Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Online

99,00 € / $149.00*

* Prices subject to change. Shipping costs will be added if applicable.
Publication Date:
October 2006
ISSN:
1613-3641
DOI:
10.1515/COG.2006.007

See all formats and pricing

Online
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 99.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 149.00 *
Print
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 480.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 721.00 *
Print + Online
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 576.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 866.00 *
*Prices subject to change. Shipping costs will be added if applicable.

Editor-in-Chief: Dabrowska, Ewa

4 Issues per year

Increased IMPACT FACTOR 2011: 1.00
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.624
Rank 41 out of 161 in category Linguistics in the 2011 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Social Sciences Edition

ERIH category 2011: INT1

VolumeIssuePage

Issues

Metonymy as a prototypical category

1Quantitative Lexicology and Variational Linguistics

2Quantitative Lexicology and Variational Linguistics

Citation Information: Cognitive Linguistics. Volume 17, Issue 3, Pages 269–316, ISSN (Online) 1613-3641, ISSN (Print) 0936-5907, DOI: 10.1515/COG.2006.007, October 2006

Publication History:
Received:
2005-01-10
Accepted:
2005-03-15
Published Online:
2006-10-18

Abstract

A definition of metonymy that has gained some popularity in Cognitive Linguistics contrasts metonymical semantic shifts within a domain or domain matrix with metaphorical shifts that cross domain boundaries. In the past few years, however, this definition of metonymy has become subject to more and more criticism, in the sense that it relies too much on the vague notions of domains or domain matrices to be fully reliable. In this article, we address this problem by focusing on a nonunitary, prototypical definition of contiguity (the concept that used to be seen as the defining feature of metonymy before Cognitive Linguistics introduced domains and domain matrices). On the basis of the traditional pre-structuralist literature on metonymy, we identify a large number of typical metonymical patterns, and show that they can be classified in terms of the type of contiguity they are motivated by. We argue that metonymies, starting from spatial part-whole contiguity as the core of the category, can be plotted against three dimensions: strength of contact (going from part-whole containment over physical contact to adjacency without contact), boundedness (involving an extension of the part-whole relationship towards unbounded wholes and parts), and domain (with shifts from the spatial to the temporal, the spatio-temporal and the categorial domain).

Keywords: metonymy; prototypicality

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.