Going beyond metaphtonymy: Metaphoric and metonymic complexes in phrasal verb interpretation
Main Article Content
Abstract
Author/s
Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
Alicia Galera-Masegosa
University of La Rioja, Spain
ABSTRACT
A metaphor can combine with another metaphor, or a metonymy with another metonymy, into a single meaning unit, thus giving rise to either a metaphorical or a metonymic amalgam. The combination of a metaphor and a metonymy, as discussed in Goossens (1990) and Ruiz de Mendoza and Díez (2002), gives rise to so-called “metaphtonymy”. Amalgams and metaphtonymy are cases of conceptual complexes. Several such complexes have been identified in previous studies (e.g. Ruiz de Mendoza and Díez 2002, Ruiz de Mendoza and Mairal 2011). Here we revisit such studies and postulate the existence of metaphoric chains as an additional case of metaphoric complex in connection to the semantic analysis of phrasal verbs. Metaphoric chains, unlike amalgams (Ruiz de Mendoza and Mairal 2011), do not involve integrating the conceptual structure of the combined metaphors. Instead, metaphoric chains involve a mapping sequence in which the target domain of a first metaphoric mapping constitutes the source domain of a subsequent metaphor.
Downloads
Article Details
References
Brdar, M. 2007. Metonymy in Grammar. Towards Motivating Extensions of Grammatical Categories and Constructions. Osijek: Faculty of Philosophy, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University.
Croft, W. 1993. “The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies”. Cognitive Linguistics, 4, 335–370.
Dirven, R. 2001. “English phrasal verbs: Theory and didactic application”. In Pütz, M., S. Niemeier and R. Dirven (Eds.) Applied Cognitive. Linguistics II: Language Pedagogy. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 3-28.
Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. 1996. “Blending as a central process in grammar”. In Goldberg, A. (Ed.) Conceptual Structure, Discourse, and Language. Stanford: Cambridge University Press, 113-130.
Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. 2002. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
Galera-Masegosa, A. 2010. “A cognitive approach to the analysis of simile-based idiomatic expressions”. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 43, 3-48.
Geeraerts, D. and Peirsman, Y. 2011. “Zones, facets, and prototype-based metonymy”. In Benczes, R., A. arcelona and F.J. Ruiz de Mendoza (Eds.) Defining Metonymy in Cognitive Linguistics: Towards a consensus view. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 89–102.
Gibbs, R. 1994. The Poetics of the Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs R., Bogdonovich, J., Sykes, J. and Barr, D. 1997. “Metaphor in idiom comprehension”. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 141-154.
Goossens, L. 1990. “Metaphtonymy: the interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action”. Cognitive Linguistics, 1 (3), 323-340.
Grady, J. 1997. Foundations of Meaning: Primary Metaphors and Primary Scenes. Ph. D. dissertation, Berkeley: University of California.
Grady, J. 1999. “A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: correlation vs. resemblance”. In Gibbs, R. and G. Steen (Eds.) Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 79-100.
Grady, J. and Johnson, C. 2002. “Converging evidence for the notions of subscene and primary scene”. In Dirven, R. and R. Pörings (Eds.) Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 533-553.
Hampe, B. (2000): “Facing up to the meaning of ‘face up to’: A cognitive semanticopragmatic anaysis of an English verb-particle construction”. In Foolen, A. and F. van der Leek (Eds.) Constructions in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 81-101.
Hidalgo Downing, L. and Kraljevic Mujic, B. 2011. “Multimodal metonymy and metaphor as complex discourse resources for creativity in ICT advertising discourse”. In Gonzálvez-García, F., S. Peña and L. Pérez (Eds.) Metaphor and Metonymy Revisited beyond the Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 153–178.
Kövecses, Z. 1990. Emotion Concepts. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Kövecses, Z. 2000. Metaphor and Emotion: Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kövecses, Z. 2002. Metaphor. A Practical Introduction. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Kövecses, Z. 2005. Metaphor in Culture. Universality and Variation. Cambidge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kövecses, Z. and Radden, G. 1998. “Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view”. Cognitive Linguistics, 9, 37-77.
Kövecses, Z. and Szabó, P. 1996. “Idioms: A view from cognitive semantics”. Applied Linguistics, 17 (3), 326-355.
Kuiper, K. and Everaert, M. 2004. “Limits on the phrase structural configurations of phrasal lexemes”. EUROPHRAS 2000. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag, 257-262.
Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. 1993. “The contemporary theory of metaphor”. In Ortony, A. (Ed.) Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed., Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press, 202-251.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.
Lakoff, G. and Turner, M. 1989. More than Cool Reason. A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Langlotz, A. 2006. Idiomatic Creativity: A Cognitive-Linguistic Model of Idiom-Representation and Idiom-Variation in English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Makkai, A. 1972. Idiom structure in English. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.
Narayanan, S. 1997. Embodiment in Language Understanding: Sensory-Motor Representations for Metaphoric Reasoning about Event Descriptions. Ph. D. dissertation, Departments of Computer Science, Berkeley: University of California.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. 1997. “Metaphor, metonymy and conceptual interaction”. Atlantis, 19, 281 – 295.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. 2000. “The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy”. In Barcelona, A. (Ed.) Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 109-132.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. 2007. “High level cognitive models: In search of a unified framework for inferential and grammatical behavior”. In Kosecki, K. (Ed.) Perspectives on Metonymy. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang, 11-30.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. and Díez, O. 2002. “Patterns of conceptual interaction”. In Dirven, R. and R. Pörings (Eds.) Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 489-532.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. and Díez, O. 2004. “Metonymic motivation in anaphoric reference”. In Radden, G. and K.-U. Panther (Eds.) Studies in Linguistic Motivation. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 293-320.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. and Galera-Masegosa, A. 2012. “Metaphoric and metonymic complexes in phrasal verb interpretation: metaphoric chains”. In Eizaga Rebollar, B. (Ed.) Studies in Cognition and Linguistics. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 161-190.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. and Mairal, R. 2007. “High-level metaphor and metonymy in meaning construction”. In Radden, G., K-M. Köpcke, T. Berg and P. Siemund (Eds.) Aspects of Meaning Construction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 33-51.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. and Mairal, R. 2008. “Levels of description and constraining factors in meaning construction: An introduction to the Lexical Constructional Model”. Folia Linguistica, 42 (2), 355-400.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. and Mairal, R. 2011. “Constraints on syntactic alternation: lexical-constructional subsumption in the Lexical-Constructional Model”. In Guerrero, P. (Ed.) Morphosyntactic Alternations in English. Functional and Cognitive Perspectives. London, UK/Oakville, CT: Equinox, 62-82.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. and Pérez, L. 2001. “Metonymy and the grammar: motivation, constraints and interaction”. Language and Communication, 21 (4), 321-357.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. and Pérez, L. 2003. “Cognitive operations and pragmatic implication”. In Panther, K.-U. and L. Thornburg (Eds.) Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 23-50.
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J. and Pérez, L. 2011. “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: myths, developments and challenges”. Metaphor and Symbol, 26, 161-185.
Taylor, J. 1995. Linguistic Categorization. Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Turner, M. and Fauconnier, G. 2000. “Metaphor, metonymy, and binding” In Barcelona, A. (Ed.) Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 133-145.
Urios-Aparisi, E. 2009. “Interaction of multimodal metaphor and metonymy in TV commercials: Four case studies”. In Forceville, C. and E. Urios-Aparisi (Eds.) Multimodal Metaphor. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 95-118.