Cover not available

In:Pragmatics and Literature
Edited by Siobhan Chapman and Billy Clark
[Linguistic Approaches to Literature 35] 2019
► pp. 165–190

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

Chapter 8
Mapping the texture of the Berlin Wall

Metonymy, layered worlds, and critical Implicatures in Sarah Kirsch’s poem “Naturschutzgebiet/nature reserve”

Published online: 5 December 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lal.35.08war
Article outline
  • 8.1Introduction
  • 8.2Sarah Kirsch and her work
  • 8.3Texture
  • 8.4Metonymy
    • 8.4.1Cognitive linguistic accounts of metonymy
    • 8.4.2Relevance-theoretic accounts of metonymy
    • 8.4.3Cognitive-pragmatic accounts of metonymy
  • 8.5Textual analysis
    • 8.5.1Building the text worlds of the Berlin Wall: Metonymies of past and present
    • 8.5.2Metaphors along the wall: Metonymies of nature and reserve
    • 8.5.3The wall as protection: Metonymy of effect for cause
  • 8.6Summary
  • Notes
  • References
References (52)
References
Barcelona, A. (Ed.) (2000). Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive. perspective. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). The case for a metonymic basis of pragmatic inferencing: Evidence from jokes and funny anecdotes. In K-U. Panther and L. Thornburg, (Eds.) Pragmatic inferencing (pp. 81–102). Hamburg: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Booth, W. (1978). Metaphor as rhetoric: The problem of evaluation. Critical Inquiry 5(1), 49–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carston, R. (2010). Metaphor: ad hoc concepts, literal meaning and mental images. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 110(3), 295–321. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, B. (2013). Relevance theory. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. (1993). The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. Cognitive Linguistics 4(4), 335–370. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dancygier, B. and Sweetser, E. (2014). Figurative language. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Díez Velasco, O. (2001). Metaphor, metonymy, and image-schemas: An analysis of conceptual interaction patterns. Journal of English Studies 3(2), 47–63.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eggins, S. (2004). Introduction to systemic functional linguistics: 2nd Edition . London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Falkum, I. (2011). The semantics and pragmatics of polysemy: A relevance-theoretic account. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University College London.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G. (1997). Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. (1996). Blending as a central process of grammar. In A. Goldberg (Ed.) Conceptual structure, discourse and language (pp. 113–130). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1998). Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science 22(2), 133–187. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1999). Metonymy and conceptual integration. In K-U. Panther and G. Radden (Es.) Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 77–90). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Metaphor, metonymy, and binding. In R. Dirven and R. Porings (Eds.) Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and ontrast (pp. 469–488). Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gavins, J. (2007). Text world theory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbons, A. (2010). Narrative worlds and multimodal figures in House of Leaves: “-find your own words; I have no more.” In M. Grishakova and M-L. Ryan (Eds.) Intermediality and storytelling (pp. 285–311). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. and Colston, H. (2012). Interpreting figurative meaning. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goossens, L. (1990). The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics 1(3), 323–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the way of words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hidalgo Downing, L. and Mujic, B. (2011). Multimodal metonymy and metaphor as complex discourse resources for creativity in ICT advertising discourse. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Special Issue on Metaphor and Metonymy 9(1), 153–178.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Howell, T. (2010). Conceptual blends and critical awareness in teaching cultural narratives. L2 Journal 2(1), 73–88. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. (1995[1956]). The metaphoric and metonymic poles. In R. Dirven and R. Porings (Eds.) Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 41–48). Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kirsch, S. (1982). Naturschutzgebiet. In Erdreich. Gedichte. Stuttgart: DVA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ladd, B. (1997). The ghosts of Berlin. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lahey, E. (2006). (Re)thinking world-building: Locating the text-worlds of Canadian lyric poetry. Journal of Literary Semantics 35(2), 145–164. 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. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason. A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panther, K-U. and Thornburg, L. (2003). Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Papafragou, A. (1996). On metonymy. Lingua 99, 169–195. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Radden, G. and Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In K-U. Panther and L. Thornburg (Eds.) Pragmatic inferencing (pp. 25–50). Hamburg: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (1997). Metaphor, metonymy and conceptual interaction. Atlantis 19, 281–295.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. In A. Barcelona (Ed.) Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads. (pp. 109–132). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. and Díez, O. (2002). Patterns of conceptual interaction. In R. Dirven and R. Porings, R (Eds.) Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 489–532). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. and Otal Campo, J. L. (2002). Metonymy, grammar, and communication. Granada, Spain: Comares.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. Peña Cervel, M. S. (2002). Cognitive operations and projection spaces. Jezikoslovlje 3(1–2), 131–158.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. and L. Pérez Hernández (2003). Cognitive operations and pragmatic implication. In K-U. Panther and L. Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing (pp. 23–50). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. and F. Santibáñez Sáenz (2003). Content and formal cognitive operations in construing meaning. Italian Journal of Linguistics 2(15), 293–320.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. and A. Galera Masegosa (2011). Going beyond metaphtonymy: Metaphoric and metonymic complexes in phrasal verb interpretation. Language Value 3(1), 1–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sedgewick, E. (2003). Touching feeling: affect, pedagogy, performativity. Durham: Duke University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (1991[1981]). Irony and the use-mention distinction. In P. Cole, (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 295–318). Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1995[1986]). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steen, G. (2005). Metonymy goes cognitive-linguistic. Style 39(1), 1–11.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stockwell, P. (2002). Cognitive poetics: An introduction. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Texture: A cognitive aesthetics of reading. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). The language of surrealism. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Turner, M. and Fauconnier, G. (1995). Conceptual integration and formal expression. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 10, 183–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wells-Jopling, R. and Oatley, K. (2012). Metonymy and intimacy. Journal of Literary Theory 6(1), 235–252. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Werth, P. (1994). Extended metaphor: A text world account. Language and Literature 3(2), 79–103. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whiteley, S. (2011). Text world theory, real readers and emotional responses to The Remains of the Day. Language and Literature 20(1), 23–42. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Statham, Simon
2020. The year’s work in stylistics 2019. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 29:4 ► pp. 454 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 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