Article published In:
Living Metaphors and Metonymies
Edited by Mario Brdar and Rita Brdar-Szabó
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 20:1] 2022
► pp. 3369
References
AllAboutTRH Newsletter
(2013) Lisa Vanderpump calls Bethenny Frankel out for constantly trashing her! AllAboutTRH Newsletter 20 December 2013, at [URL], accessed on 22 August 2018. [TRH = The Real Housewives]
Athanasiadou, A.
(2017) Irony has a metonymic basis. In A. Athanasiadou & H. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 201–216). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barcelona, A.
(2011) Reviewing the properties and prototype structure of metonymy. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona & F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza (Eds.), Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus view (pp. 7–57). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018) General description of the metonymy database in the Córdoba project, with particular attention to the issues of hierarchy, prototypicality, and taxonomic domains. In O. Blanco-Carrión, R. Pannain & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Conceptual metonymy: Methodological, theoretical and descriptive issues (pp. 27–54). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019) The tripartite typology and the Córdoba Metonymy Database. In M. Bolognesi, M. Brdar & K. Despot (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in the digital age: Theory and methods for building repositories of figurative language (pp. 49–73). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barnden, J. A.
(2015) Metaphor, simile, and the exaggeration of likeness. Metaphor and Symbol, 30(1), 41–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017a) A hyperbole-based account of the paradoxical usage of “literally”. In A. Wallington, A. Foltz & J. Ryan (Eds.), Selected papers from UK CLA Meetings (Vol. 41, pp. 111–130). ISSN 2046-9144. [URL]
(2017b) Irony, pretence and fictively-elaborating hyperbole. In A. Athanasiadou & H. L. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 145–177). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018a) Broadly reflexive relationships, a special type of hyperbole, and implications for metaphor and metonymy. Metaphor and Symbol, 33(3), 218–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018b) Some contrast effects in metonymy. In O. Blanco-Carrión, R. Pannain & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Conceptual metonymy: Methodological, theoretical and descriptive issues (pp. 97–119). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020) Uniting irony, metaphor and hyperbole in a pretence-based, affect-centred framework. In A. Athanasiadou & H. L. Colston (Eds.), The diversity of irony (pp. 15–65). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bierwiaczonek, B.
(2020) Figures of speech revisited: Introducing syntonymy and syntaphor. In A. Baicchi (Ed.), Figurative meaning construction in thought and language (pp. 225–251). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brdar-Szabó, R., & Brdar, M.
(2010) “Mummy, I love you like a thousand ladybirds”: Reflections on the emergence of hyperbolic effects and the truth of hyperboles. In A. Burkhardt & B. Nerlich (Eds.), Tropical truth(s): The epistemology of metaphor and other tropes, (pp. 383–427). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carston, R., & Wearing, C.
(2015) Hyperbolic language and its relation to metaphor and irony. Journal of Pragmatics, 791, 79–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J.
(2001) Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication and Society, 4(3), 245–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colston, H. L., & Keller, S. B.
(1998) You’ll never believe this: irony and hyperbole in expressing surprise. J. Psycholinguistic Research, 27(4), 499–513. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S., & Oakley, T.
(2003) Metonymy and conceptual blending. In K.-U. Panther & L. Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing (pp. 51–79). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cutting, J.
(2007) ‘Doing more stuff – where’s it going?’: Exploring vague language further. In J. Cutting (Ed.), Vague Language Explored (pp. 223–243). London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elder, J.
(2009) Jason de Caires Taylor: Underwater sculptures. At [URL], accessed on 22 August 2018.
Fauconnier, G.
(2009) Generalized integration networks. In V. Evans & S. Pourcel (Eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics (pp. 147–160). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoare, P.
(2004) Coward, Sir Noël Peirce (1899–1973), playwright and composer. In Oxford Dictionary of National Biography ([URL]). URL: DOI logo)
Igartua, J.-J.
(2010) Identification with characters and narrative persuasion through fictional feature films. Communications, 35(4), 347–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & Radden, G.
(1998) Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 37–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J.
(2015) Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, M., & Carter, R.
(2004) ‘‘There’s millions of them’’: Hyperbole in everyday conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(2), 149–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Musolff, A.
(2017) Irony and sarcasm in follow-ups of metaphorical slogans. In A. Athanasiadou & H. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 127–141). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norrick, N. R.
(2004) Hyperbole, extreme case formulation. J. Pragmatics, 361, 1727–1739. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L. L.
(2007) Metonymy. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 236–263). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2012) Antonymy in language structure and use. In M. Brdar, I. Raffaelli & M. Žic Fuchs (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics between universality and variation (pp.161–188). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
(2018) What kind of reasoning mode is metonymy? In O. Blanco-Carrión, R. Pannain & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Conceptual metonymy: Methodological, theoretical and descriptive issues (pp. 121–160). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peirsman, Y., & Geeraerts, D.
(2006) Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(3), 269–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peña, M. S., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J.
(2017) Construing and constructing hyperbole. In A. Athanasiadou (Ed.), Studies in figurative thought and language (pp. 42–73). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Popa-Wyatt, M.
(2020) Mind the gap: Expressing affect with hyperbole and hyperbolic figures. In J. A. Barnden & A. Gargett (Eds.), Producing figurative expression: Theoretical, experimental and practical perspective (pp. 449–467). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radden, G.
(2018) Molly married money: Reflections on conceptual metonymy. In O. Blanco-Carrión, R. Pannain & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Conceptual metonymy: Methodological, theoretical and descriptive issues (pp. 161–182). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z.
(1999) Towards a theory of metonymy. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17–59). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J.
(2020) Figurative language: relations and constraints. In J. A. Barnden & A. Gargett (Eds.), Producing figurative expression: Theoretical, experimental and practical perspectives (pp. 469–510). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Díez, O. I.
(2002) Patterns of conceptual interaction. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 489–532). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Galera Masegosa, A.
(2014) Cognitive modeling: A linguistic perspective. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stamp, J.
(2012) Rebranding Amsterdam and what it means to rebrand a city. Smithsonian Magazine 30 August 2012, accessed on 22 August 2018 at [URL]
Travel Guide
n.d.). I amsterdam sign. Amsterdam Travel Guide. At [URL], accessed on 22 August 2018.
Varzi, A.
(2019) Mereology. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2019 Edition), URL = [URL].
Volokh, E.
(2015) The two French meanings of “Je suis Charlie.” Washington Post 9 January 2015, at [URL], accessed on 29 June 2017.
Vosshagen, C.
(1999) Opposition as a metonymic principle. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden, Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 289–308). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Warren, B.
(2006) Referential metonymy. Scripta Minora of the Royal Society of Letters at Lund 2003–2004: 1. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
Watling, G.
(2020) Denying the salient contrast: Speaker’s attitude in hyperbole. In A. Athanasiadou & H. Colston (Eds.), The diversity of irony (pp. 107–130). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, G.
(2011) Elasticity of vague language. Intercultural pragmatics, 8(4), 571–599. DOI logoGoogle Scholar