Metonymic construal and vehicle selection

Pragmatics and Cognition 26 (2-3):267-295 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The article investigates the process of the selection of vehicle concepts in Polish Sign Language (PJM). Why are certain contiguity relations chosen out of many potentially available candidates as the basis for metonymies and why do some other contiguity relations not make felicitous metonymies? The process is certainly influenced by many factors, but the article focuses on several factors related to the dimensions of construal of metonymic concepts (in Langacker’s understanding), including the scope of conception and aspects of perspective (the preference for the observable entities and the distinction between subjectively and objectively construed concepts). Vehicle selection is also constrained by the effective reference requirement and the subjectively perceived vitality of contiguity relations.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,612

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Effects of contiguity and similarity on the learning of concepts.Slater E. Newman - 1956 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 52 (6):349.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-08-07

Downloads
8 (#517,646)

6 months
4 (#1,635,958)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Metaphors We Live By.George Lakoff & Mark Johnson - 1980 - Ethics 93 (3):619-621.
Mereology.Achille C. Varzi - 2016 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Reference-point constructions.Ronald W. Langacker - 1993 - Cognitive Linguistics 4 (1):1-38.

Add more references