Cover not available

Article published In: Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 33:2 (2020) ► pp.562–587

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

La red polisémica de negro

La metonimia conceptual como estrategia clave de extensión y conexión semánticas

 | Universidad Católica de Valencia

Article language: Spanish

Published online: 10 February 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.18028.sot
Resumen
El principal objetivo del artículo es describir el carácter polisémico del término cromático español negro y presentar esta unidad léxica como una categoría radial constituida por diferentes sentidos relacionados entre sí, así como también destacar el papel protagonista de la metonimia tanto en la motivación como en la conexión de los sentidos. El estudio se estructura de la siguiente manera: (i) exposición de las principales características de la semántica cognitiva y su concepción de la polisemia (ii) descripción de la motivación de cada una de las extensiones semánticas asociadas al término cromático, y (iii) trazado de la red radial del término negro que lo estructura como categoría polisémica y presentación de la relación que se establece entre ellas a partir de la metonimia y la metáfora. Para llevar a cabo la investigación se ha aplicado una metodología basada en corpus que permite obtener muestras de uso real del término cromático, así como acceder a la información lingüística y contextual que interviene en la activación y distinción de sentidos. En cuanto a la motivación y relación entre ellos, el estudio se realiza de acuerdo a la TCMM.
Abstract
The polysemic network of negro : Conceptual metonymy as a key strategy for semantic extension and connection
The main aim of this study is to describe the color term negro as a polysemic unit and to show it as a radial category containing different meanings related among them, as well as to highlight the prominence of metonymy in the motivation and the relation among senses. The article is structured as follows: (i) exposition of the main characteristics of cognitive semantics and conceptual polysemy, (ii) description of the motivation of different meanings related to negro and (iii) organization of the radial network of negro as a polysemic category and description of the role of metonymy and metaphor in the relationship among meanings. In order to carry out the study a corpus-based methodology is applied. This allows us to obtain usage-based events of the color term negro as well as to access the cotextual and contextual information that intervene in the activation and distinction of senses. In terms of the motivation and the relationship among them, the study is carried out according to the TCMM.
Article outline
  • 1.Introducción
  • 2.Metodología
  • 3.La motivación de las extensiones semánticas de negro
    • 3.1Sentidos motivados por la metonimia del tipo todo-parte categoría por miembro de la categoría>negro por tonalidad específica de negro
    • 3.2Sentidos motivados por la metonimia del tipo parte-todo propiedad saliente de una entidad por toda la entidad>negro como propiedad saliente de una entidad por toda la entidad
    • 3.3Metonimias parte-parte: negro como efecto por causa y negro como propiedad de una entidad por propiedad concomitante de la entidad
      • 3.3.1Sentidos motivados por la metonimia negro como efecto por causa
      • 3.3.2Metonimia propiedad de una entidad por propiedad concomitante de la entidad >negro como propiedad de una entidad por propiedad concomitante de la entidad
  • 4.La red radial de negro
  • 5.Conclusiones
  • Notas
  • Referencias
References (61)
Referencias
Atkins, B. T. S. (1987). Semantic ID tags: corpus evidence for dictionary senses. En Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of the UW Centre for the New Oxford English Dictionary, 17–36.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barcelona, A. (Ed.) (2000). Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within cognitive linguistics: An update. En R. Dirven y R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 207–77). Berlin and Nueva York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Metonymy in cognitive linguistics. An analysis and a few modest proposals. En H. Cuyckens, Th. Berg, R. Dirven y K. U. Panther (Eds.), Motivation in language: Studies in honor of Günter Radden (pp. 223–55). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). The Multilevel Operation of Metonymy in Grammar and Discourse, with Particular Attention to Metonymyc Chains. En F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza y S. Peña Cervel (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Internal Dynamics and Interdisciplinary Interaction (pp. 313–352). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Motivation of construction meaning and form. The roles of metonymy and inference. En K. U. Panther, L. L. Thornburg y A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp. 363–401). Amsterdam and Filadelfia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Reviewing the properties of metonymy as a technical construct, with particular attention to the view of metonymy as a prototype category. En R. Benczes, A. Barcelona y F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds), Defining Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics. Towards a Consensus View (pp. 7–57). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). La metonimia conceptual. En I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano y J. Valenzuela (Eds.), Lingüística cognitiva (pp. 123–146). Barcelona: Anthropos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barnden, J. (2010). Metaphor and metonymy. Making their connections more slippery. Cognitive Linguistics, 21(1), 1–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Benczes, R., Barcelona, A., y Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. (Eds) (2011). Defining Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics. Towards a Consensus View. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brugman, C. (1981). Story of Over: Polysemy, Semantics, and the Structure of the Lexicon. Nueva York: Garland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2002/1993). The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. En R. Dirven y R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast (pp. 161–205). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W., y Cruse, D. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dirven, R. (2003). Metonymy and metaphor: different mental strategies of conceptualisation [1993]. En R. Dirven y R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast (pp. 75–112). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, V., y Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: an introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G. (1994). Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1997). Mapping in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, 61, 222–254.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., y Atkins, B. T. S. (2000). Describing Polysemy: The Case of ‘Crawl’. En Y. Ravin y C. Leacock (Eds.), Polysemy. Theoretical and Computational Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D. (1993). Vagueness’s puzzles, polysemy’s vagaries. Cognitive Linguistics, 4(3), 223–272. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goossens, L. (2002/1990). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistics action. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(3), 323–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th. (2006). Corpus based-methods and cognitive semantics: The many meanings of to run. En S. Th. Gries y A. Stefanowitsch (Eds.), Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-Based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis (pp. 57–100). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th., y Divjak, D. S. (2009). Behavioral profiles: a corpus-based approach towards semantic analysis. En V. Evans y S. Pourcel (Eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics (pp. 57–75). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (1999). Polysemy and metaphor in perception verbs: Across linguistic study. Tesis doctoral. Edimburgo: Universidad de Edimburgo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). El cómo y el porqué de la polisemia de los verbos de percepción. En C. Molina, M. Blanco, J. Marín, A. L. Rodríguez, M. Romano (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics in Spain at the turn of the century / La Lingüística Cognitiva en España en el cambio de siglo (pp. 213–28). Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., y Valenzuela, J. (2012). Lingüística cognitiva. Barcelona: Anthropos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind. The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2000). Metaphor and Emotion. Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). Metaphor in culture. Universality and variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z., y Radden, G. (1998). Metonymy: developing a cognitive linguistics view. Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 37–77. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., y Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., y Kövecses, Z. (1987). The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English. En D. Holland y N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought (pp. 195–221). Nueva York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanfors University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1991). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume II: Descriptive Applications. Stanford, CA: Stanfors Universitu Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin and Nueva York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Littlemore, J. (2015). Metonymy. Hidden Shortcuts in Language, Thought and Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moliner, M. (2007). Diccionario de uso del español (21 vols.). Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peirsman, Y., y Geeraerts, D. (2006). Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(3), 269–316. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Philip, G. (2003). Connotation and Collocation: A Corpus-Based Investigation of Color Words In English and Italian. Tesis doctoral. Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Connotative meaning in English and Italian Colour-Word Metaphors. Metaphorik, 101, 59–93.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Radden, G. (2000). How metonymic are metaphors? En A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. A Cognitive Perspective (pp. 93–108). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Radden, G., y Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. En K. U. Panther y G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought (pp. 17–59). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Real Academia Española. Diccionario de la lengua española (23ª ed.). Disponible en [URL]
Rosch, E. (1973). On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. En T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1041, 193–233.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1978). Principles of categorization. En E. Rosch y B. B. Lloyd, Cognition and categorization (pp. 27–48). Hillsdale: NJ Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rozin, P., Millman, L., y Nemeroff, C. (1986). Operation of the laws of sympathetic magic in disgust and other domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 501, 703. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. (2000). The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. En A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. A Cognitive Perspective (pp. 109–132). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). High level cognitive models: In search a unified framework for inferential and grammatical behavior. En K. Kosecki (Ed.), Perspectives on Metonymy (pp. 11–30). Frnkfurt/Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F., y Miral Uson, R. (2007). High level metaphor and metonymy in meaning construction. En G. Radden, K. M. Köpcke, T. Berg y P. Siemund (Eds.), Aspects of meaning construction (pp. 33–49). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. (2011). Metonymy and cognitive operations. En R. Benczes, A. Barcelona y F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds), Defining Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics. Towards a Consensus View (pp. 103–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
.
Seco, M., Andrés, O., y Ramos, G. (2004). Diccionario fraseológico documentado del español actual. Locuciones y modismos españoles. Madrid: Santillana.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sherman, G. D., y Clore, G. L. (2009). The color of sin: white and black are perceptual symbols of moral purity and pollution. Psychological Science, 201, 1019–1021. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Soto Nieto, A., y Barcelona, A. (2018). Principales patrones metonímicos en las extensiones semánticas de los términos cromáticos en español. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 751, 269–290. [URL],
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tuggy, D. (1999). Linguistic Evidence for Polysemy in the Mind: A response to William Croft and Dominiek Sandra. Cognitive Linguistics, 101, 343–368.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ullmann, S. (1962). Semántica. Introducción a la ciencia del significado. Madrid: Aguilar.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. New York: The MacMillan Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zohng, Ch. B., y Liljenquist, K. (2006). Washing away your sins: Threatened morality and physical cleansing. Science, 3131, 1451–1452. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Yuan, Guorong & Yi Sun
2023. A bibliometric study of metaphor research and its implications (2010–2020). Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 41:3 ► pp. 227 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 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