Cover not available

In:Studies in Figurative Thought and Language
Edited by Angeliki Athanasiadou
[Human Cognitive Processing 56] 2017
► pp. 253–271

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 10
Metaphor and metonymy as fanciful “asymmetry” builders

 | Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
Published online: 26 April 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.56.10vel
Abstract
Langacker (1987: 469) remarks that “the asymmetry of an ‘event’ detected against an established background is fundamental to cognitive organization and not at all peculiar to language. It recalls not only figure/ground alignment […] but also the more general point that novel experience is structured and interpreted with reference to previous experience”. In this paper I argue that metaphor and metonymy are in a sense, if not par excellence, fanciful “asymmetry”-builders: their pertinent characteristic, i.e. association in terms of similarity and contiguity, always warrants that “novel experiences” (targets) are safely structured and interpreted with reference to “previous experiences” (sources); in other words, it always ensures that the imaginative, playful departure from an "established background" will not lead us astray.
Article outline
  • 1.Exaggerated stimuli
  • 2.The interaction between metaphor and metonymy
    • 2.1The perspective polarisation of prehistoric handprints
    • 2.2Metaphor-metonymy as a playful ‘seeing as’
  • 3.Back to the ‘peak shift effect’
  • 4.Epilogue
  • Notes
  • References
References (27)
References
Barcelona, A. 2003a. Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within cognitive linguistics: An update. In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (207–278). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(Ed.) 2003b. Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bartsch, R. 2003. Generating polysemy: Metaphor and metonymy. In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (49–74). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, B. 2006. The colors of clay: Special techniques in Athenian vases. Los Angeles, California: Getty Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dirven, R. 2003. Introduction. In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (1–40). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D. 2014. From structure to context: Modern linguistics from a distance In studies in Greek linguistics, 35, 35–51. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Department of Linguistics, School of Philology, Aristotle University. 8–10 May 2014. Thessaloniki: Aristotle University. [URL]
Green, A. 1997. The Intuition of the negative in Playing and Reality. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 78, 1071–1084.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. 2003. The metaphoric and metonymic poles. In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (41–48). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. I Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1990. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. II Descriptive Application. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Melrose, R. 1995. The seduction of abduction: Peirce’s theory of signs and indeterminacy in Language. Journal of Pragmatics, 23, 493–507. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nerlich, B., & Clarke, D. D. 1992. Outline of a model for semantic change. In G. Kellermann, & M. D. Morrisey (Eds.), Diachrony within Synchrony: Language History and Cognition. Papers from the International Symposium at the University of Duisburg, 26–28 March 1990 (125–141). Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Radden, G. (Eds.)1999. Metonymy in Language and Thought. (Human Cognitive Processing 4). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L. 2007. Metonymy. In D. Geeraerts, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (236–263). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piaget, J. 1962. Play, Dreams and imitation in childhood. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Radden, G. 2003. How metonymic are metaphors? In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (407–436). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ramachandran, V. S. 2011. The tell-tale brain: Unlocking the mystery of human nature. London: William Heinemann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Díez Velasco, O. I. 2003. Patterns of conceptual interaction. In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (489–532). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saussure, F. de 1974. Course in general linguistics. Glasgow: William Collins Sons & Co Ltd.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, J. 2003. Category extension by metonymy and metaphor. In R. Dirven, & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (323–348). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. B. 2005. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Veloudis, I. 1996. Kapjos, kapu, kapote … [Someone, somewhere, sometime …]. In Studies in Greek Linguistics, 16: 366–377. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Meeting of the Department of Linguistics, School of Philology, Aristotle University. 4–6 May 1995. Thessaloniki: Aristotle University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1998. “Quantifying” superlatives and homo sapiens. Journal of Semantics, 15, 215–237. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. I simasia prin, kata ke meta ti glosa. [Meaning in and beyond language]. Athens: Kritiki.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2012. Tapini glosa, tipiki logiki ke anthropino vioma [Humble language, Formal logic and Human experience]. Athens: Nissos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2017. How do languages acquire grammatical elements? The story of ka(n)- series in Modern Greek retold. Linguistics, 55(1), 117–152. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1922. Tractatus logico-philosophicus. London: Kegan Paul.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Kefalidou, Sophia
2025. Irony, intersubjectivity and construal. In What makes a Figure [Figurative Thought and Language, 19], ► pp. 271 ff. DOI logo

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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue