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. 123
References

References

Barcelona, A.
2000On the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for conceptual metaphor. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads. Cognitive approaches (31–58). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2002On the ubiquity and multiple-level operation of metonymy. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & K. Turewicz (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics today [Lódz Studies in Language] (207–224). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2005The multilevel operation of metonymy in grammar and discourse, with particular attention to metonymic chains. In F. Ruiz de Mendoza & S. Peña Cervel (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction (313–352). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2007The role of metonymy in meaning at discourse level: A case study. In G. Radden, K.-M. Köpcke, T. Berg, & P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects of meaning construction (51–75). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008The interaction of metonymy and metaphor in the meaning and form of ‘bahuvrihi’ compounds. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 208–281. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Motivation of construction meaning and form: The roles of metonymy and inference. In K.-U Panther, L. L. Thornburg, & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (363–401). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011Reviewing 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: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Metonymy is not just a lexical phenomenon. In N.-L. Johannesson and D. C. Minugh (Eds.), Selected Papers from the 2008 Stockholm Metaphor Festival [Stockholm Studies in English 105] (13–46). Stockholm: Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis.Google Scholar
2016Salience in metonymy-motivated constructional abbreviated form with particular attention to English clippings. Cognitive Semantics, 2, 30–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
In preparation. On the pervasive role of metonymy in constructional meaning and form and in discourse comprehension: A corpus-based study from a cognitive-linguistic perspective. (Provisional title.)
Barnden, J. A.
2010Metaphor and metonymy: Making their connections more slippery. Cognitive Linguistics 21(1), 1–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benczes, R.
2006Creative compounding in English: The semantics of metaphorical and metonymical noun-noun combinations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benczes, R., Barcelona, A., & Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J.
(Eds) 2011Defining metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics. Towards a consensus view [Human Cognitive Processing 28]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bierwiaczonek, B.
2013Metonymy in language, thought and brain. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
2014On constructivization – A few remarks on the role of metonymy in grammar. In K. Rudnicka-Szozda & A. Szwedek (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics in the making (5–20). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Brdar, M.
2007Metonymy in grammar. Towards motivating extensions of grammatical categories and constructions. Osijek (Croatia): Faculty of Philosophy, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University.Google Scholar
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E.
2005Mental spaces in grammar. Conditional constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Darmesteter, A.
1932La vie des mots étudiée dans leurs significations. Paris: Librairie Delagrave.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G.
2009Generalized integration networks. In V. Evans & S. Pourcel (Eds.), New directions in Cognitive Linguistics (147–160). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, D.
2002The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in composite expressions. In Dirven, R. & Pörings, R. (Eds), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (435–465). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R W., Jr.
1994The Poetics of mind. Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2007Experimental tests of figurative meaning construction. In G. Radden, K.-M. Köpcke, T. Berg, & P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects of meaning construction (19–32). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goossens, L.
2002 [1990]Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (349–377). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goossens, L., Pauwels, P., Rudzka-Ostyn, B., Simon-Vanderbergen, A.-M., & Vanparys, J.
1995By word of mouth. Metaphor, metonymy and linguistic action in a cognitive perspective. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grady, J.
1997 theories are buildings revisited. Cognitive Linguistics 8(4), 267–290. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jing-Schmidt, Z.
2008Much mouth much tongue: Chinese metonymies and metaphors of verbal behavior. Cognitive Linguistics 19(2), 241–282. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D.
2011Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z.
1986Metaphors of anger, pride and love. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1990Emotion concepts. New York & Berlin: Springer Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & Radden, G.
1998Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics 9(1), 37–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G.
1987Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
1980Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1999Philosophy in the flesh. The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
2009Metonymic grammar. In K.-U. Panther, L. Thornburg, & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (45–71). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J.
2015Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Radden, G.
(Eds.) 1999Metonymy in language and thought. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L.
(Eds.) 2003Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing [Pragmatics and Beyond New Series]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007Metonymy. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (236–263). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Panther, K.-U., Thornburg, L., & Barcelona, A.
(Eds.) 2009Metonymy and metaphor in grammar. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pauwels, P., & Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M.
1995Body parts in linguistic action: underlying schemata and value judgments. In Goossens et al.. (Eds.), By word of mouth: Metaphor, metonymy and linguistic action in a cognitive perspective (35–69). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peirsman, Y., & Geeraerts, D.
2006Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics 17(3), 269–316. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Radden, G.
2002How metonymic are metaphors? In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (407–434). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004The metonymic folk model of language. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & A. Kwiatkowska (Eds.), Imagery in Language (543–565). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J.
2014On the nature and scope of metonymy in linguistic description and explanation: Towards settling some controversies. In J. Littlemore & J. R. Taylor (Eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to Cognitive Linguistics (143–166). London & New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Otal Campo, J. L.
2002Metonymy, grammar and communication. Albolote (Granada, Spain): Comares.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Peña Cervel, S.
2005Conceptual interaction, cognitive operations and projection spaces. In F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez & S. Peña Cervel (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction. Cognitive Linguistics Research (254–280). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ruppenhofer, J., & Michaelis, L.
2010A constructional account of argument omissions. Constructions and Frames 2(2), 158–184. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Soriano, C.
2005The conceptualization of anger in English and Spanish. A cognitive approach. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Murcia.Google Scholar
Stern, G.
1931Meaning and change of meaning. Göteborg: Eladers boktryckeri Aktiebolag.Google Scholar
Taylor, J.
1995 [1989]Linguistic categorization. Prototypes in linguistic theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Yu, N.
2011Speech organs and linguistic activity/function in Chinese. In Z. A. Maalej & N. Yu (Eds.), Embodiment via body part. Studies from various languages and cultures (117–148). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, S.
2007Signed languages. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (113–136). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar