In:Defining Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: Towards a consensus view
Edited by Réka Benczes, Antonio Barcelona and Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
[Human Cognitive Processing 28] 2011
► pp. 217–248
What do metonymic chains reveal about the nature of metonymy?
Published online: 24 June 2011
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.28.12brd
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.28.12brd
The central issue that concerns us in this chapter is whether metonymy should be conceived as a mapping. The way metonymies function in authentic discourse indicates that we have two-way traffic. The initial conceptual substrate is designated by the source concept, but it is plastic and flexible enough to allow considerable customizing, often within complex metonymic networks. The inferences that steer the customizing are guided by the information based on text (i.e., cotext) and context (circumstances). It is argued that metonymy should best be approached as an inference-based domain elaboration (either expansion or reduction) of the metonymic source, in the course of which domains are tailored to an optimal conceptual measure with regard to their function.
Keywords: discourse, domain elaboration, inference, mapping, metonymic chain
Cited by (35)
Cited by 35 other publications
Szabó, Lilla Petronella
Mulahmetović Ibrišimović, Anela
Brdar, Mario & Rita Brdar-Szabó
2022. Targetting metonymic targets. In Figurative Thought and Language in Action [Figurative Thought and Language, 16], ► pp. 59 ff.
Brdar, Mario & Rita Brdar-Szabó
2025. Metonymy typologies revisited. In What makes a Figure [Figurative Thought and Language, 19], ► pp. 160 ff.
Chen, Xianglan, Hulin Ren & XiaoYing Yan
Gibbs Jr., Raymond W.
I Nizhnik, L
Muñoz, Carmen Portero
Ochieng, Joseph Jaoko
Pannain, Rossella & Lucia di Pace
2022. Metonymy and the polysemy ofCovidin Italian. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 20:1 ► pp. 231 ff.
Amaral, Luana & Márcia Cançado
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco J. & Alicia Galera Masegosa
2020. The metonymic exploitation of descriptive, attitudinal, and
regulatory scenarios in meaning making. In Figurative Meaning Construction in Thought and Language [Figurative Thought and Language, 9], ► pp. 283 ff.
Pérez-Sobrino, Paula, Jeannette Littlemore & David Houghton
Stadler, Michael W.
Denroche, Charles
Denroche, Charles
Perak, Benedikt
2018. The role of metonymy in the constructionist approach to the conceptualization of emotions. In Conceptual metonymy [Human Cognitive Processing, 60], ► pp. 205 ff.
Zhang, Weiwei, Dirk Geeraerts & Dirk Speelman
Littlemore, Jeannette & Caroline Tagg
Pérez-Hernández, Lorena & Karine Duvignau
Jodłowiec, Maria & Agnieszka Piskorska
Jodłowiec, Maria & Agnieszka Piskorska
2020. Metonymic relations – from determinacy to indeterminacy. In Relevance Theory, Figuration and Continuity in Pragmatics [Figurative Thought and Language, 8], ► pp. 45 ff.
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
2014. Chapter 3. Cognitive models. In Cognitive Modeling [Human Cognitive Processing, 45], ► pp. 59 ff.
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
2014. Chapter 4. Cognitive operations. In Cognitive Modeling [Human Cognitive Processing, 45], ► pp. 85 ff.
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
2014. Chapter 5. Content operations across levels of representation. In Cognitive Modeling [Human Cognitive Processing, 45], ► pp. 147 ff.
[no author supplied]
2014. Chapter 2. Theoretical pre-requisites. In Cognitive Modeling [Human Cognitive Processing, 45], ► pp. 17 ff.
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
