Cover not available
Article published In:
Living Metaphors and Metonymies
Edited by Mario Brdar and Rita Brdar-Szabó
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 20:1] 2022
► pp. 156–171

Metonymic hitting

 | Hamburg University
The chapter is concerned with the metonymic use of hit in expressions such as hit the road. The metonymic nature underlying these expressions has already been noticed by Ruhl (1989) and Hirtle (2013). The present study focuses on the mapping of the literal use of hit as the metonymic source to its target. The metonymic source is characterized by the use of hit as an Achievement verb in sentences such as The ball hit the window. The metonymic target in hit the road comprises two events, motion to a goal and a subsequent action. The relevant part of meaning resides in the unexpressed action. The action is inferred from the close relationship between a type of thing and potential actions afforded by the thing. In Let’s hit the road, the type noun road affords metonymic “routes” to three motivated kinds of actions: ‘travelling’, ‘beginning a journey’ and ‘leaving’.
Keywords: Achievement verb, affordance theory, complex event, force dynamics, metonymic route
Article outline
  • 1.Background
  • 2.Use of hit in simple sentences describing simple events
  • 3.The Achievement verb hit in force-dynamic scenarios
  • 4. Hit in complex events describing actions
    • 4.1The hit the Ntype-construction
    • 4.2Multiple senses of hit-expressions
    • 4.3Actions afforded by types of things
    • 4.4Metonymic routes leading to the senses of hit the road
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 24 May 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00105.rad
References (15)
References
Barcelona, A. (2009). Motivation of construction meaning and form: The roles of metonymy and inference. In K.-U. Panther, L. L. Thornburg & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp. 363–401). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Reviewing the properties and prototype structure of metonymy. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona & F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza (Eds.), Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus view (pp. 7–57). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Metonymy. In E. Dąbrowska & E. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 143–167). Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Ch. (1970). The grammar of hitting and breaking , In R. A. Jacobs & P. S. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar (pp. 120–133). Waltham, MA: Ginn & Co.Google Scholar
Gibson, J. J. (2014). The ecological approach to visual perception. New York: Psychological Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, S. R. (1966). Families of idioms in American English. Unpublished talk, Annual Meeting of LSA.Google Scholar
Hirtle, W. (2013). Making sense out of meaning: An essay in lexical semantics. Québec: McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (1989). Emotion concepts. New York & Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. (1991). Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol II1. Descriptive application. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L. L. (2009). Introduction: On figuration in grammar. In K.-U. Panther, L. L. Thornburg & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp. 1–44). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radden, G. (2009). Generic reference in English: A metonymic and conceptual blending analysis. In K.-U Panther, L. L. Thornburg & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp. 199–228). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruhl, Ch. (1989). On monosemy: A study in linguistic semantics. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics, Volume I1, Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar