Chapter published in:
Studies in Figurative Thought and Language
Edited by Angeliki Athanasiadou
[Human Cognitive Processing 56] 2017
► pp. 200229
References

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