Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics & Cognition
Vol. 26:2/3 (2019) ► pp.267–295

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

Metonymic construal and vehicle selection

The case study of Polish Sign Language (PJM)

 | Maria Curie-Skłodowska University Lublin, Poland
Published online: 12 February 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.19031.kow
Abstract
The article investigates the process of the selection of vehicle concepts in Polish Sign Language (PJM). Why are certain contiguity relations chosen out of many potentially available candidates as the basis for metonymies and why do some other contiguity relations not make felicitous metonymies? The process is certainly influenced by many factors, but the article focuses on several factors related to the dimensions of construal of metonymic concepts (in Langacker’s understanding), including the scope of conception and aspects of perspective (the preference for the observable entities and the distinction between subjectively and objectively construed concepts). Vehicle selection is also constrained by the effective reference requirement and the subjectively perceived vitality of contiguity relations.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Dimensions of metonymic construal
  • 3.Vitality of contiguity relations
  • 4.Other factors
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (28)
References
Barcelona, Antonio. 2005. The multilevel operation of metonymy in grammar and discourse, with particular attention to metonymic chains. In Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez & María Sandra Peña Cervel (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics. Internal Dynamics and Interdisciplinary Interaction, 313–352. New York-Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bierwiaczonek, Bogusław. 2013. Metonymy in Language, Thought and Brain. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cruse, David Alan. 1979. On the Transitivity of the Part-Whole Relation. Journal of Linguistics 15(1). 29–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Denroche, Charles. 2015. Metonymy and Language: A New Theory of Linguistic Processing. New/York-London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner. 2002. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraassen, Bas Cornelis Van. 1980. The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goossens, Luis. 1990. “Metaphtonymy: 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
Gordon, Peter. 2004. Numerical Cognition Without Words: Evidence from Amazonia. Science 306 (5695). 496–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jarque, Maria-Josep. 2005. Double Mapping in Metaphorical Expressions of Thought and Communication in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). Sign Language Studies 5(3). 292–316. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kosecki, Krzysztof. 2013. Metonymy as a Form of Expressing Identity in Phonic and Signed Languages. In Janusz Badio & Kamila Ciepiela (eds.), Language, Action, Interaction, 59–74. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Metonymy in Polish Sign Language. In Krzysztof Kosecki & Janusz Badio (eds.), Cognitive Processes in Language, 159–171. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kosiba, Olgierd & Piotr Grenda. 2011. Leksykon języka migowego. Bogatynia: Wydawnictwo “Silentium” Piotr Grenda.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kowalewski, Hubert. 2018. Heart is for Love: Cognitive Salience and Visual Metonymies in Comics. The Comics Grid: Journal of Comics Scholarship 81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Is this road lazy or just incompetent?” Conceptual proximity as a parameter of salience in metonymies”. metaphorik.de 27/2017. 41–68.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1993. The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought, 202–229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1993. Reference-Point Constructions. Cognitive Linguistics 4(1). 1–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1991. Concept, Image, and Symbol. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Radden, Günter & Zoltán Kövecses. 1999. Towards a Theory of Metonymy. In Klaus-Uwe Panther & Günter Radden (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought, 17–60. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Radden, Günter & Linda L. Thornburg. 1999. The Potentiality for Actuality Metonymy in English and Hungarian. In Klaus-Uwe Panther & Günter Radden (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought, 333–357. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Redondo, Laura-Ana. 2018. Metonymy and the dynamics of conceptual operations in Spanish Sign Language. In Olga Blanco-Carrión, Antonia Barcelona & Rosella Pannain (eds.), Conceptual Metonymy: Methodological, theoretical, and descriptive issues, 287–310. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seto, Ken-ichi. 1999. Distinguishing Metonymy from Synecdoche. In Klaus-Uwe Panther & Günter Radden (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought, 91–120. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taub, Sarah 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
Tomaszewski, Piotr. 2005. O niektórych elementach morfologii Polskiego Języka Migowego: zapożyczenia (cz. 2). Poradnik Językowy 31. 44–62.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Varzi, Achille. 2019. Mereology. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. [URL]
Wilcox, Phyllis Perrin. 2004. A Cognitive Key: Metonymic and Metaphorical Mappings in ASL. Cognitive Linguistics 15(2). 197–222. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. Metaphor in American Sign Language. Washington D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue