Ibérica (Oct 2017)
A metaphor-metonymy continuum? Evidence from cross-field L2 set texts
Abstract
While the typology of metonymy has remained relatively stable in the literature, there is still ongoing discussion about metaphor varieties and their distinction from the former. Some theorists (Radden 2003; Chen and Lai 2012) have argued that language must be approached as stages along a continuum, with literal and metaphoric uses at both ends, and metonymy somewhere in the middle. However, in L2 contexts, particularly in specialised domains, the nature of such figurative uses can be obscure to learners, as they often follow the received models in their fields of study, and language tends to be perceived as primarily literal. This actually distorts the position of language elements within the metonymy-metaphor continuum, and it prevents linking figurative and non-figurative uses into a more comprehensive use of language as a richer tool for communication. Using a three-dimensional taxonomy for metaphor, which takes into account communicative, conceptual and linguistic factors, and a detailed revision of metonymy types as research instruments, this paper performs a cross-field comparison of a corpus of 150 CEFR-B1 set texts to which undergraduates in Economics, Geography, and Chemistry at a Spanish university are exposed. It gives statistical treatment to the appearance of figurative language in texts, showing variations and trends among disciplines, and the prevalence of metaphor-metonymy overlap in those areas of knowledge. In addition, the findings encourage the integration of a cognitive approach when highlighting metaphor and metonymy to L2 students, since the cross-linguistic and cross-cultural variations that characterise these figures may complicate transitioning from literal to figurative language uses without instructors needing to resort to their mother tongue.
