Cover not available

Article In: Metonymic Thinking All the Way Down: From discourse to the lexicon, and beyond
Edited by Carmen Portero-Muñoz, Antonio Barcelona and Almudena Soto Nieto
[Cognitive Linguistic Studies 13:1] 2026
► pp. 205–244

Section 4. Metonymy in sign languages and dance

Metonymies we sign by

Metonymies as a multilevel phenomenon in sign languages

ORCiD logo with link | University of Osijek
ORCiD logo with link | Eötvös Loránd University
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
According to (2012). Metonymy in, under and above the lexicon. In S. M. Alegre, M. G. Moyer, E. P. Ballester & S. T. Muntañá (Eds.), At a time of crisis: English and American studies in Spain (pp. 254–271). Departament de Filologia Anglesa i de Germanística, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona/AEDEAN, Barcelona.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, metonymy is more than just a lexical phenomenon. It is a conceptual mechanism (an inferential schema) operating under the lexicon, in the lexicon, and above the lexicon. In light of the fact that “lexical metonymies are often at the same time grammatical and discourse metonymies” ( (2012). Metonymy in, under and above the lexicon. In S. M. Alegre, M. G. Moyer, E. P. Ballester & S. T. Muntañá (Eds.), At a time of crisis: English and American studies in Spain (pp. 254–271). Departament de Filologia Anglesa i de Germanística, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona/AEDEAN, Barcelona.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar: 254), we realize that metonymy is “a ubiquitous, multilevel phenomenon.” This is also in keeping with the Equipollence Hypothesis (Mairal-Usón, R., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2009). Levels of description and explanation in meaning construction. In C. S. Butler & J. Martín Arista (Eds.), Deconstructing constructions (pp. 153–198). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Ruiz de Mendoza, F., & Luzondo Oyón, A. (2012). Lexical-constructional subsumption in resultative constructions in English. In M. Brdar, I. Raffaeli & M. Žic Fuchs (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics between universality and variation (pp. 117–136). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), according to which cognitive and linguistic processes found to be at work in one domain of linguistic inquiry are expected to be active in other domains, too. The hypothesis is here extended to apply to all modes of communication, including pictorial and visuo-kinetic modalitites. This article first shows that, unsurprisingly, metonymy is also pervasive in signed languages and that it occurs at several levels or layers. Secondly, the study demonstrates that many of these metonymies are complex. Thirdly, the study argues that a number of metonymies are (no longer) recognized as such due to reductions of an excessively structuralist approach to sign languages.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The pervasiveness of metonymy in sign languages
    • 2.1Lexical metonymies in sign languages
    • 2.2Metonymy and grammar in sign languages
  • 3.Complex sign language metonymies
  • 4.Metonymic roots of some opaque signs
    • 4.1Phonologizing signs
    • 4.2Diachronic processes leading to the disappearance or opacity of metonymy in signs
  • 5.Conclusions and outlooks for further research
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (61)
References
Barcelona, A. (2005). The multilevel operation of metonymy in grammar and discourse, with particular attention to metonymic chains. In F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza & S. Peña Cervel (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction (pp. 313–352). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). The role of metonymy in meaning construction at discourse level: A case study. In G. Radden, K.-M. Köpcke, T. Berg & P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects of meaning construction (pp. 51–75). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Metonymy in, under and above the lexicon. In S. M. Alegre, M. G. Moyer, E. P. Ballester & S. T. Muntañá (Eds.), At a time of crisis: English and American studies in Spain (pp. 254–271). Departament de Filologia Anglesa i de Germanística, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona/AEDEAN, Barcelona.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Battison, R. (1974). Phonological deletion in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 5(1), 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Metonymy and word-formation: Their interactions and complementation. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). Novel metonymies, wine and wineskins, old and new ones. In S. Gudurić & B. Radić-Bojanić (Eds.), Jezici i kulture u vremenu i prostoru VII/1 [Languages and cultures in time and space] (pp. 123–134). Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet/Pedagoško društvo Vojvodine.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). On the regularity of metonymy across languages (exemplified on some metonymies in medical discourse). ExELL. Explorations in English Language and Linguistics, 7(1), 52–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brdar, M., & Brdar-Szabó, R. (2007). When Zidane is not simply Zidane, and Bill Gates is not just Bill Gates: Some thoughts on online construction of metaphtonymic meanings of proper names. In G. Radden, K.-M. Köpcke, T. Berg & P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects of meaning construction (pp. 125–142). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2025). Metonymy typologies revisited: Adding cumulativity to the picture. In H. L. Colston (Ed.), What makes a Figure: Rethinking figurativity (pp. 160–193). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brentari, D. (1998). A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, W. P. (1885). The Indian sign language: With brief explanatory notes of the gestures taught deaf-mutes in our institutions. Philadelphia: L. R. Hamersly & Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Copestake, A., & Briscoe, T. (1995). Semi-productive polysemy and sense extension. Journal of Semantics, 12(1), 15–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duke, I. (2009). The everything sign language book: American sign language made easy. Avon: Adams Media.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Einsteinhands Thrive (2018). SASL: A teacher, friend & family resource for beginners: Quick and easy reference to learning South African signs with SASL, English, Zulu, & Afrikaans. Johannesburg: Wits Centre for Deaf Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fass, D. (1991). Met*: A method for discriminating metonymy and metaphor by computer. Computational Linguistics, 17(1), 49–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fass, D. C. (1997). Processing metonymy and metaphor. Greenwich: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferrand, Jacques. (ca. 1784). Dictionnaire à l’usage des sourds et muets. Limoges: Lambert-Lucas.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. Jr. (1999). Speaking and thinking with metonymy. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 61–76). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gillon, B. S. (1999). The lexical semantics of English count and mass nouns. In E. Viegas (Ed.), Breadth and depth of semantic lexicons (pp. 19–37). Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S., & Brentari, D. (2017). Gesture, sign, and language: The coming of age of sign language and gesture studies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 401, e46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, M. (2007). Chained metonymies in lexicon and grammar: A cross-linguistic perspective on body-part terms. In G. Radden, K.-M. Köpcke, T. Berg & P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects of meaning construction (pp. 77–98). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Chained metonymies. In J. Newman & S. Rice (Eds.), Empirical and experimental methods in cognitive/functional research (pp. 181–194). Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lai, Y.-D., & Yang, C.-L. (2009). Iconicity and arbitrariness in Taiwan Sign Language: A psycholinguistic account. MingDao Journal, 5(2), 159–187. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Kövecses, Z. (1987). The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 195–221). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1993). Reference-point constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 4(1), 1–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Metonymic grammar. In K.-U. Panther, L. L. Thornburg & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp. 45–71). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liddell, S. K. (1984). Think and believe: Sequentiality in American Sign Language. Language, 60(2), 372–399. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mairal-Usón, R., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2009). Levels of description and explanation in meaning construction. In C. S. Butler & J. Martín Arista (Eds.), Deconstructing constructions (pp. 153–198). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McKee, R., & Vale, M. (2017). Sign language lexicography. In P. Hanks & G.-M. de Schryver (Eds.), International handbook of modern lexis and lexicography (pp. 1–22). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mittelberg, I. (2019). Visuo-kinetic signs are inherently metonymic: How embodied metonymy motivates forms, functions, and schematic patterns in gesture. Frontiers in Psychology, 101, article 254. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nerlich, B., & Clarke, D. D. (2001). Serial metonymy: A study of reference-based polysemisation. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 2(2), 245–272. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Brien, J. (1999). Metaphoricity in the signs of American Sign Language. Metaphor and Symbol, 14(3), 159–177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Occhino, C., & Wilcox, S. (2017). Gesture or sign? A categorization problem. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 401, e66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Padden, C. A., & Perlmutter, D. M. (1987). American Sign Language and the architecture of phonological theory. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 51, 335–375. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L. L. (2003). Introduction: On the nature of conceptual metonymy. In K.-U. Panther & L. L. Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing (pp. 1–20). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Introduction: On figuration in grammar. In K.-U. Panther, L. L. Thornburg & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp. 1–44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Portero Muñoz, C. (in press). Metonymy in morphological recategorization: The case of Spanish body-part verbs. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, 13(1).
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: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reddy, M. J. (1979). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284–324). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Redondo, A.-L. (2018). Metonymy and the dynamics of conceptual operations in Spanish Sign Language. In O. Blanco-Carrión, A. Barcelona, & R. Pannain (Eds.), Conceptual Metonymy: Methodological, theoretical, and descriptive issues (pp. 287–310). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2007). High-level cognitive models: In search of a unified framework for inferential and grammatical behavior. In K. Kosecki (Ed.), Perspectives on metonymy: Proceedings of the international conference ‘Perspectives on Metonymy’ (pp. 11–30). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Díez Velasco, O. I. (2002). Patterns of conceptual interaction. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 489–532). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F., & Luzondo Oyón, A. (2012). Lexical-constructional subsumption in resultative constructions in English. In M. Brdar, I. Raffaeli & M. Žic Fuchs (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics between universality and variation (pp. 117–136). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Mairal-Usón, R. (2007). High-level metaphor and metonymy in meaning construction. In G. Radden, K.-M. Köpcke, T. Berg & P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects of meaning construction (pp. 33–49). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shaw, E., & Delaporte, Y. (2015). A historical and etymological dictionary of American sign language: The origin and evolution of more than 500 signs. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Siple, P. (1978). Visual constraints for sign language communication. Sign Language Studies, 191, 95–110. [URL].
Stokoe, W. C. (1960). Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication system of the American deaf studies in linguistics. Studies in Linguistics Occasional Papers 8. Buffalo: University of Buffalo Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sutton-Spence, R., & Woll, B. (1999). The linguistics of British sign language: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taub, S. F. (2001). Language from the body: Iconicity and metaphor in American sign language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilcox, P. P. (2000). Metaphor in American sign language. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). A cognitive key: Metonymic and metaphorical mappings in ASL. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(2), 197–222. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilcox, S. (2004). Cognitive iconicity: Conceptual spaces, meaning, and gesture in signed language. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(2), 119–147. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilcox, S., & Martínez, R. (2021). Signed languages and cognitive linguistics. In X. Wen & J. R. Taylor (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 500–511). London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilcox, S., & Occhino, C. (2017). Signed languages. In B. Dancygier (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 99–117). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilcox, S., & Wilcox, P. P. (2010). The analysis of Signed Languages. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis (pp. 739–760). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilcox, S., Wilcox, P. P., & Jarque, M. J. (2003). Mappings in conceptual space: Metonymy, metaphor, and iconicity in two signed languages. Jezikoslovlje, 4(1), 139–156.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Woll, B. (1985). Visual imagery and metaphor in British sign language. In W. Paprotté & R. Dirven (Eds.), The ubiquity of metaphor: Metaphor in language and thought (pp. 603–630). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwitserlood, I. (2012). Classifiers. In R. Pfau, M. Steinbach & B. Woll (Eds.), Sign language: An international handbook (pp. 158–186). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue