Towards a Better Understanding of Metonymy

198 Pages·2019·2.852 MB·English

by  Bernhardt, Karl Andrew, Davis, Graeme, Wachowski, Wojciech

W
o S
jc C
i I
e T
c S
h I
L
W Y
a T
c S
h
o L
w A
s R
k TOWARDS A BETTER
i U

T
L
U

C UNDERSTANDING

D
TO N
OF METONYMY
W A

A
Y
R R
D
A
S
R
A E
T
B I
E L
T
T
E L:
R D

U S
N C
D
E
R 4 Wojciech Wachowski
S 4
T .
A L
N O
V
D
I
N
G

O
F

M
E
T
O
N
Y
M
Y
G
N
A
L

R
E
T
E
P
The general aim of this book is to contribute to a better W TOWARDS
understanding of metonymy, a phenomenon which still, despite the oj A BETTER UNDERSTANDING
c
current upsurge in scholarly attention, remains puzzling in some i
e
OF METONYMY
c
respects. The theoretical framework of this book is provided by the h

school of thought commonly known as Cognitive Linguistics. The W
a
first part of the book analyses and develops various hypotheses c
h
concerning the nature of metonymy advanced in the literature to o
w
date. It presents numerous arguments in favour of the conceptual s
k
rather than purely linguistic basis of metonymy and shows that i

metonymy is a ubiquitous phenomenon not only in language

but above all in thought. The second part contains a thorough

analysis of the constraints on the scope of metonymy and discusses
T
O
the differences between metonymy and other forms of so-called
W
figurative language. The third part is devoted to the role and
A
importance of metonymy in communication and focuses on the R
D
creative functions of metonymy, which have received surprisingly S

A
little scholarly attention to date, such as euphemism, vague

B
language, and humour. The fourth part of this book is centred E
T
on some problematic issues concerning the distinction between T
E
R
metonymy, metaphor, and synecdoche.

U
N
D
E
R
S
WOJCIECH WACHOWSKI is Assistant Professor in the Institute of
T
A
Modern Languages and Applied Linguistics at Kazimierz Wielki N
University in Bydgoszcz, Poland. He is also an Endeavour Research D
I
N
Fellow at the University of Queensland, Australia, and has lectured
G
as a visiting professor at several European universities. He has
O
published on various topics in linguistics, especially cognitive F

M
linguistics and sociolinguistics. His main research interests include
E
metonymy and metaphor, and teacher and translator training. T
O
N
Y
M
Y
www.peterlang.com
CONTEMPORARY STUDIES
IN DESCRIPTIVE LINGUISTICS
LITERARY AND CULTURAL STYLISTICS
VOL. 44
Edited by
PROFESSOR GRAEME DAVIS & KARL A. BERNHARDT
PETER LANG
Oxford Bern Berlin Bruxelles New York Wien
• • • • •
Wojciech Wachowski
TOWARDS
A BETTER UNDERSTANDING
OF METONYMY
PETER LANG
Oxford Bern Berlin Bruxelles New York Wien
• • • • •
Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche National-
bibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available on the Internet at
http://dnb.d-nb.de.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Wachowski, Wojciech, author.
Title: Towards a better understanding of metonymy / Wojciech Wachowski.
Description: Oxford ; New York : Peter Lang, 2019. | Series: Literary and
cultural stylistics ; 44 | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018024750 | ISBN 9781788743457 (alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Metonyms. | Cognitive grammar.
Classification: LCC P301.5.M49 W65 2018 | DDC 401/.43--dc23 LC record
available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018024750
Cover design by Peter Lang Ltd.
ISSN 1660-9301
ISBN 978-1-78874-345-7 (print) • ISBN 978-1-78874-346-4 (ePDF)
ISBN 978-1-78874-347-1 (ePub) • ISBN 978-1-78874-348-8 (mobi)
© Peter Lang AG 2019
Published by Peter Lang Ltd, International Academic Publishers,
52 St Giles, Oxford, OX1 3LU, United Kingdom
[email protected], www.peterlang.com
Wojciech Wachowski has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Author of this Work.
All rights reserved.
All parts of this publication are protected by copyright.
Any utilisation outside the strict limits of the copyright law, without
the permission of the publisher, is forbidden and liable to prosecution.
This applies in particular to reproductions, translations, microfilming,
and storage and processing in electronic retrieval systems.
This publication has been peer reviewed.
Contents
List of Figures vii
List of Tables xiii
Acknowledgements xv
Typographical conventions xvii
Introduction 1
Chapter 1
Metonymy: The name and definition 7
Chapter 2
Metonymy: The scope 53
Chapter 3
Metonymy: The functions 107
Chapter 4
Metaphor, metonymy, and synecdoche: Problematic issues 129
Conclusion 151
Bibliography 155
Index 171

Figures
Figure 1. Shakespeare caricature (by Court Jones, 2008).
Reproduced with permission from the author 10
Figure 2. The Dog Picture (Marr 1982: 101). Reproduced with
permission from the author 12
Figure 3. The Kanizsa Triangle (public domain) 13
Figure 4. The law of prägnanz (by Boeree). Reproduced with
permission from the author 14
Figure 5. Guernica (1937) by Pablo Picasso 17
Figure 6. The basic metonymic relation (Panther and
Thornburg 2018: 124). Reproduced with permission
from the authors and publishing house 37
Figure 7. Domain matrix underlying the concept of the
letter T (Croft 2003: 170). Reproduced with
permission from the author 47
Figure 8. Sign, reference and concept metonymies
(Radden and Kövecses 1999: 23). Reproduced
with permission from the authors 49
Figure 9. Figures of speech – antiquity
(Nerlich and Clarke 1999: 198) 54
viii
Figure 10. Figures of speech – classical rhetoric (Nerlich and
Clarke 1999: 199) 54
Figure 11. Figures of speech – Jakobson (Nerlich and
Clarke 1999: 199) 55
Figure 12. Figures of speech – Burkhardt, Seto, Nerlich and
Clarke (Nerlich and Clarke 1999: 203) 56
Figure 13. Metaphor and metonymy distinguished on the
basis of the number of conceptual mappings
(correspondences) involved (Brdar and
Brdar- Szabó 2013: 202) 57
Figure 14. Metaphor and metonymy distinguished on the basis
of domain inclusion (Brdar and
Brdar- Szabó 2013: 201) 58
Figure 15. Taxonomy (C- relation) (Seto 1999: 93) 61
Figure 16. Partonomy (E- relation) (Seto 1999: 93) 62
Figure 17. Figures of speech 70
Figure 18. Rubin’s vase (1915) 84
Figure 19. Selected common attributes and family resemblances
of the category bird (Ungerer and Schmid 1996: 30).
Reproduced with permission from the authors 90
Figure 20. Conceptual prominence of target meaning (Panther
and Thornburg 2004: 106). Reproduced with
permission from the authors 94
ix
Figure 21. Conceptually prominent target meaning (Panther
and Thornburg 2004: 109). Reproduced with
permission from the authors 95
Figure 22. Conceptually prominent source meaning (Panther
and Thornburg 2004: 108). Reproduced with
permission from the authors 96
Figure 23. Source- in- target metonymy (Ruiz de Mendoza
(2003) and Ruiz de Mendoza and Pérez- Hernández
(2003)). Reproduced with permission from the
authors 104
Figure 24. Target- in- source metonymy (Ruiz de Mendoza
(2003) and Ruiz de Mendoza and Pérez- Hernández
(2003)). Reproduced with permission from the
authors 104
Figure 25. Metonymic backgrounding: source- in- target
metonymy (source highlighted, target backgrounded) 111
Figure 26. Positive end of the scale for the whole scale 115
Figure 27. Metonymic backgrounding – target- in- source
metonymy (source highlighted, target hidden) 117
Figure 28. The first metonymic inference. The source (police
officer) activates the “dummy” target (danger) and
conceals the “real” target (stupidity) 120
Figure 29. The second metonymic inference. The source (police
officer) activates the “real” target (stupidity) 120