Article published in:Defining Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: Towards a consensus view
Edited by Réka Benczes, Antonio Barcelona and Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
[Human Cognitive Processing 28] 2011
► pp. 217–248
What do metonymic chains reveal about the nature of metonymy?
The central issue that concerns us in this chapter is whether metonymy should be conceived as a mapping. The way metonymies function in authentic discourse indicates that we have two-way traffic. The initial conceptual substrate is designated by the source concept, but it is plastic and flexible enough to allow considerable customizing, often within complex metonymic networks. The inferences that steer the customizing are guided by the information based on text (i.e., cotext) and context (circumstances). It is argued that metonymy should best be approached as an inference-based domain elaboration (either expansion or reduction) of the metonymic source, in the course of which domains are tailored to an optimal conceptual measure with regard to their function.
Published online: 24 June 2011
Cited by 25 other publications
No author info given
Gibbs Jr., Raymond W.
Jodlowiec, Maria & Agnieszka Piskorska
Jodłowiec, Maria & Agnieszka Piskorska
Littlemore, Jeannette & Caroline Tagg
Muñoz, Carmen Portero
Pannain, Rossella & Lucia di Pace
Pérez-Hernández, Lorena & Karine Duvignau
Pérez-Sobrino, Paula, Jeannette Littlemore & David Houghton
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José & Alicia Galera Masegosa
Stadler, Michael W.
Zhang, Weiwei, Dirk Geeraerts & Dirk Speelman
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 june 2022. 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.