Cover not available
Article published In:
Concepts and Context in Relevance-Theoretic Pragmatics: New Developments
Edited by Agnieszka Piskorska and Manuel Padilla Cruz
[Pragmatics 33:3] 2023
► pp. 368–392

Non-literal uses of proper names in XYZ constructions

A relevance theory perspective

ORCID logo | University of Warsaw,
The paper focuses on non-literal uses of proper names in XYZ constructions, such as the use of the personal name Donald Trump in Boris Johnson is the Donald Trump of UK politics or ‘5G’ is the Donald Trump of telecom, and argues that such uses can be best accounted for by relevance theory. While in their primary use, proper names uniquely denote specific individuals and have no meaning on their own, in their secondary uses, they act as common nouns, capable of conveying non-literal meanings. In relevance theory, such non-literal uses can be explained in terms of lexical modulation or ad hoc concept formation. The analysis of selected examples shows that while some of the XYZ constructions can be seen as metaphors, others are better described as category extensions, and it substantiates the relevance-theoretic claim that there is no clear cut-off point between the two varieties of loose use.
Keywords: ad hoc concept, category extension, lexical pragmatics, metaphor, proper name, relevance theory, XYZ construction
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Some issues concerning proper names
    • 2.1Formal aspects of proper names
    • 2.2The semantics of proper names in relevance theory
    • 2.3Secondary uses of proper names
  • 3.Non-literal uses of proper names in relevance theory
    • 3.1Lexical modulation
    • 3.2Category extension
  • 4.Non-literal uses of proper names in XYZ constructions
    • 4.1The XYZ construction
    • 4.2Proper names in XYZ constructions
    • 4.3An overview of approaches to the XYZ construction
    • 4.4Category extension or metaphor? A relevance-theoretic analysis of non-literal uses of proper names in the XYZ construction
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 24 February 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.21070.wal
References (69)
References
Allerton, David J. 1987. “The Linguistic and Sociolinguistic Status of Proper Names: What Are They, and Who Do They Belong To?” Journal of Pragmatics 11 (1): 61–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Allott, Nicholas. 2010. Key Terms in Pragmatics. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Anderson, John M. 2007. The Grammar of Names. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Audi, Robert, ed. 2015. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (3rd Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bach, Kent. 2002. “Giorgione Was So-Called Because of His Name.” Philosophical Perspectives 161: 73–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barcelona, Antonio. 2003. “Names: A Metonymic ‘Return Ticket’ in Five Languages.” Jezikoslovlje 4 (1): 11–41.Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 1987. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2002. Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boër, Steven E. 1975. “Proper Names as Predicates.” Philosophical Studies 271: 389–400. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brdar-Szabó, Rita, and Mario Brdar. 2020. “The Bruce Willis of Sandwiches: The Y of X Is Y of Z Construction on Its Journey towards a Paragon Model, as One Way of Achieving Intersubjectivity.” Diadorim 22 (2): 277–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bunnin, Nicholas, and Jiyuan Yu. 2004. The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Burge, Tyler. 1973. “Reference and Proper Names.” The Journal of Philosophy 70 (14): 425–439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 1997. “Enrichment and Loosening: Complementary Processes in Deriving the Proposition Expressed?” Linguistische Berichte 81: 103–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “Metaphor and the Literal/Non-Literal Distinction.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Keith Allan, and Kasia M. Jaszczolt, 469–492. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, Barbara, and Eve Sweetser. 2014. Figurative Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan, and Melanie Green. 2006. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Fara, Delia G. 2015. “‘Literal’ Uses of Proper Names.” In On Reference, ed. by Andrea Bianchi, 251–279. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frege, Gottlob. 1892/1980. “On Sense and Reference.” In Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege (3rd Edition), ed. by Peter Geach, and Max Black, 56–78. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Geurtz, Bart. 1997. “Good News about the Description Theory of Names.” Journal of Semantics 14 (4): 319–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanks, Patrick. 2006. “Proper Names: Linguistic Status.” In Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics (2nd Edition), ed. by Keith Brown, 134–137. Boston: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hidalgo-Downing, Laura. 2016. “Metaphor and Metonymy.” In The Routledge Handbook of Language and Creativity, ed. by Rodney H. Jones, 107–128. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hofstadter, Douglas, and Fluid Analogies Research Group. 1995. Fluid Concepts and Creative Analogies: Computer Models of the Fundamental Mechanisms of Thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney. 1988. English Grammar: An Outline. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jeshion, Robin. 2015a. “A Rejoinder to Fara’s “‘Literal’ Uses of Proper Names”.” In On Reference, ed. by Andrea Bianchi, 280–294. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015b. “Names Not Predicates.” In On Reference, ed. by Andrea Bianchi, 225–250. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015c. “Referentialism and Predicativism about Proper Names.” Erkenntnis 801: 363–404. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jones, Rodney H., ed. 2016. The Routledge Handbook of Language and Creativity. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kay, Paul. 2002. “Patterns of Coining.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
. 2013. “The Limits of (Construction) Grammar.” In The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, ed. by Thomas Hoffmann, and Graeme Trousdale, 32–48. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kripke, Saul. 1980. Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. “Cognitive Models and Prototype Theory.” In Concepts: Core Readings, ed. by Eric Margolis, and Stephen Laurence, 391–421. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lehrer, Adrienne. 2006. “Proper Names: Semantic Aspects.” In Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics (2nd Edition), ed. by Keith Brown, 141–145. Boston: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lycan, William G. 2019. Philosophy of Language: A Contemporary Introduction (3rd Edition). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Matushansky, Ora. 2008. “On the Linguistic Complexity of Proper Names.” Linguistics and Philosophy 311: 573–627. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1974. A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive, Being a Connected View of the Principles of Evidence and the Methods of Scientific Investigation (Volume VII) . In The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, ed. by John M. Robson. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Padilla Cruz, Manuel. 2022. “Is Free Enrichment Always Free? Revisiting Ad Hoc-Concept Construction.” Journal of Pragmatics 1871: 130–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pang, Kam-yiu S. 2010. “Eponymy and Life-Narratives: The Effect of Foregrounding on Proper Names.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (5): 1321–1349. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payne, John, and Rodney Huddleston. 2002. “Nouns and Noun Phrases.” In The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, ed. by Rodney Huddleston, and Geoffrey K. Pullum, 323–523. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Powell, George. 2010. Language, Thought and Reference. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pullum, George. 2003. “Phrases for Lazy Writers in Kit Form.” Language Log, October 27. [URL] (15 May 2021)
Reimer, Marga. 2006. “Proper Names: Philosophical Aspects.” In Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics (2nd Edition), ed. by Keith Brown, 137–141. Boston: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. 1905. “On Denoting.” In Logic and Knowledge. Essays 1901–1950, ed. by Robert C. Marsh, 1956, 41–56. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
. 1918. “The Philosophy of Logical Atomism.” In Logic and Knowledge. Essays 1901–1950, ed. by Robert C. Marsh, 1956, 177–281. London: George Allen and Unwin. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Stephen P. 2014. “Mill on Names.” In Mill’s “A System of Logic”: Critical Appraisals, ed. by Antis Loizides, 44–62. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R. 1958. “Proper Names.” Mind 67 (266): 166–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1986/1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition (2nd Edition). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2008. “A Deflationary Account of Metaphors.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, ed. by Raymond W. Gibbs, 84–105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sternberg, Robert J. 1999. Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taschek, William. 2010. “On Sense and Reference: A Critical Reception.” In The Cambridge Companion to Frege, ed. by Michael Potter, and Tom Ricketts, 293–341. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2014. “Toward a Constructional Framework for Research on Language Change.” In Grammaticalization – Theory and Data, ed. by Sylvie Hancil, and Ekkehard König, 87–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C., and Graeme Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turner, Mark. 1991. Reading Minds: The Study of English in the Age of Cognitive Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Lancker Sidtis, Diana. 2004. “When Novel Sentences Spoken or Heard for the First Time in the History of the Universe Are Not Enough: Toward a Dual-Process Model of Language.” International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders 39 (1): 1–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Lancker Sidtis, Diana, Krista Cameron, Kelly Bridges, and John J. Sidtis. 2015. “The Formulaic Schema in the Minds of Two Generations of Native Speakers.” Ampersand 21: 39–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Langendonck, Willy. 2007. Theory and Typology of Proper Names. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Veale, Tony. 2014. “The ABCs of XYZs: Creativity and Conservativity in Humorous Epithets.” In Cognition, Experience, and Creativity, ed. by Jaison A. Manjaly, and Bipin Indurkhya, 135–154. New Delhi: Orient Blackswan.Google Scholar
Vega Moreno, Rosa E. 2007. Creativity and Convention: The Pragmatics of Everyday Figurative Speech. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wałaszewska, Ewa. 2015. Relevance-Theoretic Lexical Pragmatics: Theory and Applications. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
. 2020. “Category Extension as a Variety of Loose Use.” In Relevance Theory, Figuration and Continuity in Pragmatics, ed. by Agnieszka Piskorska, 25–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 2003. “Relevance and Lexical Pragmatics.” Rivista di Linguistica 12 (2): 273–291.Google Scholar
. 2014. “Relevance Theory.” UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 261: 1–20.Google Scholar
. 2017. “Relevance Theory.” In Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Yan Huang, 79–100. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Robyn Carston. 2007. “A Unitary Approach to Lexical Pragmatics: Relevance, Inference and Ad Hoc Concepts.” In Pragmatics, ed. by Noel Burton-Roberts, 230–259. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. “Pragmatics and the Challenge of ‘Non-Propositional’ Effects.” Journal of Pragmatics 1451: 31–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber. 2012. “Introduction: Pragmatics.” In Meaning and Relevance, 1–27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zabeeh, Farhang. 1968. What Is in a Name? An Inquiry into the Semantics and Pragmatics of Proper Names. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Zimmer, Ben. 2009. “The Cadillac of Snowclones.” Language Log, November 9. [URL] (15 May 2021)