Metonymy in Language and Thought. Case Studies. 3301-JF2645
At the level of language, examples of metonymy include expressions such as: "hands" in "all hands on deck!"; "four wheels" in "A perfect set of four wheels for a perfect driver – that would be something!"; and also the statement "Boys will be boys" or the question "Do you have a watch?". Even though analysis of different kinds of linguistic manifestations of metonymy will be of main concern, non-linguistic realizations of metonymy in visual perception will also be considered. Relying on analyses of linguistic as well as non-linguistic examples of metonymy within the framework of cognitive linguistics, the course discusses metonymy as a conceptual process – a "figure of thought", rather than a "figure of speech".
Theoretical issues taken up during the course pertain to developments of conceptual metonymy theory in cognitive linguistics with reference to approaches postulated by: Lakoff and Johnson (1980); Lakoff and Turner (1989); Lakoff (1987); Taylor (1989); Langacker (1993); Radden and Kövecses (1999).
The chief source of data: English.
Main terms and issues:
• cognitive domain and Idealized Cognitive Model (ICM);
• the distinction of metonymic vehicle and metonymic target;
• pictorial and verbo-pictorial manifestations of metonymy in illustrations and drawings;
• linguistic metonymic expression (verbal metonymies) vs. conceptual metonymy;
• comparison of conceptual metonymy and conceptual metaphor;
• types of metonymies;
• systematicity of metonymies;
• functions of metonymy (lexical; discursive; rhetorical; cognitive);
• the role of metonymy in categorization;
• metonymy as a reference-point phenomenon;
• principles for the selection of metonymic vehicle;
• types of metonymy-producing relationships;
• linguistic manipulation by means of metonymy (in advertisements and politics);
• rhetorical effects of metonymy.
Type of course
Mode
Self-reading
Prerequisites (description)
Course coordinators
Learning outcomes
Learning outcomes for students admitted before the academic year 2022/2023:
Upon completing the course students will have:
Knowledge about:
• metonymy in language and thought.
• relationships between conceptual metonymy and metaphor.
Skills that will allow them to:
• analyse metonymic expressions in language (i.e. verbal metonymies) as well as pictorial and verbo-pictorial manifestations of metonymy in, e.g.: illustrations, drawings, cartoons, comics, print advertisements.
Competence that will allow them to:
• develop their ability of critical reading of the literature on the conceptual theory of metonymy.
Education at language level B2+.
Learning outcomes for students admitted after the academic year 2022/23:
KNOWLEDGE
Students know and understand:
- manifestations of conceptual metonymy in language and in the visual mode (e.g. in illustrations, drawings).
- development of conceptual theory of metonymy in cognitive linguistics.
- functions of metonymy in language and thought.
- relationships between conceptual metonymy and metaphor.
SKILLS
Students will be able to:
- analyse metonymic expressions in language (i.e. verbal metonymies) as well as pictorial and verbo-pictorial manifestations of metonymy in, e.g.: illustrations, drawings, cartoons, comics, print advertisements.
- criticaly read the literature on the conceptual theory of metonymy.
- recognize differences between diverse methodological approaches to conceptual metonymy.
- present their knowledge in a coherent, precise and linguistically correct manner in English on level C2 according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, using appropriate register and form.
- communicate with diverse groups of participants, and in particular about issues pertaining to the role of conceptual metonymy in language and thought.
- further develop their interest in cognitive linguistics with ease and keep their curiosity alive.
- apply knowledge about conceptual metonymy in their translation practice.
SOCIAL COMPETENCE
Students will be ready to:
- critically assess their own linguistic knowledge and skills related to the collection, analysis, and interpretation of linguistic data.
- venture on lifelong learning and personal and professional development, applying knowledge and skills obtained during the course, and in particular their abilities to critically study academic literature.
- take responsibility for performing their professional duties, with due respect for the work of others.
- strive at formulating their views in a precise and trustworthy manner.
- care about the application of ethical norms in professional and academic conduct, as well as about development of professional ethos and ethical principles and norms in academia.
Assessment criteria
• Form: Discussions and analytical tasks to be done individually and in small groups.
• The basis for the final grade is the result of the written mid-term (40%) and the final test (60%); types of test questions: multiple choice, filling-in blanks, one short open question.
• 10% extra can be gained from an optional written assignment; active participation in the discussions may also raise the final grade.
• Two up to three absences are allowed.
Bibliography
Basic readings (the relevant parts of):
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George, and Mark Turner. 1989. More than Cool Reason. A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, Ronald W. 1993. "Reference-point constructions". Cognitive Linguistics 4(1): 1-38.
Radden, Günter, and Zoltán Kövecses. 1999. "Towards a theory of metonymy". In Metonymy in Languge and Thought, edited by Klaus-Uwe Panther, and Günter Radden, 17-59. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Taylor, John R. 1989/1995. Linguistic Categorization. Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Further readings:
Gibbs, Raymond W. 1999. “Speaking and thinking with metonymy”. In Metonymy in Languge and Thought, edited by Klaus-Uwe Panther, and Günter Radden, 61-77. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Górska, Elżbieta. 2017. “Text-image relations in cartoons. A case study of image schematic metaphors”. Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 134(3): 219–228. doi:10.4467/20834624SL.17.015.7089
Górska, Elżbieta. 2020. Understanding Abstract Concepts across Modes in Multimodal Discourse. A Cognitive Linguistic Approach. London and New York: Routledge. DOI https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429282737
Górska, Elżbieta, and Günter Radden, eds. 2005. Metonymy-Metaphor Collage. Warszawa: Warsaw University Press.
Littlemore, Jeannette. 2015. Metonymy: Hidden Shortcuts in Language, Thought and Communication. Cambridge University Press.
Panther, Klaus-Uwe, and Günter Radden, eds. 1999. Metonymy in Language and Thought. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Panther Klaus-Uwe, and Linda L. Thornburg, eds. 2003. Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Additional information
Additional information (registration calendar, class conductors, localization and schedules of classes), might be available in the USOSweb system: