Chapter published in:
Studies in Figurative Thought and Language
Edited by Angeliki Athanasiadou
[Human Cognitive Processing 56] 2017
► pp. 200229
References
Barcelona, A.
(Ed.) 2000Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective [Topics in English Linguistics 30]. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2003Metonymy in cognitive linguistics: An analysis and a few modest proposals. In H. Cuyckens, T. Berg, R. Dirven, & K.-U. Panther (Eds.), Motivation in language: Studies in honor of Günter Radden [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 243] (223–255). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005The multilevel operation of metonymy in grammar and discourse, with particular attention to metonymic chains. In F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, & M. S. Peña Cervel (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction [Cognitive Linguistics Research 32] (313–352). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2011Reviewing the properties and prototype structure of metonymy. In A. Barcelona, R. Benczes, & F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds.), Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus view [Human Cognitive Processing 28] (7–58). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barcelona, A., Benczes, R., & Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J.
(Eds.) 2011Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics. Towards a consensus view [Human Cognitive Processing 28]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Brdar, M.
2007Topic-continuity, metonymy and locative adverbials: A cognitive-functional account. Suvremena lingvistika, 63, 13–29.Google Scholar
2009Metonymies we live without. In K.-U. Panther, L. Thornburg, & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar [Human Cognitive Processing 25] (259–274). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brdar, M., & Brdar-Szabó, R.
2011Metonymy, metaphor and the “weekend frame of mind”: Towards motivating the micro-variation in the use of one type of metonymy. In K.-U. Panther, & G. Radden (Eds.), Motivation in grammar and the lexicon [Human Cognitive Processing 27] (233–250). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
This volume. How metonymy and grammar interact: Some effects and constraints in a cross-linguistic perspective.
Brdar-Szabó, R., & Brdar, M.
2003Referential metonymy across languages: What can cognitive linguistics and contrastive linguistics learn from each other? International Journal of English Studies, 3/2, 85–105.Google Scholar
2012The problem of data in the cognitive linguistic research on metonymy: A cross-linguistic perspective. Language Sciences, 34/6, 728–745. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H.
1983Making sense of nonce sense. In G. Flores d’Arcais, & R. Jarvella (Eds.), The process of understanding language (297–332). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Corbett, G. G.
2010Agreement in Slavic. Glossos, 10, 1–61.Google Scholar
Croft, W.
1993The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. Cognitive Linguistics, 4/4, 335–370. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006On explaining metonymy: Comment on Peirsman and Geeraerts, “Metonymy as a prototypical category”. Cognitive Linguistics, 17/3, 317–326. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dirven, R., & Pörings, R.
(Eds.) 2002Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast [Cognitive Linguistics Research 20]. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G.
1997Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Foolen, A.
This volume. The hand in figurative thought and language.
Gortan-Premk, D.
1997Polisemija i organizacija leksičkog sistema u srpskom jeziku [“Polysemy and the organization of lexical system in the Serbian language”]. Beograd: Institut za srpski jezik SANU.Google Scholar
Handl, S.
2011The conventionality of figurative language: A usage-based study. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M., & Tadmor, U.
(Eds.) 2009Loanwords in the world’s languages. A comparative handbook. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M.
2006Keeping an eye on the data: Metonymies and their patterns. In A. Stefanowitsch, & S. T. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy [Trends in Linguistics 171] (123–151). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2007Chained metonymies in lexicon and grammar. A cross-linguistic perspective on body part terms. In G. Radden, K.-M. Köpcke, T. Berg, & P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects of meaning construction (77–98). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & Radden, G.
1998Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics, 9/1, 37–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kovačević, M.
1999Metonimija i sinegdoha [“Metonymy and synecdoche”]. Srpski jezik, 4/1–2, 171–202.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
1987Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
1980Metaphors we live by. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
1993Reference-point constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 4/1, 1–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maalej, Z. A., & Yu, N.
(Eds.) 2011Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages and cultures [Human Cognitive Processing 31]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Markert, K., & Nissim, M.
2006Metonymic proper names: A corpus-based account. In A. Stefanowitsch, & S. T. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy [Trends in Linguistics 171] (152–174). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Norrick, N.
1981Semiotic principles in semantic theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nunberg, G.
1978The pragmatics of reference. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Radden, G.
(Eds.) 1999Metonymy in language and thought [Human Cognitive Processing 4]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Panther, K-U., & Thornburg, L.
(Eds.) 2003Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 113]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003aMetonymies as natural inference and activation schemas. In K-U. Panther, & L. Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 113] (127–147). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L.
2004The role of conceptual metonymy in meaning construction. Metaphorik.de, 6, 91–116.Google Scholar
Panther, K.-U., Thornburg, L., & Barcelona, A.
(Eds.) 2009Metonymy and metaphor in grammar [Human Cognitive Processing 25]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A.
1995Metonymy and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 7, 141–175.Google Scholar
Peirsman, Y., & Geeraerts, D.
2006Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17/3, 269–316. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006aDon’t let metonymy be misunderstood: An answer to Croft. Cognitive Linguistics, 17/3, 327–335. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rasulić, K.
2006‘This could be you’: Metonymy as conceptual integration. In K. Rasulić, & I. Trbojević (Eds.), ELLSII75 Proceedings, Vol. I (307–317). Belgrade: Faculty of Philology.Google Scholar
2010Aspekti metonimije u jeziku i mišljenju [“Aspects of metonymy in language and thought”]. Theoria, 53/3, 49–70.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J.
2000The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective [Topics in English Linguistics 30]. (109–132). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Díez Velasco, O. I.
2004Metonymic motivation in anaphoric reference. In G. Radden, & K.-U. Panther (Eds.), Studies in Linguistic Motivation [Cognitive Linguistics Research 28] (293–320). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Pérez Hernández, L.
2001Metonymy and the grammar: Motivation, constraints, and interaction. Language and Communication, 21/4, 321–357. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ullmann, S.
1957The principles of semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Veloudis, I.
This volume. Metaphor and metonymy as fanciful “asymmetry” builders.
Warren, B.
2006Referential metonymy. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Yu, N.
2001What does our face mean to us? Pragmatics and Cognition, 9, 1–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Rasulić, Katarina & Mirjana Mišković-Luković
2020. ŠTA SPAJA A ŠTA RAZDVAJA KOGNITIVNOLINGVISTIČKI I KONITIVNOPRAGMATIČKI PRISTUP METAFORI?. Lipar :72  pp. 11 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 07 october 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.