The Bruce Willis of sandwiches: the Y of X is Y of Z construction on its journey towards a paragon model, as one way of achieving intersubjectivity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35520/diadorim.2020.v22n2a39460Keywords:
blending, XYZ construction, intersubjectivity, paragon, mappingAbstract
The present article is concerned with innovative metaphorical expressions with proper nouns in a subtype of so-caled XYZ constructions, such as Is sad singleton Vladimir Putin the Jennifer Aniston of European politics?, which link relatively disparate domains and which may cause interpretation difficulties, leading to the problem known as de Saussure’s paradox. Veale (2014) believes that they are “double-edged comparisons that can cut both ways, since information inevitably flows in both directions, …. to meet in the middle to construct a blended mental image.” We argue that such constructions are better explained as metaphors based on metonymic paragon models. A closer look at these constructions reveals that they are most of the time used in discourse in such a way that the speaker provides mapping-like statements justifying the pairing of X and Y: speakers create remarkable links between disparate domains on purpose, but they also attempt, in observance of the Gricean principle of cooperation, to facilitate the processing of such expressions and deliberately explicate what seem to be underlying mappings in keeping with the maxim of quantity until supplying enough information to safeguard the interpretation of the figurative expression in the direction of what they have in mind, i.e. ensuring intersubjectivity. In light of similar constructions without any explications, which can be analyzed as based on metonymic paragon models, we realize that spelling out the reasons for the pairings of proper nouns actually seems to function as a trigger for the online creation of novel paragons or quasi-paragons, or for an ad hoc modification of existing paragons. We claim that it is actually these explications that “cut both ways,” i.e. apply to both X and Y, which means that we witness a dynamic (re)construal of meaning whereby a paragon model is strengthened or modified, or is being created.References
BARCELONA, A. Names: A metonymic “return ticket” in five languages. Jezikoslovlje, v. 4, pp. 11–41, 2003.
BARCELONA, A. Metonymy behind grammar: The motivation of the seemingly “irregular” grammatical behavior of English paragon names. In: RADDEN, G,; PANTHER, K.-U. (eds.). Studies in linguistic motivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2004, p. 357–374.
BARNDEN, J. Metaphor and irony: messy when mixed. In: SOARES DA SILVA, A. (ed.), Figures: Intersubjectivity and usage. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, fc.
BRDAR, M. Intensification and metonymy in some XYZ constructions: From the Bible to Einstein. LaMiCus – Language, Mind, Culture and Society, 1, p. 110–134, 2017.
BRDAR, M. Intensification and metonymy in some XYZ constructions: From the Bible to Einstein. LaMiCus – Language, Mind, Culture and Society, 1, p. 110–134, 2017.
BRDAR, M.; BRDAR-SZABÓ, R. Metonymic coding of linguistic action in English, Croatian and Hungarian. In: PANTHER, K.-U.; THORNBURG, L. (eds.). Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2003, p. 241–266. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.113.17brd
BRDAR, M.; BRDAR-SZABÓ, R. When Zidane is not simply Zidane, and Bill Gates is not just Bill Gates: Or, Some thoughts on online construction of metaphtonymic meanings of proper names. In: RADDEN, G.; KÖPCKE, K.-M.; BERG, TH.; SIEMUND, P. (eds.), Aspects of meaning construction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2007, p. 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.136.09brd
BRDAR, M.; BRDAR-SZABÓ, R. Intensification of adjectives and adverbs by means of reduplication in Germanic, Romance, Slavic and Finno-Ugric languages. In: OEBEL, G. (ed.), Intensivierungskonzepte bei Adjektiven und Adverben im Sprachenvergleich. Crosslinguistic Comparison of intensified adjectives and adverbs. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovač, 2011, p. 293–344.
BRDAR, M.; BRDAR-SZABÓ, R. Some reflections on metonymy and word-formation. ExELL. Explorations in English Language and Linguistics, v. 1, p. 40–62, 2013.
BRDAR-SZABÓ, R.; BRDAR, M. “Mummy, I love you like a thousand ladybirds": Reflections on the emergence of hyperbolic effects and the truth of hyperboles. In: BURKHARDT, A.; NERLICH, B. (eds.), Tropical truth(s). The epistemology of metaphor and other tropes. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2010, p. 383–427.
CROFT, W. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
FAUCONNIER, G.; TURNER, M. Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, v. 22, p. 133–187, 1998.
FAUCONNIER, G.; TURNER, M. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books, 2002.
GOLDBERG, A. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995.
GOLDBERG, A.; JACKENDOFF, R. The English resultative as a family of constructions. Language, v. 80, p. 532–568, 2004.
GRICE, H. P. Logic and conversation. In: COLE, P.; MORGAN, J. (eds.). Syntax and semantics, Volume 3. New York: Academic Press, 1975, p. 41–58.
GYŐRI, G; HEGEDÜS, I. A cognitive approach to the methodology of semantic reconstruction: The case of Eng. chin and knee. In: Allan, K.; Robinson, J. A. (eds.), Current methods in historical semantics. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, 2011, p. 313–333.
HOFFMANN, TH. Abstract phrasal and clausal constructions. In: HOFFMANN, TH.; TROUSDALE, G. (eds.). The Oxford handbook of construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2013, p. 307–328.
ISRAEL, M. The scalar model of polarity sensitivity. In: FORGET, D.; HIRSCHBÜHLER, P.; MARTINEAU, F.; RIVERO, M. L. (eds.). Negation and polarity: Syntax and semantics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1997, p. 209–229.
ISRAEL, M. The rhetoric of grammar: Scalar reasoning and polarity sensitivity. Ph.D. Dissertation, U.C. San Diego, 1998.
KÖVECSES, Z. The scope of metaphor. In: Barcelona, A. (ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2000, p. 79–92.
KÖVECSES, Z. Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
KÖVECSES, Z.; RADDEN, G. Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics, v. 9, n. 1, p. 37–77, 1998.
https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1998.9.1.37
LAKOFF, G. Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1987.
LAKOFF, G.; JOHNSON, M. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
LANGACKER, R. W. Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1999.
LEE, D. Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
PANTHER, K.-U. The role of conceptual metonymy in meaning construction. In: RUIZ DE MENDOZA, F. J.; PEÑA CERVEL, S. (eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2005, p. 353–386.
PANTHER, K.-U.; THORNBURG, L. A cognitive approach to inferencing in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, v. 30, n. 6, p. 755–769, 1998.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00028-9
PANTHER, K.-U.; THORNBURG, L. The potentiality for actuality metonymy in English and Hungarian. In: PANTHER, K.-U.; RADDEN, G (eds.), Metonymy in language and thought. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1999, p. 333–357.
PEÑA CERVEL, M. S. Argument structure and implicational constructions at the crossroads. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, v. 14, p. 474–497, 2016.
PEÑA CERVEL, M. S. Revisiting the English resultative family of constructions: A unifying account. In: RUIZ DE MENDOZA IBÁÑEZ, F. J.; LUZONDO OYÓN, A.; PÉREZ SOBRINO, P. (eds.). Constructing families of constructions: Analytical perspectives and theoretical challenges. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2017, p. 175–204.
RADDEN, G.; KÖVECSES, Z. Towards a theory of metonymy. In: PANTHER, K.-U.; RADDEN, G. (eds.). Metonymy in language and thought. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1999, p. 17–59.
REDDY, M. J. The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In: ORTONY, A (ed.), Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979, p. 284–324.
REDDY, M. J. The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In ORTONY, A. (ed.), Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993, p. 164–201.
STEEN, F.; TURNER, M. Multimodal construction grammar. In: Borkent, M.; Dancygier, B.; Hinnell, J. (eds.), Language and the creative mind. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 2013, p. 255–274.
THORNBURG, L., & PANTHER, K.-U. Speech act metonymies. In: LIEBERT, W.-A.; REDEKER, G.; WAUGH, L. R. (eds.). Discourse and perspective in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1997, p. 205–219.
TOMASELLO, R. L. The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999.
TRASK, R. L. Historical linguistics, London: Arnold, 1996.
TRAUGOTT, E. C. The grammaticalization of NP of NP patterns. In: BERGS, A.; DIEWALD, G. (eds.). Constructions and language change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2008, p. 23–45.
TRAUGOTT, E. C. ‘All that he endeavoured to prove was ...’: on the emergence of grammatical constructions in dialogual contexts. In: KEMPSON, R.; COOPER, R. (eds.). Language change and evolution. London: Kings College Publications, 2008, p. 143–177.
TRAUGOTT, E. C.; TROUSDALE, G. Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization: how do they intersect? In: TRAUGOTT, E. C.; TROUSDALE, G. (eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010, p. 19–44.
TROUSDALE, G. Constructions in grammaticalization and lexicalization: evidence from the history of a Composite Predicate Construction in the history of English. In: TROUSDALE, G.; GISBORNE, N. (eds.). Constructional approaches to English grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2008, p. 33–67.
TURNER, M. Reading minds. The study of English in the age of cognitive science. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1991.
TURNER, M. Figure. In: KATZ, A.N.; CACCIARI, C.; GIBBS, R.W. JR. (eds.). Figurative language and thought. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998, p. 44–87.
TURNER, M; FAUCONNIER, G. A mechanism of creativity. Poetics Today, v. 20, n. 3, p. 397–418, 1999.
VEALE, T. The ABCs of XYZs: Creativity and conservativity in humorous epithets. In: MANJALY, J.; INDURKHYA, B. (eds.) Cognition, experience, and creativity. New Delhi: Orient Blackswan, 2014, p. 135–154.
VERHAGEN, A. Subjectification, syntax, and communication. In: Stein, D.; Wright, S. (eds.). Subjectivity and subjectivisation: Linguistic perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, p. 103–128.
VERHAGEN, A. Constructions of intersubjectivity. Discourse, syntax, and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright transfer -- Authorization to publication
If the submitted article is approved for publication, it is already agreed that the author authorizes UFRJ to reproduce it and publish it in Diadorim: revista de estudos linguísticos e literários, the terms "reproduction" and "publication" being understood as defined respectively by items VI and I of article 5 of Law 9610/98. The article can be accessed both by the World Wide Web (WWW) and by the printed version, with free consultation and reproduction of a copy of the article for the own use of those who consult. This authorization of publication is not limited in time, and UFRJ is responsible for maintaining the identification of the author of the article.
The journal Diadorim: revista de estudos linguísticos e literários is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribuition-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).
