[[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.{{Top}}métonymie{{Bottom}}
===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===
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>[[Roman Jakobson|Jakobson, Roman]]. "Two aspects of language and two types of aphasic disturbances," ''Selected Writings'', vol. II, ''[[Word]] and Language'', The [[Hague]]: Mouton, 1971 [1956]., p. 21.</ref>
==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 [[Jakobson]]===Diachronic Dimension of Signifying Chain===In his most detailed work on 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.
[[===Formula for Metonymy]] thus concerns the ways in which [[signifier]]s can be combined/linked in a single ===[[signifying chain ('horizontal' relations), whereas [[metaphorLacan]] concerns the ways in which provides a [[signifier]] in one [[signifying chainformula]] may be substituted for a [[signifiermetonymy]] in another chain ('vertical' relations).<ref>{{E}} p.164</ref>
Together, [[metaphor]] and [[Image:Lacan-metonymy.jpg|center]] constitute the way in which [[signification]]s is produced.
==Formula of Metonymy==This formula is to be read as follows:
On the lefthand side of the [[Lacanalgebra|equation]], [[outside]] provides a formula for the brackets, [[metonymyLacan]].writes '''<refi>{{E}} p.164f</refi>''' '''S''', the [[paternal function|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 [[algebra|equation]] there is '''S''', the [[signifier]], and ('''---'''), the [[bar]] of the [[Saussure]]ean [[sign|algorithm]]. The [[sign]] <b>=</b> is to be read "is congruent with."
This ===Formula for Metonymy - Summary===Thus the [[whole]] formula is to be read as follows.reads:
On <blockquote>"The signifying function of the lefthand side connection of the equation, outside signifier with the brackets, [[Lacan]] writes '''<i>fsignifier is congruent with maintenance of the bar."</iblockquote>''' '''S''', the signifying function, which is to say the effect of [[signification]].
Inside The formula is meant to illustrate [[Lacan]]'s [[thesis]] that in [[metonymy]] the brackets he writes '''S . . . S''''[[resistance]] of [[signification]] is maintained, the link between one [[signifierbar]] and another in a is not crossed, no new [[signifying chainsignified]]is produced.
On the righthand side of the equation there is '''S''', the ===Contexts===[[signifierLacan]], and ( '''--''' ), the puts his [[barconcept]] of the [[Saussure]]ean [[sign|algorithmmetonymy]]to use in a variety of contexts.
The ===Metonymy and Desire===[[Lacan]] presents [[metonymy]] as a [[diachrony|diachronic]] movement from one [[signifier]] to another along the [[signifying chain]], as one [[signsignifier]] = is constantly refers to be read "is congruent withanother in a perpetual [[deferred action|deferral]] of [[signification|meaning]]."
[[Desire]] is also characterized by exactly the same never-ending [[process]] of continual [[deferred action|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 the whole formula reads: [[Lacan]] writes that "desire ''is'' a metonymy."<ref>{{E}} p. 175</ref>
<blockquote>"===Metonymy and Displacement===[[Lacan]] also follows [[Jakobson]] in linking the [[metaphor]]-[[metonymy]] [[distinction]] to the signifying function mechanisms of the connection [[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 signifier with condition for [[metaphor]], because "the signifier is congruent with maintenance coordination of [[signifiers]] has to be possible before transferences of the barsignified are able to take [[place]]."<ref>{{S3}} p. 229</blockquoteref>
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=See Also==[[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 for something else,"<ref>{{ESee}} 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 * [[LacanBar]] writes that "desire ''is'' a metonymy."<ref>{{E}} p.175</ref> == Metonymy and Displacement==* [[Lacan]] also follows [[JakobsonDesire]] in linking the [[metaphor]]-[[metonymy]] distinction to the mechanisms of the [[dream work]] described by [[Freud]].||However, he differs from * [[JakobsonDisplacement]] over the precise nature of this link. Just as [* [displacement]] is logically prior to [[condensationLanguage]], 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 ==||
* [[Metaphor]]
* [[Signification]]||* [[Signifier]]* [[Signifying chain]]{{Also}}
== References ==
<div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small">
<references/>
</div>
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]
[[Category:Linguistics]]
[[Category:Dictionary]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Symbolic]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Concepts]]
[[Category:Terms]]
[[Category:OK]]
__NOTOC__
