FACTOID # 84: 41% world's poor people live in India.
 
 Home   Encyclopedia   Statistics   Countries A-Z   Flags   Maps   Education   Forum   FAQ   About 
 
 
 
WHAT'S NEW
RELATED ARTICLES
People who viewed "Denominatio" also viewed:
RECENT ARTICLES
More Recent Articles »
 

SEARCH ALL

FACTS & STATISTICS    Advanced view

Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:

 

 

(* = Graphable)

 

 


Encyclopedia > Denominatio

In rhetoric and cognitive linguistics, metonymy (in Greek meta = after/later and onoma = name) is the use of a single characteristic to identify a more complex entity. It is also known as denominatio or pars pro toto (part for the whole).


In rhetoric, metonymy is the substitution of one word for another with which it is associated. Metonymy works by contiguity rather than similarity. Typically, when someone uses metonymy, they don't wish to transfer qualities (as you do with metaphor); rather they transfer associations which may not be integral to the meaning.


The common figure "The White House said..." is a good example of metonymy, with the term "White House" actually referring to the authorities who are symbolized by the White House, which is an inanimate object that says nothing. The Crown for a kingdom is another example of this kind of metonymy. Metonymy can also refer to the rhetorical strategy of describing something indirectly by referring to things around it: describing someone's house in order to describe them, for example. Advertising frequently uses this kind of metonymy, simply putting a product in close proximity to something we want (beauty, happiness). See also figure of speech, synecdoche, metalepsis.


In cognitive linguistics, metonymy is one of the basic characteristics of cognition. It is extremely common for people to take one well-understood or easy-to-perceive aspect of something and use that aspect to stand either for the thing as a whole or for some other aspect or part of it. For example,


The pen is mightier than the sword.


"Pen" denotes publishing and "sword" denotes military force.


In linguistics, as in rhetoric, the distinction between metaphor and metonymy is important. For example, the phrase "to fish pearls" uses metonymy, drawing from "fishing" the notion of taking things from the ocean. What remains similar is the domain of usage and the associations, but we understand the phrase in spite of rather than because of the literal meaning of fishing: we know you do not use a fishing rod or net to get pearls. In contrast, the metaphorical phrase "fishing for information", transfers the concept of fishing (waiting, hoping to catch something) into a new domain. (example drawn from Dirven, 1996)


See also

Social stereotype, synecdoche


References

Dirven, René "Conversion as a Conceptual Metonymy of Basic Event Schemata." Workshop on Metonymy, Hamburg University, Germany, June 23-24, 1996. http://www.psyc.leeds.ac.uk/cgi-bin/search/metaphorAbstracts/abstract.pl?DirvenR02


metaphorik.de 06/2004 (online journal about metaphor and metonymy) special issue: metonymy. http://www.metaphorik.de/06


  Results from FactBites:
 
Suárez, DM 47 (16206 words)
Ergo semper potest illa denominatio sumi ex coexistentia extremorum, absque alio respectu in re ipsa distincto ab extremis; vel si illa non est sola denominatio, sed intrinseca habitudo, idem erit in omnibus illis quas Durandus ponit in secundo membro suae principalis distinctionis.
Ultima vero consequentia nititur in fundamento saepe repetito, quod haec denominatio amitti potest, et acquiri de novo, conservando omnem formam absolutam; ergo forma intrinseca et respectiva, a qua sumitur, est in re aliquo modo distincta ab omnibus formis absolutis, saltem modali distinctione.
Sed solum contingit, separari aut destitui terminum, quo ablato cessat etiam relativa denominatio, non quia aliquid rei vel realis modi auferatur ab ipso relativo, sed quia denominatio relativa includit aliquo modo terminum, sine quo non manet actualiter, sed fundamentaliter tantum, seu in proxima aptitudine.
Suárez, DM 8 (14163 words)
Si autem dicat consistere in absoluto, quia nullam intrinsecam relationem addi necesse est sed solam concomitantiam obiecti, sic fatemur veritatem esse aliquid absolutum vel potius consistere in absoluto cum respectu secundum dici; nam illa denominatio sumpta ex concomitantia obiecti non incongrue potest respectus secundum dici appellari.
Unde perfectio illa a qua sumitur haec denominatio non est aliquid ex natura rei distinctum ab ipso iudicio, sed est ipsamet specifica differentia quae sumitur ex tali obiecto formali seu ratione assentiendi.
Et confirmatur, quia falsitas in rebus esse non potest nisi denominatio extrinseca; ergo nec veritas; nam oppositorum eadem est seu proportionalis ratio.
  More results at FactBites »


 
 

COMMENTARY     


Share your thoughts, questions and commentary here
Your name
Your comments

Want to know more?
Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:

 


Lesson Plans | Student Area | Student FAQ | Reviews | Press Releases |  Feeds | Contact
The Wikipedia article included on this page is licensed under the GFDL.
Images may be subject to relevant owners' copyright.
All other elements are (c) copyright NationMaster.com 2003-5. All Rights Reserved.
Usage implies agreement with terms, 1022, m