
2017. When Richard met CG: reference-point and English copy-raising. Language and Cognition 9:3 ► pp. 473 ff.
Peña Cervel, Ma Sandra
2022. For Better, for Worse, for Richer, for Poorer, in Sickness and in Health: A Cognitive-Linguistic Approach to Merism. Metaphor and Symbol 37:3 ► pp. 229 ff.
Poppi, Fabio I. M., Marianna Bolognesi & Amitash Ojha
2020. Imago Dei: Metaphorical conceptualization of pictorial artworks within a participant-based framework. Semiotica 2020:236-237 ► pp. 349 ff.
Radden, Günter
2018. Chapter 6. Molly married money. In Conceptual Metonymy [Human Cognitive Processing, 60], ► pp. 161 ff.
Radden, Günter
Rasulic, Katarina
2017. Chapter 8. Shakespeare on the shelf, Blue Helmets on the move. In Studies in Figurative Thought and Language [Human Cognitive Processing, 56], ► pp. 200 ff.
Rodríguez-Redondo, Ana-Laura
2018. Chapter 11. Metonymy and the dynamics of conceptual operations in Spanish Sign Language. In Conceptual Metonymy [Human Cognitive Processing, 60], ► pp. 287 ff.
Slabakova, Roumyana, Jennifer Cabrelli Amaro & Sang Kyun Kang
2013. Regular and Novel Metonymy in Native Korean, Spanish, and English: Experimental Evidence for Various Acceptability. Metaphor and Symbol 28:4 ► pp. 275 ff.
Slabakova, Roumyana, Jennifer Cabrelli Amaro & Sang Kyun Kang
2016. Regular and Novel Metonymy: Can You Curl up with a Good Agatha Christie in Your Second Language?. Applied Linguistics 37:2 ► pp. 175 ff.
Soto Nieto, Almudena
2020. La red polisémica denegro. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 33:2 ► pp. 562 ff.
Soto Nieto, Almudena & Antonio Barcelona Sánchez
1970. Principales patrones metonímicos en las extensiones semánticas de los términos cromáticos en español. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 75 ► pp. 287 ff.
Szwedek, Aleksander
2014. The nature of domains and the relationships between them in metaphorization. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 12:2 ► pp. 342 ff.
Dr Tanweer Ali & O'Mara-Shimek, Michael
2015. A communicative efficiency and effectiveness model for using metaphor and metonymy in financial news reporting. On the Horizon 23:3 ► pp. 216 ff.
Thomou, Paraskevi & Marilena Koutoulaki
2022. From usage patterns to meaning construction. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 20:2 ► pp. 305 ff.
Tincheva, Nelly
2021. Blurring the Boundaries between Real Worlds, Discourse Worlds and Text Worlds. Slavia Meridionalis 21
Tincheva, Nelly
2023. ‘Narrative structure’, ‘rhetorical structure’, ‘text structure’. English Text Construction 16:1 ► pp. 30 ff.
Tóth, Máté
Viimaranta, Johanna & Arto Mustajoki
2020. What Can Science, Religion, Politics, Culture and the Economy Do? A Corpus Study of Metonymical Conceptualization Combined with Personification. Scando-Slavica 66:1 ► pp. 71 ff.
Villacañas, Beatriz & Michael White
2013. Pictorial metonymy as creativity source in “Purificación García” advertising campaigns. Metaphor and the Social World 3:2 ► pp. 220 ff.
Wojciechowska, Sylwia
2023. Hand in Hand or Separate Ways: Navigation Devices and Nesting of Metonymic BODY PART Multiword Expressions in Monolingual English Learners’ Dictionaries. International Journal of Lexicography 36:4 ► pp. 388 ff.
Zhang, Weiwei, Dirk Geeraerts & Dirk Speelman
2015. Visualizing onomasiological change: Diachronic variation in metonymic patterns for woman in Chinese. Cognitive Linguistics 26:2 ► pp. 289 ff.
Zhang, Weiwei, Dirk Speelman & Dirk Geeraerts
2015. Cross-linguistic variation in metonymies for PERSON. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 13:1 ► pp. 220 ff.
Zibin, Aseel, Abdel Rahman Mitib Altakhaineh & Elham T. Hussein
2020. On the comprehension of metonymical expressions by Arabic-speaking EFL learners: A cognitive linguistic approach. Topics in Linguistics 21:1 ► pp. 45 ff.
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 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.