Termout.org logo/LING


Update: February 24, 2023 The new version of Termout.org is now online, so this web site is now obsolete and will soon be dismantled.

Lista de candidatos sometidos a examen:
1) metonymy (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística

1) Candidate: metonymy


Is in goldstandard

1
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt157 - : However, she cancels ambiguity by explicating the analogy through the use of metonymy and metaphor:

2
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt189 - : For the cases when euphemistic, dysphemistic and x-phemistic phenomena merged with metaphor or metonymy I have employed the Conceptual Metaphor Theory, originated by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) and later modified in Johnson (1987), Lakoff (1987, 1993, 2002), Lakoff and Johnson (1999) and Lakoff and Turner (1989). The main aim of this theory is to reveal the intentions of metaphor and metonymy, their meaning and ideologies underlying language use through their analysis, since conceptual metaphors are normally initiated in human bodily experiences of any kind —as thought evolves out of the sensory and motor systems to create metaphorical expressions (Johnson, 1987 ) and to conceptualise abstract concepts— and in knowledge of the value attached to source domains in particular cultural practices (Charteris-Black, 2011, p. 59). As for the methodology employed in these cases, this approach divides the metaphor —and, by extension, metonymy— analysis into three stages: first, metaphors are identified;

3
paper CO_Lenguajetxt79 - : Metonymy and metaphor identification: methological issues

4
paper CO_Íkalatxt65 - : There are two varieties of sintactic metonymy: in one variety, the ellipted element is invariable ; in the other variety, the ellipsis is 'open' and the missing element must be recovered from the context. In both cases we find a continuum from zero to full lexicality, the main features determining position on the continuum being the identifiability and determinateness of the missing elements, and their acceptability when overtly expressed (1995: 40).[36]^8

Evaluando al candidato metonymy:


1) metaphor: 6 (*)
2) lakoff: 4
3) johnson: 4

metonymy
Lengua: eng
Frec: 74
Docs: 25
Nombre propio: 1 / 74 = 1%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 1
Puntaje: 1.679 = (1 + (1+3.90689059560852) / (1+6.22881869049588)));
Candidato aceptado

Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término

(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)
metonymy
: 10. Barcelona, A. (2003a). Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin, Alemania: Mouton de Gruyter.
: 11. Barcelona, A. (2003b). The case of metonymic basis of pragmatic inferencing: evidence from jokes and fanny anecdotes. En Panther, K-U and Thorndurg, L. (Eds.), Metonymy and Pragmatic Inference (pp. 81-101). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
: 37. Dirven, R. (1993) Metonymy and metaphor: Different mental strategies of conceptualisation. Leuvense Bijdragen, Lovaina: Departamento de Lingüística, Universidad de Lovaina, 82, 1-25.
: 38. Dirven, R. (1999). Conversion as a conceptual metonymy of event schemata. En K-U. Panther, y G. Radden (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought (pp. 275-287). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
: 46. Pantner, K-U y Thornburg, L. (2007) Metonymy. En Geeraerts, D. y Cuyckens, H. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 236-263). New York, United States of America: Oxford University Press.
: 47. Kövecses, Z. y Radden G. (1998). Metonymy: developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 9, 37-77.
: 52. Seto, K. (1999). Distinguishing metonymy from synecdoche. En: Panther, K-U and Radden, G. (Eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought (pp. 91-120). Amsterdam, Paises Bajos: John Benjamins.
: 71. Warren, B. (1995). Distinguishing between metaphor and metonymy. En G. Melchers y B. Warren (Eds.), Studies in Anglistics (pp. 137-150). Estocolmo, Suecia: Almqvist & Wiksell International.
: 73. Warren, B. (2002). An alternative account of the interpretation of referential metonymy and metaphor. En R. Dirven y R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast (pp. 113-133). Berlin, Nueva York: Mouton de Gruyter.
: 8. Barcelona, A. (2000). On the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for conceptual metaphor. En A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: a Cognitive Perspective (pp. 31-58). Berlín, Alemania: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Barcelona, A. (2002). Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within Cognitive Linguistics: an update. En R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.) Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 207-77). Berlin - New York, Germany - USA: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Barnden, J. A. (2010). Metaphor and metonymy: making their connections more slippery. En Cognitive Linguistics, 21(1), 1-34.
: Croft, W. (2002). The Role of Domains in the Interpretation of Metaphors and Metonymies. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast (pp. 161-205). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. [94]https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.16
: Hanks, P. (2006). Metaphoricity is gradable. En A. Stefanowitsch & S. T. Gries (Eds.). Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy (pp. 17-35). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Kovacses, Z. & Radden, G. (1998). Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistic. 9(1), 37-77.
: Maclagan, M., Davis, B. & Lunsford, R. (2008). Fixed expressions, extenders and metonymy in the speech of people with Alzheimer’s disease. En S. Granger & F. Meunier (Eds.), Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 175-187). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
: Panther, K. & Thornburg, L. (1999). The potentiality for actuality metonymy in English and Hungarian. En K. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 333-357). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.
: Panther, K. & Thornburg, L. (2007). Metonymy. En D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 236-263). Oxford: University Press.
: Panther, K. (2006). Metonymy as a usage event. En G. Kristiansen, M. Achard, R. Dirven & F. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds.) Cognitive Linguistics: Applications and Future Perspectives (pp. 147-185). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Panther, K., & Thornburg, L. (2007). Metonymy. En, D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 236-263). New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
: Peirsman, Y. & Geeraerts, D. (2006). Metonymy as a Prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17, 269-316.
: Ponterotto, D. (2000). The cohesive role of cognitive metaphor in discourse and conversation. En A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads (pp. 283-298). Berlin: Gruyter.
: Radden, G e Z. Kövecses. 2007. Towards a theory of metonymy. (em linha) Disponível em [136]https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284894262_Towards_a_Theory_of_Metonymy
: Radden, G. (2000). How Metonymic Are Metaphors? En A. Barcelona (Coord.). Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads (pp. 93-108). Berlín/Nueva York: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Radden, G. (2002). How metonymic are metaphors? En, R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.) Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 407-434). Berlin-New York, Germany-USA: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2000). The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. En A. Barcelona (Coord.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads (pp. 109-132). Berlín/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2007). High-level cognitive models: in search of a unified framework for inferential and grammatical behavior. En K. Kosecki (Coord.). Perspectives on Metonymy (pp. 11-30). Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
: Rundbald, G. (2007). Impersonal, general, and social: The use of metonymy versus passive voice in medical discourse. Written Communication, 24(3), 250-277.
: Seto, K. (1999). Distinguishing metonymy from synecdoche. En, K. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought, Metonymy in language and thought (Vol. 4, pp. 91-120). Amensterdam-Philadelphia, Netherlands-USA: John Benjamins Publishing.
: Taylor, J. (2002). Category extension by metonymy and metaphor. En, R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.) Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 323-347). Berlin-New York, Germany-USA: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Warren, B. (1999). Aspects of referential metonymy. En, K. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.) Metonymy in language and thought, Metonymy in language and thought (Vol. 4, pp. 121-135). Amsterdam-Philadelphia, Netherlands-USA: John Benjamins Publishing.