The Interactional Relationship Between Metonymy And Conceptual Integration Theory

Nearly all rhetoricians and linguists have taken it for granted for a long time that metonymy is a figurative language. However, in recent years some researchers also consider it a kind of cognitive process and try to interpret this device in the cognitive perspective. Conceptual integration (or blending) theory, a salient theory in western cognitive linguistic field, was brought forward by Fauconnier in the 1990s. This theory holds that conceptual integration widely exists in cognitive processes, which has made it a quite popular theory in the cognitive linguistic study. Now, it has attracted much attention both at home and abroad due to its forceful explanatory power. Some scholars have proved its explanatory power from various angles, but few of them have applied this theory to metonymy analysis. On the basis of cognitive process, metonymy and conceptual integration theory may be closely related.This thesis intends to give a tentative exploration and study of the interactional relationship between metonymy and conceptual integration theory, trying to offer a new platform for the study on these two terms. And in order to give the reader a clear description, some examples addressed by the previous scholars will be referred to. Moreover, the analysis of the relationship between metonymy and conceptual integration theory is by no means a systematic one. Hopefully, it can offer some insights and enlightenment to the readers who are interested in this issue.This thesis mainly consists of five sections. Introduction gives us a brief description of some relevant issues, which includes the current interests in metonymy, the previous studies of conceptual integration, the objectives, methodology, feasibility and originality of this thesis. Chapter One shows us a cognitive study of metonymy. In this chapter, the definitions and the classifications of metonymy are discussed respectively. Besides, metonymy is analyzed as a basic mode of cognition and thinking. Lastly, the application of metonymy is mentioned. Chapter Two lists a synoptic view of conceptual integration theory. In this chapter, the key issues about conceptual integration theory are discussed, including its theoretical basis, development, metal space theory, optimality principles, the network model and its wide application. Chapter Three analyzes the interactional relationship between metonymy and conceptual integration theory, including metonymy as basis of conceptualization, conceptual nature of metonymy, metonymic features and conceptual structure, metonymy and mental space theory, metonymy and optimality principles, the role of metonymy in conceptual integration theory and a study of some concrete examples. Definitely, this chapter plays an essential part in this thesis and it can be considered as the most important section. Finally, conclusion is the retrospect and prospect of the whole thesis, which gives us a summary of the main points of this thesis and points out some inevitable limitations of the study and some suggestions for further study and research.