Chapter published in:
Conceptual Metonymy: Methodological, theoretical, and descriptive issues
Edited by Olga Blanco-Carrión, Antonio Barcelona and Rossella Pannain
[Human Cognitive Processing 60] 2018
► pp. 161–182

Molly married money

Reflections on conceptual metonymy

| Universität Hamburg
This chapter is concerned with the conceptual basis of metonymy. Particular attention is devoted to properties that are considered crucial to conceptual metonymy. The metonymic source has received little attention. However, it plays an important role as an element of the target and is given due attention. The notion of association is applied to metonymic interconnections, inference, and strength of association. A central element of metonymy is the notion of relation: However, neither contiguity nor indexicality adequately covers the range of metonymic relations. The paper argues that two more properties are pertinent to conceptual metonymy: a metonymic shift from a source concept to a complex metonymic target, and the conceptual integration of source and target and its resulting emergent meanings.
Keywords: association, conceptual integration, conceptual shift, metonymic relation, metonymic source, metonymic target
Published online: 17 May 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.60.06rad
References

References

Alač, M., & Coulson, S.
2004 The man, the key, or the car: Who or what is parked out back? Cognitive Science Online, 2, 21–34.Google Scholar
Barcelona, A.
2004 Metonymy behind grammar: The motivation of the seemingly “irregular” grammatical behavior of English paragon names. In G. Radden & K.-U. Panther (Eds.), Studies in linguistic motivation (357–384). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2011 Reviewing the properties and prototype structure of metonymy. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona, & F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds.), Defining metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: Towards a consensus view (7–57). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bierwiaczonek, B.
2013 Metonymy in language, thought and brain. Sheffield & Bristol: Equinox.Google Scholar
Brdar, M., & Brdar Szabó, R.
2014 Where does metonymy begin? Some comments on Janda (2011). Cognitive Linguistics 25(2), 313–340. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brinton, L. J.
1988 The development of English aspectual systems: Aspectualizers and post-verbal particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Coulson, S., & Oakley, T.
2003 Metonymy and conceptual blending. In K.-U. Panther & L. L. Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing (51–79). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Denroche, Ch.
2015 Metonymy and language: A new theory of linguistic processing. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dirven, R.
1999 Conversion as a conceptual metonymy of event schemata. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (275–287). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frisson, S., & Pickering, M. J.
1999 The processing of metonymy: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 25, 1366–1383.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr.
1994 The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haser, V.
2005 Metaphor, metonymy, and experientialist philosophy: Challenging cognitive semantics. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hernández-Gomariz, I.
this volume. Analysis of metonymic triggers, metonymic chaining and patterns of interaction with metaphor and with other metonymies as part of the metonymy database in the Córdoba project.
Janda, L. A.
2011 Metonymy in word-formation. Cognitive Linguistics 22(2), 359–392. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D.
2011 Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
1980 Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
2008 Cognitive Grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 Investigations in Cognitive Grammar. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J.
2015 Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Norrick, N. R.
1981 Semiotic principles in semantic theory. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Panther, K.-U.
2005 The role of conceptual metonymy in meaning construction. In F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez & S. Peña Cervel (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction (353–386). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L.L.
this volume. What kind of reasoning mode is metonymy?
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L. L.
2009 Introduction: On figuration in grammar. In K.-U. Panther & L. L. Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (1–44). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peirsman, Y., & Geeraerts, D.
2006 Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17, 269–316. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Radden, G.
2009 Generic reference in English: A metonymic and conceptual blending analysis. In K.-U Panther, L. L. Thornburg, & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (199–228). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z.
1999 Towards a theory of metonymy. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (17–59). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J.
2003 The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective (109–132). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Song, N. S.
1997 Metaphor and metonymy. In R. Carston & S. Uchida (Eds.), Relevance theory: Applications and implications (87–104). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Strack, D.
2015 Metonymic connections are not mapped: Theoretical and neurological evidence for “metonymic binding”. Paper presented at the 13th ICLC at Newcastle upon Tyne.
Sweep, J.
2011 Metonymical transfers: The complex relation of metonymy and grammar. Linguistics in Amsterdam 4(1).Google Scholar
Warren, B.
1999 Aspects of referential metonymy. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (121-135). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Barcelona, Antonio
2019.  In Metaphor and Metonymy in the Digital Age [Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication, 8], ► pp. 49 ff. Crossref logo
Denroche, Charles
2019. Employing cognitive metonymy theory in the analysis of semantic relations between source and target text in translation. Metaphor and the Social World 9:2 ► pp. 177 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 january 2021. 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.