Changes

===Linguistic Definition===[[Metonymy]] is usually defined as a [[trope]] in which a term is used to denote an [[object]] which it does not literally refer to, but with which it is closely linked. This link may be one of [[physical ]] contiguity, but not necessarily.

==Roman Jakobson=Metonymic Axis of Language===HoweverFollowing [[Jakobson]], [[Lacan]]'s use of the term owes little to this definition apart from the notion of contiguity, since it is inspired by the work of [[Roman Jakobsonlinks]], who established an opposition between [[metonymy]] and to the combinatorial axis of [[metaphorlanguage]], as opposed to the [[substitutive]] axis.<ref>Jakobson 1956</ref>

Following ===Diachronic Dimension of Signifying Chain===In his most detailed work on [[JakobsonThe Subject|the subject]], [[Lacan]] links defines [[metonymy]] to as the combinatorial axis of [[languagediachrony|diachronic]], as opposed to the substitutive axis.<ref>(For example, in the sentence 'I am happy,' the relation between the words 'I' one [[signifier]] and 'am' is a metonymic relation, whereas [[another]] in the possibility of substituting 'sad' for 'happy' depends on the metaphoric relation between these two terms[[signifying chain]].)</ref>

===Metonymy and Versus Metaphor===In his most detailed work on [[Metonymy]] thus concerns the subject, ways in which [[signifier]]s can be combined / linked in a single [[Lacansignifying chain]] defines ("horizontal" relations), whereas [[metonymymetaphor]] as concerns the ways in which a [[diachrony|diachronicsignifier]] relation between in one [[signifying chain]] may be substituted for a [[signifier]] in another [[chain]] ("vertical" relations). Together, [[metaphor]] and another [[metonymy]] constitute the way in the which [[signifying chainsignification]]is produced.

[[Metonymy]] thus concerns the ways in which [[signifier]]s can be combined/linked in a single [[signifying chain ('horizontal' relations), whereas [[metaphor]] concerns the ways in which a [[signifier]] in one [[signifying chain]] may be substituted for a [[signifier]] in another chain ('vertical' relations). Together, [[metaphor]] and [[metonymy]] constitute the way in which [[signification]]s is produced. ===Formula of for Metonymy===[[Lacan]] provides a [[formula ]] for [[metonymy]].<ref>{{E}} p.164</ref>

This formula is to be read as follows. On the lefthand side of the equation, outside the brackets, [[Lacan]] writes '''<i>f</i>''' '''S''', the signifying function, which is to say the effect of [[signification]]. Inside the brackets he writes '''S . . . S'''', the link between one [[signifier]] and another in a [[signifying chain]]. On the righthand side of the equation there is '''S''', the [[signifier]], and ( '''--''' ), the [[bar]] of the [[Saussure]]ean [[sign|algorithm]]. The [[sign]] = is to be read "is congruent with." Thus the whole formula reads:  <blockquote>"the signifying function of the connection of the signifier with the signifier is congruent with maintenance of the bar."</blockquote>

The formula is meant to illustrate On the lefthand side of the [[algebra|equation]], [[outside]] the brackets, [[Lacan]]writes '''<i>f</i>''' '''S'''s thesis that in , the [[metonymypaternal function|signifying function]] , which is to say the effect of [[resistancesignification]] of . [[significationInside]] is maintainedthe brackets he writes '''S . . . S'''', the link between one [[barsignifier]] is not crossed, no new and another in a [[signifiedsignifying chain]] is produced.

==Contexts==On the righthand side of the [[algebra|equation]] there is '''S''', the [[signifier]], and ('''---'''), the [[Lacanbar]] puts his concept of the [[Saussure]]ean [[sign|algorithm]]. The [[metonymysign]] <b>=</b> is to use in a variety of contextsbe read "is congruent with."

=== Formula for Metonymy and Desire- Summary===[[Lacan]] presents [[metonymy]] as a [[diachrony|diachronic]] movement from one [[signifier]] to another along Thus the [[signifying chain]], as one [[signifierwhole]] constantly refer sto another in a perpetual deferral of meaning.formula reads:

[[Desire]] is also characterized by exactly <blockquote>"The signifying function of the same never-ending process connection of continual deferral; since [[desire]] the signifier with the signifier is always "Desire for something else,congruent with maintenance of the bar."<ref>{{E}} p.167</refblockquote> as soon as the [[object]] of [[desire]] is attained, it is no longer desirable, and the [[subject]]'s [[desire]] fixes on another [[object]].

Thus The formula is meant to illustrate [[Lacan]] writes 's [[thesis]] that "desire ''in [[metonymy]] the [[resistance]] of [[signification]] is maintained, the [[bar]] is not crossed, no new [[signified]] is'' a metonymy."<ref>{{E}} pproduced.175</ref>

== Metonymy and Displacement=Contexts===[[Lacan]] also follows puts his [[Jakobsonconcept]] in linking the [[metaphor]]-of [[metonymy]] distinction to the mechanisms use in a variety of the [[dream work]] described by [[Freud]]contexts.

However, he differs ===Metonymy and Desire===[[Lacan]] presents [[metonymy]] as a [[diachrony|diachronic]] movement from one [[Jakobsonsignifier]] over to another along the precise nature [[signifying chain]], as one [[signifier]] constantly refers to another in a perpetual [[deferred action|deferral]] of this link[[signification|meaning]].

Just as [[displacementDesire]] is logically prior to also characterized by exactly the same never-ending [[condensationprocess]], so of continual [[metonymydeferred action|deferral]] is the condition for ; since [[metaphordesire]]is always "desire for something else, because "<ref>{{E}} p. 167</ref> as soon as the coordination of signifiers has to be possible before transferences [[object]] of [[desire]] is attained, it is no longer desirable, and the signified are able to take place[[subject]]'s [[desire]] fixes on another [[object]]. Thus [[Lacan]] writes that "desire ''is'' a metonymy."<ref>{{S3E}} p.229175</ref>

== See Also =={{See}}* [[Bar]]* [[Desire]]||* [[Displacement]]* [[Language]]||

 </div>