Difference between revisions of "Metonymy"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | :[[Fr]]. ''''métonymie]]'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | =====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. | [[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. | This link may be one of physical contiguity, but not necessarily. | ||
| − | + | =====Roman Jakobson===== | |
| − | ==Roman Jakobson== | ||
However, [[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 Jakobson]], who established an opposition between [[metonymy]] and [[metaphor]].<ref>Jakobson 1956</ref> | However, [[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 Jakobson]], who established an opposition between [[metonymy]] and [[metaphor]].<ref>Jakobson 1956</ref> | ||
| − | Following [[Jakobson]], [[Lacan]] links [[metonymy]] to the combinatorial axis of [[language]], as opposed to the substitutive axis. | + | Following [[Jakobson]], [[Lacan]] links [[metonymy]] to the combinatorial axis of [[language]], as opposed to the substitutive axis. |
| − | == | + | =====Diachronic Chain of Signifiers===== |
In his most detailed work on the subject, [[Lacan]] defines [[metonymy]] as the [[diachrony|diachronic]] relation between one [[signifier]] and another in the [[signifying chain]]. | In his most detailed work on the subject, [[Lacan]] defines [[metonymy]] as the [[diachrony|diachronic]] relation between one [[signifier]] and another in the [[signifying chain]]. | ||
| − | [[Metonymy]] thus concerns the ways in which [[signifier]]s can be combined/linked in a single [[signifying chain ( | + | =====Metonymy and Metaphor===== |
| + | [[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]] | + | Together, [[metaphor]] and [[metonymy]] constitute the way in which [[signification]] is produced. |
| − | |||
| + | =====Formula for Metonymy===== | ||
[[Lacan]] provides a formula for [[metonymy]].<ref>{{E}} p.164</ref> | [[Lacan]] provides a formula for [[metonymy]].<ref>{{E}} p.164</ref> | ||
[[Image:Lacan-metonymy.jpg|center]] | [[Image:Lacan-metonymy.jpg|center]] | ||
| − | This formula is to be read as follows | + | 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]]. | + | On the lefthand side of the equation, outside the brackets, [[Lacan]] writes '''<i>f</i>''' '''S''', the [[paternal funciton|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]]. | 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''' | + | 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." | + | The [[sign]] '''=''' is to be read "is congruent with." |
| + | =====Formula for Metonymy - Summary===== | ||
Thus the whole formula reads: | Thus the whole formula reads: | ||
| − | <blockquote>" | + | <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 [[Lacan]]'s thesis that in [[metonymy]] the [[resistance]] of [[signification]] is maintained, the [[bar]] is not crossed, no new [[signified]] is produced. | The formula is meant to illustrate [[Lacan]]'s thesis that in [[metonymy]] the [[resistance]] of [[signification]] is maintained, the [[bar]] is not crossed, no new [[signified]] is produced. | ||
| − | ==Contexts== | + | =====Contexts===== |
[[Lacan]] puts his concept of [[metonymy]] to use in a variety of contexts. | [[Lacan]] puts his concept of [[metonymy]] to use in a variety of contexts. | ||
| − | === Metonymy and Desire=== | + | =====Metonymy and Desire===== |
[[Lacan]] presents [[metonymy]] as a [[diachrony|diachronic]] movement from one [[signifier]] to another along the [[signifying chain]], as one [[signifier]] constantly refer sto another in a perpetual deferral of meaning. | [[Lacan]] presents [[metonymy]] as a [[diachrony|diachronic]] movement from one [[signifier]] to another along the [[signifying chain]], as one [[signifier]] constantly refer sto another in a perpetual deferral of meaning. | ||
| − | [[Desire]] is also characterized by exactly the same never-ending process of continual deferral; since [[desire]] is always " | + | [[Desire]] is also characterized by exactly the same never-ending process of continual deferral; since [[desire]] is always "desire for something else,"<ref>{{E}} p.167</ref> as soon as the [[object]] of [[desire]] is attained, it is no longer desirable, and the [[subject]]'s [[desire]] fixes on another [[object]]. |
Thus [[Lacan]] writes that "desire ''is'' a metonymy."<ref>{{E}} p.175</ref> | Thus [[Lacan]] writes that "desire ''is'' a metonymy."<ref>{{E}} p.175</ref> | ||
| − | == Metonymy and Displacement== | + | =====Metonymy and Displacement===== |
[[Lacan]] also follows [[Jakobson]] in linking the [[metaphor]]-[[metonymy]] distinction to the mechanisms of the [[dream work]] described by [[Freud]]. | [[Lacan]] also follows [[Jakobson]] in linking the [[metaphor]]-[[metonymy]] distinction to the mechanisms of the [[dream work]] described by [[Freud]]. | ||
| Line 54: | Line 58: | ||
Just as [[displacement]] is logically prior to [[condensation]], so [[metonymy]] is the condition for [[metaphor]], because "the coordination of signifiers has to be possible before transferences of the signified are able to take place."<ref>{{S3}} p.229</ref> | Just as [[displacement]] is logically prior to [[condensation]], so [[metonymy]] is the condition for [[metaphor]], because "the coordination of signifiers has to be possible before transferences of the signified are able to take place."<ref>{{S3}} p.229</ref> | ||
| − | |||
== See Also == | == See Also == | ||
| Line 62: | Line 65: | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]] | [[Category:Psychoanalysis]] | ||
| Line 69: | Line 70: | ||
[[Category:Linguistics]] | [[Category:Linguistics]] | ||
[[Category:Dictionary]] | [[Category:Dictionary]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Language]] | ||
[[Category:Symbolic]] | [[Category:Symbolic]] | ||
| − | |||
[[Category:Concepts]] | [[Category:Concepts]] | ||
[[Category:Terms]] | [[Category:Terms]] | ||
| + | [[Category:OK]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | __NOTOC__ | ||
Revision as of 06:39, 18 August 2006
- Fr. ''métonymie]]
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
However, 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 Jakobson, who established an opposition between metonymy and metaphor.[1]
Following Jakobson, Lacan links metonymy to the combinatorial axis of language, as opposed to the substitutive axis.
Diachronic Chain of Signifiers
In his most detailed work on the subject, Lacan defines metonymy as the diachronic relation between one signifier and another in the signifying chain.
Metonymy and Metaphor
Metonymy thus concerns the ways in which signifiers 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 is produced.
Formula for Metonymy
Lacan provides a formula for metonymy.[2]
This formula is to be read as follows:
On the lefthand side of the equation, outside the brackets, Lacan writes f 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 Saussureean algorithm.
The sign = is to be read "is congruent with."
Formula for Metonymy - Summary
Thus the whole formula reads:
"The signifying function of the connection of the signifier with the signifier is congruent with maintenance of the bar."
The formula is meant to illustrate Lacan's thesis that in metonymy the resistance of signification is maintained, the bar is not crossed, no new signified is produced.
Contexts
Lacan puts his concept of metonymy to use in a variety of contexts.
Metonymy and Desire
Lacan presents metonymy as a diachronic movement from one signifier to another along the signifying chain, as one signifier constantly refer sto another in a perpetual deferral of meaning.
Desire is also characterized by exactly the same never-ending process of continual deferral; since desire is always "desire for something else,"[3] as soon as the object of desire is attained, it is no longer desirable, and the subject's desire fixes on another object.
Thus Lacan writes that "desire is a metonymy."[4]
Metonymy and Displacement
Lacan also follows Jakobson in linking the metaphor-metonymy distinction to the mechanisms of the dream work described by Freud.
However, he differs from Jakobson over the precise nature of this link.
Just as displacement is logically prior to condensation, so metonymy is the condition for metaphor, because "the coordination of signifiers has to be possible before transferences of the signified are able to take place."[5]
See Also
References
- ↑ Jakobson 1956
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.164
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.167
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.175
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.229
