Metonymy and conceptual blending

Abstract

1 of 18 10/7/2004 7:02 PM Metonymy and Conceptual Blending Seana Coulson and Todd Oakley 1. General Definitions of Conceptual Blending Conceptual blending theory offers a general model of meaning construction in which a small set of partially compositional processes operate in analogy, metaphor, counterfactuals, and many other semantic and pragmatic phenomena. Discussed at length in Fauconnier & Turner (1998), Coulson (2000), and Oakley (in preparation) blending involves a set of operations for combining dynamic cognitive models in a network of mental spaces (Fauconnier, 1994), or partitions of speakers' referential representations. Below, we discuss the role of metonymy in a range of conceptual blends that span a continuum from instances of ordinary language use to examples of human creativity and artistry operating at its highest pitch. Our examples include uses of the idiom blowing your own horn, literary blends in the writings of the American author Ernest Hemingway, and metonymic blends in the sculpture of Viktor Schreckengost. 1.1 Mental Space Theory Mental spaces contain partial representations of the entities and relationships in any given scenario as perceived, imagined, remembered, or otherwise understood by a speaker. Elements represent each of the discourse entities, and simple frames represent the relationships that exist between them. Because the same scenario can be construed in multiple ways, mental spaces are frequently used to partition incoming information about elements in speakers' referential representations. (1) Seana thinks the statue is hideous, but Todd thinks it's just wonderful. For example, (1) prompts the reader to construct two mental spaces, one to represent Seana's opinion of the statue, and one to represent Todd's: Seana Todd Thinks Thinks ====== ====== s s' hideous(s) wonderful(s')