Cover not available
Article published In:
Metaphor and the Social World
Vol. 8:1 (2018) ► pp.1–24

Text metaphtonymy

The interplay of metonymy and metaphor in discourse

 | University of Westminster
This article starts by looking at the various ways metonymic and metaphoric thinking, as independent phenomena, organize text at discourse level. The literature on metaphor in discourse is classified under three broad categories, ‘metaphor clusters’, ‘metaphor chains’ and ‘extended metaphor’, while the less extensive body of research on metonymy in discourse is analyzed into parallel categories, ‘metonymy clusters’, ‘metonymy chains’ and ‘extended metonymy’. The article goes on to look at the ways in which metonymy-in-discourse and metaphor-in-discourse phenomena combine in making meaning at text level. The interplay of metonymy and metaphor in discourse, referred to here as ‘text metaphtonymy’, is explored under headings adapted from Goossens (1990), namely, ‘metaphor within metonymy’ and ‘metonymy within metaphor’. The ways in which metonymy and metaphor combine at discourse level are shown to be varied and intricate. This has implications for applied linguists working with text. The direction further work in this area might take is indicated.
Keywords: chains, clusters, extended metaphor, extended metonymy, discourse, metaphor, metaphtonymy, metonymy, text
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Metaphor in discourse
    • 2.1Metaphor clusters
    • 2.2Metaphor chains
    • 2.3Extended metaphor
  • 3.Metonymy in discourse
    • 3.1Metonymy clusters
    • 3.2Metonymy chains
    • 3.3Extended metonymy
  • 4.Text metaphtonymy
    • 4.1Metonymy within metaphor
    • 4.2Metaphor within metonymy
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 7 May 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.16011.den
References (61)
References
Al-Sharafi, A. (2004). Textual metonymy: A semiotic approach. Basingstoke: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barcelona, A. (Ed.). (2000). Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Benczes, R., Barcelona, A., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F. (Eds.). (2011). Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus view. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biernacka, E. (2013). A discourse dynamics investigation of metonymy in talk. Unpublished PhD thesis. Milton Keyes: The Open University.Google Scholar
Brdar-Szabó, R., & Brdar, M. (2011). What do metonymic chains reveal about the nature of metonymy? In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona & F. Ruiz de Mendoza (Eds.), Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus view (pp. 217–248). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L. (1999). Identifying and describing metaphor in spoken discourse data. In L. Cameron & G. Low (Eds.), Researching and applying metaphor (pp. 105–132). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
(2008). Metaphor and talk. In R. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 197–211). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). The discourse dynamics framework for metaphor. In L. Cameron & R. Maslen (Eds.), Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and humanities (pp. 77–94). London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Cameron, L., & Deignan, A. (2006). The emergence of metaphor in discourse. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 671–690. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L., & Low, G. (2004). Figurative variation in episodes of educational talk and text. European Journal of English Studies, 78(3), 355–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L., Low, G., & Maslen, R. (2010). Finding systematicity in metaphor use. In L. Cameron & R. Maslen (Eds.), Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and humanities (pp. 116–146). London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Cameron, L., & Maslen, R. (Eds.). (2010). Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and humanities. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Cameron, L., Maslen, R., Todd, Z., Maule, J., Stratton, P., & Stanley, N. (2009). The discourse dynamics approach to metaphor and metaphor-led analysis. Metaphor and Symbol, 24(2), 63–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L., & Stelma, J. (2004). Metaphor clusters in discourse. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 107–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E. (2014). Figurative language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Darian, S. (2000). The role of figurative language in introductory science texts. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 163–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deignan, A. (2005a). A corpus linguistic perspective on the relationship between metonymy and metaphor. Style, 39(1), 72–91.Google Scholar
(2005b). Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deignan, A., Littlemore, J., & Semino, E. (2013). Figurative language, genre and register. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Denroche, C. (2015). Metonymy and language: A new theory of linguistic processing. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dirven, R. (2002). Metonymy and metaphor: Different mental strategies of conceptualisation. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 75–111). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dirven, R., & Pörings, R. (Eds.). (2003). Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forceville, C. (2008). Metaphor in pictures and multimodal representations. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 462–482). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009). Metonymy in visual and audiovisual discourse. In E. Ventola & A. Guijarro (Eds.), The world told and the world shown: Issues in multisemiotics (pp. 56–74). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language and understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1999). Speaking and thinking with metonymy. In K. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 61–76). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goatly, A. (1997). The language of metaphors. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goossens, L. (1990). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(3), 323–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 349–377). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Handl, S. (2011). Salience and the conventionality of metonymies. In S. Handl & H. Schmid (Eds.), Windows to the mind: Metaphor, metonymy and conceptual blending. (pp. 85–114). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hidalgo, L., & Kraljevic, B. (2011). Multimodal metonymy and metaphor as complex discourse resources for creativity in ICT advertising discourse. In F. Gonzálvez-García, S. Peña, & L. Pérez (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy revisited beyond the contemporary theory of metaphor. Special issue of the Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 153–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M. (2010). Chained metonymies. In J. Newman & S. Rice (Eds.), Experimental and empirical methods in cognitive functional research (pp. 181–194). Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. (1956). Two aspects of language and two types of aphasic disturbances. In R. Jakobson & M. Halle, Fundamentals of language (pp. 53–82). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kimmel, M. (2010). Why we mix metaphors (and mix them well): Discourse coherence, conceptual metaphor, and beyond. Journal of Pragmatics, 421, 97–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Optimizing the analysis of metaphor in discourse. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 10(1), 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koller, V. (2003). Metaphor clusters, metaphor chains: Analyzing the multifunctionality of metaphor in text. metaphorik. de, 51, 115–134.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Littlemore, J. (2015). Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lodge, D. (1977). The modes of modern writing: Metaphor, metonymy and the typology of modern literature. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Low, G. (2008). Metaphor and positioning in academic book reviews. In M. Zanotto, L. Cameron & M. Cavalcanti (Eds.), Confronting metaphor in use: An applied linguistic approach (pp. 79–100). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Musolff, A. (2000). Political imagery of Europe: A house without exit doors. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 21(3). 216–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panther, K., & Radden, G. (Eds.). (1999). Metonymy in language and thought. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panther, K., & Thornburg, L. (Eds.). (2003). Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panther, K., Thornburg, L., & Barcelona, A. (Eds.). (2009). Metonymy and metaphor in grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Sobrino, P. (2016). Multimodal metaphor and metonymy in advertising: A corpus-based account. Metaphor and Symbol, 31(2), 73–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reddy, M. (1993). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed.) (pp. 164–201). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F., & Diez Velasco, O. (2002). Patterns of conceptual interaction. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 489–532). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Semino, E., Deignan, A., & Littlemore, J. (2013). Metaphor, genre, and recontextualization. Metaphor and Symbol, 28(1), 41–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seto, K. (1999). Distinguishing metonymy from synecdoche. In K. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 91–120). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, G. (2002). Identifying metaphor in language: A cognitive approach. Style, 36(3) 386–407.Google Scholar
(2007). Finding metaphor in grammar and usage. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). Why figurative thought and language are not enough: On the crucial role of metaphor in communication. Paper given at 1st International Symposium on Figurative Thought and Language. April 25–26, 2014, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.
Steen, G., Dorst, A., Berenike Herrmann, J., Kaal, A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S. (2006). Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stirling, L. (1996). Metonymy and anaphora. In W. de Mulder & L. Tasmowski (Eds.), Coherence and anaphora (pp. 69–88). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cited by (15)

Cited by 15 other publications

Schröder, Ulrike
2024. “Open and Closed People” as and in containers: Breaking Down Cultural Conceptualizations in Multimodal Communication. In The Handbook of Cultural Linguistics [Springer Handbooks in Languages and Linguistics, ], ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Shu, Jing, Gui Wang & Caihua Xu
2024. An exploration of CFL learners’ metaphor use in second language writing: Effects of genre and topic. Journal of Second Language Writing 66 ► pp. 101162 ff. DOI logo
Yang, Kaiwen & Ya Sun
2024. To change or not to change: Transformations of ecological metaphors in Chinese government microblogs. Discourse & Society DOI logo
Gibbs, Raymond W.
2023. Pragmatic complexity in metaphor interpretation. Cognition 237 ► pp. 105455 ff. DOI logo
Heritage, Frazer
2023. Positioning incels. In Incels and Ideologies [Palgrave Studies in Language, Gender and Sexuality, ], ► pp. 41 ff. DOI logo
Heritage, Frazer
2023. Language, ethnicity, race, and racism. In Incels and Ideologies [Palgrave Studies in Language, Gender and Sexuality, ], ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Lu, Qiuyun
2021. “Desire Is Like a Dreadful Monster”: Analysis of Extended Metaphors in L2 Argumentative Essays by Chinese Learners of English. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Shevchenko, Iryna & Vira Shastalo
2021. The Conceptual Metaphor of Modesty in English and Ukrainian. Cognitive Studies | Études cognitives :21 DOI logo
Fontaine, Lise
2020. A textual perspective on referential metonymy. Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada :70 ► pp. 199 ff. DOI logo
Bogetić, Ksenija
2019. Discursive metaphorical frames in newspaper texts on language change. Metaphor and the Social World 9:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Bogetić, Ksenija
2023. Race and the language of incels. English Today 39:2 ► pp. 89 ff. DOI logo
Denroche, Charles
2019. Employing cognitive metonymy theory in the analysis of semantic relations between source and target text in translation. Metaphor and the Social World 9:2 ► pp. 177 ff. DOI logo
Denroche, Charles
2021. The Three Grammars and the sign. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 19:1 ► pp. 206 ff. DOI logo
Denroche, Charles
2023. Translating figurative language. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 10:1 ► pp. 173 ff. DOI logo
Denroche, Charles
2024. Drawing as a Tool in Metaphor-Led Discourse Analysis. Metaphor and Symbol 39:2 ► pp. 132 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 december 2024. 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.