Part of
Aspects of Meaning ConstructionEdited by Günter Radden, Klaus-Michael Köpcke, Thomas Berg and Peter Siemund
[Not in series 136] 2007
► pp. 33–49
Edited by Günter Radden, Klaus-Michael Köpcke, Thomas Berg and Peter Siemund
[Not in series 136] 2007
► pp. 33–49
High-level metaphor and metonymy in meaning construction
This chapter addresses the problem of meaning construction in grammar from the point of view of high-level metaphor and metonymy. We argue that meaning construction, in the sense given to this term by Panther (2005), is essentially an inferential activity whether at the level of so-called pragmatic meaning (e.g. implicature derivation, illocutionary meaning) or when dealing with core grammar phenomena, especially conversion processes and constructional alternation, which we explore within the domain of transitivity. In our study we are able to find high-level metaphor and metonymy at the basis of some of these grammatical processes. We also observe that the same principles and conceptual patterns (e.g. metaphor-metonymy interaction and metonymic chaining) that constrain metaphorical and metonymic activity at other levels of analysis are operational at the grammatical level too.
Cited by (51)
Cited by 51 other publications
Brdar, Mario, Rita Brdar-Szabó & Daler Zayniev
2024. Metonymic layers in proverbs. In Proverbs within Cognitive Linguistics [Cognitive Linguistic Studies in Cultural Contexts, 16], ► pp. 40 ff. 
Franceschi, Daniele
2024. From the Reflexive to the Middle Construction: What is ‘In-Between’? a Comparison Between English and Italian. In Constructional and Cognitive Explorations of Contrastive Linguistics, ► pp. 71 ff.
Huelva Unternbäumen, Enrique
2024. Usos temporales de construcciones gramaticales con verbos de movimiento con dirección inherente: Proyecciones metafóricas y restricciones cognitivo-semánticas en la lengua española. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 17:1 ► pp. 137 ff.
Pejić Bach, Mirjana, Tanja Kamenjarska, Sarwar Khawaja, Fayyaz Hussain Qureshi & Vasja Roblek
2024. Conceptual Metaphors in Linguistics and Information Science and Their Role in the Great Reset. In Great Reset—Opportunity or Threat? [Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics, ], ► pp. 53 ff.
DESAGULIER, GUILLAUME & PHILIPPE MONNERET
2023. Cognitive Linguistics and a Usage‐Based Approach to the Study of Semantics and Pragmatics. In The Handbook of Usage‐Based Linguistics, ► pp. 31 ff.
Khatin-Zadeh, Omid, Jiehui Hu, Hassan Banaruee & Fernando Marmolejo-Ramos
2023. How emotions are metaphorically embodied: measuring hand and head action strengths of typical emotional states. Cognition and Emotion 37:3 ► pp. 486 ff.
Zhou, Siruo, Dan Xiong, Tongquan Zhou & Ping Pang
2023. On the Novel Chinese Modifier-Head Construction
Shejian Shang de X
: An Analysis of Meaning Construction. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics 46:3 ► pp. 438 ff.
Brdar, Mario & Rita Brdar-Szabó
2022. Targetting metonymic targets. In Figurative Thought and Language in Action [Figurative Thought and Language, 16], ► pp. 59 ff.
Dąbrowska, Anna
2022. Anger Is a Potent Ally. The Interplay of Metaphor, Metonymy and Image Schema. In Concepts, Discourses, and Translations [Second Language Learning and Teaching, ], ► pp. 3 ff.
Głogowska, Anna & Julia Ostanina-Olszewska
2022. Conceptualization of emotions in the novel The Slynxby Tatyana Tolstaya. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 18:2 ► pp. 267 ff.
Martín‐Gascón, Beatriz
2022. Why in Spanish “Nos Ponemos Contentos” But not “Satisfechos”: A Cognitive‐Linguistic Review of The “Change‐of‐State Verb Ponerse + Adjective” Construction*. Studia Linguistica 76:2 ► pp. 552 ff.
Iza Erviti, Aneider
2021. Introduction. In Discourse Constructions in English [Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics, ], ► pp. 1 ff.
Jin, Shengxi, Zhengjun Lin & Todd Oakley
2021. Translating Metaphtonymy: Exploring Trainee Translators' Translation Approaches and Underlying Factors. Frontiers in Psychology 12
Soto Nieto, Almudena
2020. La red polisémica denegro. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 33:2 ► pp. 562 ff.
Chen, Xianglan, Fang Li, Yachao Duan & Yahui Duan
2019. The length of preceding context influences metonymy processing. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 17:1 ► pp. 243 ff.
Pedrazzini, Ana & Nora Scheuer
2019. Modal functioning of rhetorical resources in selected multimodal cartoons. Semiotica 2019:230 ► pp. 275 ff.
Sweetser, Eve, Oana David & Elise Stickles
2019. MetaNet. In Metaphor and Metonymy in the Digital Age [Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication, 8], ► pp. 23 ff.
Blanco-Carrión, Olga
2018. Conventionality and linguistic domain(s) involved in the characterization of metonymies (for the creation of a detailed typology of metonymy). In Conceptual metonymy [Human Cognitive Processing, 60], ► pp. 55 ff.
Hernández-Gomariz, Isabel
2018. Analysis of metonymic triggers, metonymic chaining, and patterns of interaction with metaphor and with other metonymies as part of the metonymy database in the Córdoba project. In Conceptual metonymy [Human Cognitive Processing, 60], ► pp. 75 ff.
Athanasiadou, Angeliki
2017. Chapter 6. If-clauses and their figurative basis. In Studies in Figurative Thought and Language [Human Cognitive Processing, 56], ► pp. 152 ff.
Brdar-Szabó, Rita & Mario Brdar
2017.
Doing Tsukahara and the Epley in a cross-linguistic perspective. In Constructing families of constructions [Human Cognitive Processing, 58], ► pp. 77 ff.
Brdar-Szabó, Rita & Mario Brdar
2021. Metonymic indeterminacy and metalepsis. In Figurative Language - Intersubjectivity and Usage [Figurative Thought and Language, 11], ► pp. 175 ff.
Brdar-Szabó, Rita & Mario Brdar
2023. Cultural models mediating between visual sensation and semiotic systems, exemplified on visual, alpha-pictorial and verbal-gestural communication. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 10:2 ► pp. 367 ff.
Paszenda, Joanna
2017. Motivation behind the extended senses of the Polish ditransitive construction. In Constructing families of constructions [Human Cognitive Processing, 58], ► pp. 241 ff.
Littlemore, Jeannette & Caroline Tagg
2016. Metonymy and Text Messaging: A Framework for Understanding Creative Uses of Metonymy. Applied Linguistics ► pp. amw018 ff.
RUIZ DE MENDOZA-IBÁÑEZ, FRANCISCO & ALBA LUZONDO-OYÓN
2016. Figurative and non-figurative motion in the expression of result in English. Language and Cognition 8:1 ► pp. 32 ff.
Galera Masegosa, Alicia & Aneider Iza Erviti
2015. Conceptual complexity in metaphorical resemblance operations revisited. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 28:1 ► pp. 97 ff.
Mairal-Usón, Ricardo
2015. Constructional meaning representation within a knowledge engineering framework. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 13:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Negro Alousque, Isabel
2015. Implicational Constructions in English. English Studies 96:4 ► pp. 458 ff.
Shenk, Elaine
2015. El engañolyel cuco: metaphors in the nexus between language and status in Puerto Rico. Language and Intercultural Communication 15:3 ► pp. 324 ff.
Barcelona, Antonio
2014. Bogusław Bierwiaczonek, Metonymy in language, thought and brain. Sheffield: Equinox, 2013. Pp. iv + 291.. Journal of Linguistics 50:3 ► pp. 712 ff.
Barcelona, Antonio
2019. The tripartite typology and the Córdoba Metonymy Database. In Metaphor and Metonymy in the Digital Age [Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication, 8], ► pp. 49 ff.
Barcelona, Antonio
2024. Trends in cognitive-linguistic research on metonymy. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 11:1 ► pp. 51 ff.
Guerra García, Fátima
2014. The interaction of non-linguistic
and linguistic knowledge in FunGramKB. In Language Processing and Grammars [Studies in Language Companion Series, 150], ► pp. 339 ff.
Luzondo Oyón, Alba
2014. Constraining factors on the family of resultative constructions. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 12:1 ► pp. 30 ff.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José & María de los Ángeles Gómez González
2014. Constructing discourse and discourse constructions. In Theory and Practice in Functional-Cognitive Space [Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics, 68], ► pp. 295 ff.
Yoon, Jiyoung
2014. Chapter 2. The role of constructional meanings in novel verb-noun compounds in Spanish. In Romance Perspectives on Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 15], ► pp. 37 ff.
Kövecses, Zoltán
2013. The Metaphor–Metonymy Relationship: Correlation Metaphors Are Based on Metonymy. Metaphor and Symbol 28:2 ► pp. 75 ff.
Kövecses, Zoltán
2020. Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory,
Iza Ervitia, Aneider
2012. RESEMBLANCE OPERATIONS AND CONCEPTUAL COMPLEXY IN ANIMAL METAPHORS. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 7:1
Del Campo Martínez, Nuria
2011. A LEXICAL CONSTRUCTIONAL APPROACH TO ILLOCUTIONARY CONSTRUCTIONS: THE CASE OF REQUESTS. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 0:6
Dube, Siphiwe Ignatius
2011. “Hate Me Now”. Religious Studies and Theology 29:2 ► pp. 171 ff.
Gibbs, Raymond W.
2011. Evaluating Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Discourse Processes 48:8 ► pp. 529 ff.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José & Lorena Pérez Hernández
2011. The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: Myths, Developments and Challenges. Metaphor and Symbol 26:3 ► pp. 161 ff.
Galera Masegosa, Alicia
2010. DISCOURSE MARKERS IN THE LEXICAL CONSTRUCTIONAL MODEL: THE CASE OF THE ‘SO WHAT X’ CONSTRUCTION. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 5:1
Galera Masegosa, Alicia
2011. DISCOURSE MARKERS IN THE LEXICAL CONSTRUCTIONAL MODEL: THE CASE OF THE ‘SO WHAT X’ CONSTRUCTION. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 0:6
Felices Lago, Ángel & María Enriqueta Cortés de los Ríos
2009. A COGNITIVE-AXIOLOGICAL APPROACH TO PRINT ECO-ADVERTISEMENTS IN THE ECONOMIST: THE ENERGY SECTOR UNDER SCRUTINY. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 4:1
Otal Campo, Jose-Luis
2009. Review of Vega Moreno (2007): Creativity and Convention: The pragmatics of everyday figurative speech. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 7 ► pp. 334 ff.
[no author supplied]
2007. Book reviews. Intercultural Pragmatics 4:3
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 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.