The Conceptual Nature And Functions Of Metonymy

Metonymy and metaphor have traditionally been recognized as figures of speech with their theories restricted in the field of rhetoric. Over the past twenty years, cognitive linguists have made a great deal of discoveries in the study of the two tropes. Their theories and findings have brought much impact on the research of the relationship between human cognition and the two figures of thought. In comparison with the vast amount of cognitive researches on metaphor, the studies on metonymy are relatively fewer. Moreover, the theories about the structure, the working mechanism, the cognitive nature and the functions of metonymy are either subjected to metaphor theories or unsystematically put forward. In view of this, the author of the dissertation believes that a comprehensive research on these topics is of great importance.In contrast with the traditional view on metonymy, which claims that metonymy is a figure of speech that operates on the name of things, this paper holds that metonymy is conceptual in nature. Metonymy, no less significant than metaphor, is part of our everyday thinking, grounded in experience, subject to general and systematic cognitive principles and structures our thoughts and actions. Metonymy is claimed, in this paper, to be a cognitive process in which one conceptual entity provides mental access to another entity,with the two entities belonging to the same conceptual space, such as an idealized cognitive model (ICM), a frame, a scenario, and a mental space. Five crucial aspects have been investigated concerning the cognitive view on metonymy: First, what are the ICMs in which metonymy most commonly occurs? Second, what is the conceptual contiguity, given some conceptual structures proposed by some other cognitive linguists, such as frames, scenarios, and mental spaces, besides the ICMs, in which we can interpret the grounding of metonymy? Third, what are the relationships between metonymy and synecdoche, metonymy and metaphor? Fourth, how are those superficially scattered conceptual metonymies classified into coherent systems so that we can categorize diversified metonymic linguistic expressions? Fifth, if the above questions are satisfactorily settled, can we apply this integrated metonymy theory into practice, in botfc the fields of semantics and pragmatics?The first three questions deal with the ultimate conceptual nature of metonymy. The notion of "contiguity" is at the core of most theories of metonymy. Conceptual contiguity is validated as the grounding of metonymy and it can be found in our conceptual structures, such as ICMs, frames, scenarios, and mental spaces. All these conceptual structures in our conceptual system can give rise to contiguous relationships where metonymies are locating. Besides, in order to further clarify the conceptual nature of metonymy, this paper presents a detailed exploration in distinguishing metonymy from metaphor and the interactive relationship in between. A distinction between metonymy and synecdoche is also exhibited.As a result of different angles of metonymic studies, in fact, typologies of metonymy among different researchers lack consistency. The reason is that there lacks an integrated cognitive framework that covers all possible contiguities. According to the cognitive processes where metonymy exists and works, ICMs are used in analyzing the metonymic typologies. Given that our knowledge about the world is organized by structured ICMs, as proposed by Lakoff (1987), which we perceive as wholes with parts, metonymic relationship is proved to appear in two situational configurations: whole ICM and its parts, parts of an ICM. The two configurations can account for various conceptual metonymies that are conventional and entrenched in our language and cognition. Besides the presentation of a cognitive typology of metonymy, some cognitive principles that governthe selection of typical vehicles are discussed as well.The application of the functions of metonymy at both the semantic level and the discourse level is another inter...