Metonymy is a figure of speech that involves transferring a name from one thing to another on the basis of certain typical kinds of relations: designating the effect with the cause, the whole with a part, the contents with its container. An example would be "a sail on the horizon" for "a ship on the horizon."
Metonymy is a fundamental notion supporting Lacan's thesis that "the unconscious is structured like a language." It is analogous with the Freudian concept of "displacement" and refers to the problematic of desire and demand.
Lacan (2002, p. 155) proposed the following symbolic formula for metonymy:
This formula represents the fact that any new signifier (S0) intervenes because [[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 contiguous with a prior signifier (S)closely linked. Metonymy is best illustrated by the kind This link may be one of displacement that takes place in dreamsphysical contguity, but not necessarily.
The Freudian concept Metonymy is a figure of displacement emphasizes speech that involves transferring a name from one thing to another on the shift basis of value and certain typical kinds of meaning. What usually happens is that words and feelingsrelations: designating the effect with the cause, in the whole with a distorted and disguised formpart, are transferred to nearby materialthe contents with its container. An example would be "a sail on the horizon" for "a ship on the horizon. "Metonymy is a fundamental notion supporting Lacan insisted 's thesis that metonymy resists being meaningful by always producing apparent nonsense, as "the unconscious is structured like a language." It is usually analogous with the case with Freudian concept of "displacement" and refers to the manifest content problematic of a dreamdesire and demand.
Primal repression and the metaphor of the name of the Father impose the mediation of a signifier upon desire. The signifier of the name of the Father initiates the alienation of desire in language. Desire can no longer operate directly. Insofar as it takes the form of speech and is expressed as demand, desire becomes nothing more than a reflection of itself. Increasingly lost in the chain of signifiers, desire refers to an indeterminate series of objects, one after another, that are substitutes for the lost object (das Ding), and thus it refers to an indeterminate series of signifiers that symbolize these substitutive objects.
Desire always refers However, Lacan's use of the term owes little to something fundamentally other than this definition apart from the objects notionn of contiguity, since it aims for or is inspired by the signifiers that symbolize themwork of [[Roman Jakobson]], who established an opposition between [[metonymy]] and [[metaphor]]. Thus desire inevitably follows <ref>Jakobson 1956</ref>Following [[Jakobson]], [[Lacan]] links metonymy to the path combinatorial axis of metonymy[[language]], as opposed to the substitutive axis. Because desire (For example, in the sentence 'I am happy,' the relation between the words 'I' and 'am' is expressed by a symbolizing demandmetonymic relation, it always designates a desire whereas the possibility of substituting 'sad' for 'happy' depends on the metaphoric relation between these two terms.)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 whole ways in which [[signifier]]s can be combined/linked in a single [[signifying chain ('horizontal' relations), whereas [[metaphor]] concerns the lost object) by expressing ways in which a desire [[signifier]] in one [[signifying chain]] may be substituted for a part [[signifier]] in another chain (the substitute object'vertical' relations).Together, just [[metaphor]] and [[metonymy]] constitute the way in which [[signification]]s is produced.[[Lacan]] provides a formula for [[metonymy]].<ref>E. 164</ref>This formula is to be read as follows.On the lefthand side of the metonymic figure "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 sail on [[signifying chain]].On the righthand side of the horizon" designates equation there is '''S''', the whole [[signifier]], and (a ship) by a part (a sail- ), the [[bar]] of the [[Saussure]]ean algorithm.The sign = is to be read 'is congruent with'.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.
JOËL DORLacan proposed the following symbolic formula for metonymy:This formula represents the fact that any new signifier (S0) intervenes because it is contiguous with a prior signifier (S). Metonymy is best illustrated by the kind of displacement that takes place in dreams.The Freudian concept of displacement emphasizes the shift of value and of meaning. What usually happens is that words and feelings, in a distorted and disguised form, are transferred to nearby material. Lacan insisted that metonymy resists being meaningful by always producing apparent nonsense, as is usually the case with the manifest content of a dream.
See [[Lacan]] puts his concept of [[metonymy]] to use in a variety of contexts.== 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.[[Desire]] is also: Metaphorcharacterized by exactly the same never-ending process of continual deferral; Want of beingsince [[desire]] is always "Desire for something else,"<ref>E. 167</lack ref> as soon as the [[object]] of being[[desire]] is attained, it is no longer desirable, and the [[subject]]'s [[desire]] fixes on another [[object]].BibliographyThus [[Lacan]] writes that "desire ''is'' a metonymy."<ref>E 175</ref>
* Dor, Joël. (1998). Introduction == Metonymy and Displacement==[[Lacan]] also fllows [[Jakobson]] in linking the [[metaphor]]-[[metonymy]] distinction to the reading mechanisms of Lacan: The unconscious structured like a language. New York: Other Pressthe [[dream work]] described by [[Freud]]. * Lacan Jacques. (1993). The seminar However, he differs from [[Jakobson]] over the precise nature of Jacques Lacanthis link. Book 3: The psychoses (Russell Grigg, Trans.). New York: W. W. Norton. (Original work published 1981; originally presented 1955-1956) * ——. (1998). Le séminaire. Book 5: Les formations de l'inconscientJust as [[displacement]] is logically prior to [[condensation]], 1957-1958. Paris: Seuil. * ——. (2002).Écrits: A selection (Bruce Finkso [[metonymy]] is the condition for [[metaphor]], Trans.). New York: W. Wbecause "the coordination of signifiers has to be possible before transferences of the signified are able to take place. Norton"<ref>S3.229</ref>
== Another Definition ==
==new==
To the overall conception of linguistics he borrows from Saussure Lacan adds Roman Jakobson’s distinction between metaphor and metonymy:
The second term which Lacan borrows from Jakobson to fill out his understanding of the symbolic order is metonymy: "following Jakobson, Lacan links metonymy to the combinatorial axis of language, as opposed to the substitutive axis" (Evans 113). If metaphor is a process of substitution, whereby one signifier comes to stand in for another in relation to a given signified, then metonymy is a purely diachronic movement above the barrier separating signifier from signified. In contrast to the vertical motion of metaphor, it is a horizontal movement along the chain of signification, as "one signifier constantly refers to another in a perpetual deferral of meaning" (Evans 114). As the only realm in which meaning is generated, the symbolic’s dependence on the metonymic function of signifier relations thus becomes the primary focus of Lacan’s concern with language. He emphasises the metonymic deferral of meaning that takes place in the incessant play of signifiers, referring to the ready movement of the chain of signifiers over the signifieds as glissement (slippage). This designation of the movement along the signifying chain as a slippage emphasises Lacan’s re-writing of Saussure’s concept such that the relationship between signifier and signified ceases to be stable (if arbitrary) and becomes profoundly unstable.
== Miscellaneous ==Primal repression and the metaphor of the name of the Father impose the mediation of a signifier upon desire. The signifier of the name of the Father initiates the alienation of desire in language. Desire can no longer operate directly. Insofar as it takes the form of speech and is expressed as demand, desire becomes nothing more than a reflection of itself. Increasingly lost in the chain of signifiers, desire refers to an indeterminate series of objects, one after another, that are substitutes for the lost object (das Ding), and thus it refers to an indeterminate series of signifiers that symbolize these substitutive objects. Desire always refers to something fundamentally other than the objects it aims for or the signifiers that symbolize them. Thus desire inevitably follows the path of metonymy. Because desire is expressed by a symbolizing demand, it always designates a desire for the whole (the lost object) by expressing a desire for a part (the substitute object), just as the metonymic figure "a sail on the horizon" designates the whole (a ship) by a part (a sail). == See Also ==* [[Condensation]]* [[Displacement]]* [[Category:SymbolicMetaphor]]* [[Category:TermsSignifier]]* [[Category:ConceptsSignification]]* [[Category:PsychoanalysisDesire]]* [[Category:Roman Jakobson]] == References ==<references/> * Lacan Jacques. (1993). The seminar of Jacques Lacan]]. Book 3: The psychoses (Russell Grigg, Trans.). New York: W. W. Norton. (Original work published 1981; originally presented 1955-1956)* ——. (1998). Le séminaire. Book 5: Les formations de l'inconscient, 1957-1958. Paris: Seuil.* ——. (2002).Écrits: A selection (Bruce Fink, Trans.). New York: W. W. Norton
