engleski

The role of conceptual metonymy in meaning construction

In this article we argue that abstract inferential principles based on Gricean maxims or, even more radically, on a unique principle of relevance cannot adequately account for how interlocutors actually proceed in inferring utterance meanings. We advocate an intermediate level of inferential principles- metonymies- that are, on the one hand, abstract enough to be used as inferential schemata and, on the other hand, have enough specific conceptual content to serve as guideposts in utterance interpretation. We define conceptual metonymy as a contingent, i.e. non-necessary, relation within one conceptual domain between a source meaning and a target meaning, in which the source meaning provides mental access to the target meaning. We regard such metonymic relations as multipurpose conceptual devices not restricted to language but used in other semiotic systems and thinking as well. Furthermore, we argue that in a prototypical metonymy the target meaning is conceptually more prominent, i.e. more in the focus of attention, than the source meaning. Prototypical metonymies not only make target meanings accessible but also available, e.g. as new topics, for further elaboration in the ensuing discourse. Metonymies in this sense are ubiquitous as conceptual tools in natural language. They function on the referential, predicational and illocutionary levels of speech acts, and they organize conceptual content in the lexicon, interact with grammatical structure, and play a key role in the ad hoc creation and understanding of pragmatic meaning.

conceptual metonymy; inference; relevance; Gricean maxims; meaning construction

nije evidentirano