Article published in:
Metaphor and the Social World
Vol. 9:2 (2019) ► pp. 177198
References

References

Barcelona, A.
(2005) The multilevel operation of metonymy in grammar and discourse, with particular attention to metonymic chains. In F. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez & M. S. Peña Cervel (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction (pp. 313–352). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bell, R.
(1991) Translating and translation: Theory and practice. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Bellos, D.
(2011) Is that a fish in your ear? London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Benczes, R.
(2015) Cognitive linguistics is fun: An interview with Günter Radden. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 13(2), 479–506. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bierwiaczonek, B.
(2007) Synonymy reactivated. Linguistica Silesiana, 28, 7–21.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S.
(2004) Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader (2nd ed.) (pp. 290–305). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brdar, M.
(2017) Metonymy and word formation: Their interactions and complementation. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Brdar, M., & Brdar-Szabó, R.
(2013) Translating (by means of) metonymy. In A. Rojo & I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics and translation (pp. 199–226). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) Metonymies we (don’t) translate by: The case of complex metonymies. Argumentum, 10, 232–247.Google Scholar
Catford, J.
(1965) A linguistic theory of translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Denroche, C.
(2011) The fundamental role of metonymy in conceptualization and communication. In D. Hornsby (Ed.), Interfaces in language 2 (pp. 191–206). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
(2015) Metonymy and language: A new theory of linguistic processing. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2018) Text metaphtonymy: The interplay of metaphor and metonymy in discourse. Metaphor in the Social World, 8(1), 1–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fougner Rydning, A.
(2012) CTMM as a method to study conceptual metaphtonymies in translation. In M. Brdar, I. Raffaeli & M. Žic Fuchs (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics between universality and variation (pp. 293–326). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R.
(1999) Speaking and thinking with metonymy. In K. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 61–76). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halverson, S.
(2007) A cognitive linguistic approach to translation shifts. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 21(1), 105–121.Google Scholar
Hatim, B., & Munday, J.
(2004) Translation: An advanced resource book. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hervey, S., & Higgins, I.
(1992) Thinking translation: A course in translation method, French-English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R.
(1959/2012) On linguistic aspects of translation. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader (3rd ed.) (pp. 126–131). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Johnson, M.
(1987) The body in the mind. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & G. Radden
(1998) Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics. 9(1), 37–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kress, G.
(2010) Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Krings, H.
(1986) Translation problems and translation strategies of advanced German learners of French (L2). In J. House & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlingual and intercultural communication (pp. 263–276). Tübigen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1987) Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R.
(1993) Reference-point constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 4(1), 1–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) Metonymic grammar. In K. Panther, L. Thornburg & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp. 45–71). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larson, M.
(1998) Meaning-based translation: a guide to cross-language equivalence (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Lederer, M.
(1976) Synecdoque et traduction. Études de linguistique appliquée, 24, 13–41.Google Scholar
Littlemore, J.
(2015) Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge, UK; Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lodge, D.
(1977) The modes of modern writing: Metaphor, metonymy and the typology of modern literature. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Munday, J.
(2012) Introducing translation studies: Theories and applications. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nida, E.
(1964) Toward a science of translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Panther, K., & Thornburg, L.
(1998) A cognitive approach to inferencing in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 755–769. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) Introduction: On the nature of conceptual metonymy. In K. Panther & L. Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing (pp. 1–22). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2018) What kind of reasoning mode is metonymy? In O. Blanco-Carrión, A. Barcelona & R. Pannain (Eds.), Conceptual metonymy: Methodological, theoretical, and descriptive issues (pp. 121–160). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, C.
(2004) Where does metonymy stop? Sense, facets and active zones. Metaphor and Symbol, 19(4), 245–264. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peirsman, Y., & Geeraerts, D.
(2006) Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(3), 269–316. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pym, A.
(2010) Exploring translation theories. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Quine, W.
(1960) Word and object. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Radden, G.
(2005) The ubiquity of metonymy. In J. L. Otal Campo, I. Navarro i Ferrando & B. Bellés Fortuño (Eds.), Cognitive and discourse approaches to metaphor and metonymy (pp. 11–28). Castello de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I.Google Scholar
(2008) Event metonymies. Paper presented at the Third International Conference of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, Leipzig, Germany. 25–27 September, 2008.
(2018) Molly married money: reflections on conceptual metonymy. In O. Blanco-Carrión, A. Barcelona & R. Pannain (Eds.), Conceptual metonymy: Methodological, theoretical, and descriptive issues (pp. 161–182). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rojo, A., & Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I.
(Eds.) (2013) Cognitive linguistics and translation. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F., & Diez Velasco, O.
(2002) Patterns of conceptual interaction. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 489–532). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Somers, H.
(2003) Translation memory systems. In H. Somers (Ed.), Computers and translation: A translator’s guide (pp. 31–47). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toury, G.
(1995) Descriptive translation studies – and beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vinay, J., & Darbelnet, J.
(1958/1995) Comparative stylistics of French and English: A methodology for translation [orig. Stylistique comparée du français et de l’anglais ]. Translated and ed. by J. Sager & M. Hamel. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Zhang, W.
(2016) Variation in metonymy, cross-linguistic, historical and lectal perspectives. Berlin, Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar