In:Aspects of Meaning Construction
Edited by Günter Radden, Klaus-Michael Köpcke, Thomas Berg and Peter Siemund
[Not in series 136] 2007
► pp. 19–32
Experiential tests of figurative meaning construction
Published online: 11 April 2007
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.136.04gib
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.136.04gib
One of the major claims of recent cognitive linguistics research is that metonymy constitutes a fundamental scheme of human cognition and is not just a rhetorical device employed for specific communicative purposes. The work of Klaus-Uwe Panther and others has suggested that certain metonymies are natural inference schemes operating during many aspects of language production and understanding. This chapter explores the relations between cognitive linguistic ideas on conceptual metonymy and recent psycholinguistic experiments examining online meaning construction. I suggest that there is no direct evidence supporting the idea that conceptual metonymies are immediately recruited during metonymic language processing, but that this gap is due to the difficulties in testing whether very abstract schemes are accessed during online meaning construction. Nonetheless, there exists various experimental support for other cognitive linguistic claims about metonymy, including the importance of metonymy for highlighting certain aspects of discourse topics, the interaction of metonymy and grammatical structure in sentence comprehension, and the idea that conceptual metonymies may interact with pragmatic information to constrain specific interpretations of metonymic utterances.
Cited by (13)
Cited by 13 other publications
Barcelona, Antonio
2024. Trends in cognitive-linguistic research on metonymy. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 11:1 ► pp. 51 ff.
Boieblan, Mostafa
2024. Grounded cognition and the role of musical expertise in shaping synesthetic metaphors among a music speech
community. International Journal of Language and Culture 11:2 ► pp. 180 ff.
Soriano, Cristina & Javier Valenzuela
Naciscione, Anita
2020. Multimodal creativity in figurative use. In Performing metaphoric creativity across modes and contexts [Figurative Thought and Language, 7], ► pp. 249 ff.
Barcelona, Antonio, Olga Blanco-Carrión & Rossella Pannain
de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José Ruiz
2017. Cognitive modeling and irony. In Irony in language use and communication [Figurative Thought and Language, 1], ► pp. 179 ff.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José
2017. Conceptual complexes in cognitive modeling. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 30:1 ► pp. 299 ff.
Musolff, Andreas
2015. Dehumanizing metaphors in UK immigrant debates in press and online media. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 3:1 ► pp. 41 ff.
Musolff, Andreas
2017. Irony and sarcasm in follow-ups of metaphorical slogans. In Irony in language use and communication [Figurative Thought and Language, 1], ► pp. 127 ff.
Winter, Bodo & Teenie Matlock
Tendahl, Markus & Raymond W. Gibbs
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 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.
