Studying Metonymy in Persian and the Theory of Lexical Concepts and Cognitive Models

Document Type : Research

Authors

Abstract

Metonymy is one of the most important processes of semantic change in the language, which besides receiving a high degree of attention by rhetoricians and historical semanticists, has been, at least for three decades, considered by cognitive semanticists as a process at work in everyday speech. The theory of Lexical Concepts and Cognitive Models (LCCM) proposed by Vyvyan Evans in 2006 in the form of an article and within the framework of cognitive semantics explains how the meaning functions in the language, especially based on metaphoric and metonymic processes and how the speakers understand these processes. Based on this theory, words don’t have ‘meanings’ in and of themselves and the meaning of a word is subordinate to the utterance in which it occurs. The present article studies this theory with data in the Persian language, evaluating the process of metonymy within LCCM framework. It concludes that first, distinguishing absolute meaninglessness in words, in a word-based approach, is essentially considered a methodological problem. Second, one cannot synchronically distinguish a process called metonymy, especially in its traditional definition; instead, it should be considered a process based on ‘decreasing’ on the syntagmatic axis, not a process based on the proximity of two concepts on the paradigmatic axis. Thus, words can be considered as units that have meaning when decontextualized, but are not ‘meaningful’. Such a view liberates us from the troublesome framework of word-based approaches.

Keywords

References

صفوی، کورش (1379). درآمدی بر معنی‏شناسی. تهران: حوزة هنری سازمان تبلیغات اسلامی.
صفوی، کورش (1391). «حذف یا کاهش». نوشته‏های پراکنده. دفتر اول: معنی‏شناسی. تهران: علمی. صص524 ـ 483.
گندمکار، راحله (1392). «واژه‏ها چگونه معنی می‏دهند: مفاهیم واژگانی، الگوهای شناختی و ساختار معنی» (معرفی و نقد).  نشریة پژوهش‏های زبان‏شناسی تطبیقی. سال سوم. شمارة 6. صص 195-189.
Allwood, Jens (2003). "Meaning Potentials and Context: Some Consequences for the Analysis of Variation in Meaning". Cognitive Approaches to Lexical Semantics. H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven & J. Taylor (eds.).  Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 29-66.
Barcelona, Antonio (ed.) (2000). Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Clark, Herbert (1983). "Making Sense of Nonce Sense". The Process of Language Understanding. G. Flores D'Arcais & R. J. Jarvella (eds.).  Chichester: John Wiley. pp. 297-332.
Coulson, Seana (2000). Semantic Leaps. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Croft, William (2000). Explaining Language Change: An Evolutionary Approach. London: Longman.
Dirven, René (1999). "Conversion as a Conceptual Metonymy of Event Schemata". Metonymy in Language and Thought. Klaus- Uwe Panther & Günter Radden (eds.). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dirven, René & Ralf Pörings (eds.) (2003). Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruter.
Evans, Vyvyan (2006). "Lexical Concepts, Cognitive Models and Meaning-construction". Cognitive Linguistics. 17-4. pp. 491-534.
Evans, Vyvyan. (2009). How Words Mean. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Evans, Vyvyan (2013). Language and Time: A Cognitive Linguistics Approach.Cambridge University Press.
Evans, Vyvyan & Melanie Green (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Geeraerts, Dirk (2010). Theories of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Herskovits, Annette (1986). Language and Spatial Cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Jakobson, Roman (2003). "The Metaphoric and Metonymic poles". Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. R. Dirven & R. Pörings (eds.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 41-47.
Lakoff, George (1987). Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, Ronald (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 2: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, Ronald(1993). "Universals of Construal". Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley. Linguistics Society. 19. pp. 447–463.
Langacker, Ronald (2000). "A Dynamic Usage-based Model". Usage-based Models of Language. M. Barlow and S. Kemmer (eds.).  Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. pp. 1-64.
Nerlich, Brigitte & David D. Clarke (2001). "Serial Metonymy: A Study of Reference-based Polysemisation". Journal of Historical Pragmatics. 2(2). pp. 245-272.
Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Günter Radden (eds.) (1999). Metonymy in Language and Thought. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Pustejovsky, James (1995). The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Radden, Günter & Zoltán Kövecses (1999). "Towards a Theory of Metonymy". Metonymy in Language and Thought. Panther K-U and Radden G. (eds.). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. pp. 17-60.
Steen, Gerard (ed.) (2004). "Special Issue on Metonymy". Style. 38 (4). pp. 195-216.
Sweetser, Eve (1999). "Compositionality and Blending: Semantic Composition, in a Cognitively Realistic Framework". Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations, Scope and Methodology. T. Janssen & G. Redeker (eds.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 129-162.
Taylor, John R. (2009). "Cognitive Semantics". Concise Encyclopedia of Semantics. Elsevier. Keith Allan (ed.). pp. 73-86.
Tomasello, Michael (2003). Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Tyler, Andrea & Vyvyan Evans (2001). "Reconsidering Prepositional Polysemy Networks: The Case of over". Language. 77 (4). pp. 724-65.
 
ZABANPAZHUHI (Journal of Language Research)
Volume 9, Issue 23
July 2017
Pages 151-176

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics