Synecdoche - Revision history

JamilaBrooks37: /* Relation to Metonymy */

2014-11-06T16:37:11Z

Relation to Metonymy

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:37, 6 November 2014
Line 3:		Line 3:

	== Relation to Metonymy ==		== Relation to Metonymy ==
	~~Synecdoche~~ and metonymy are similar, ~~but different~~. ~~There~~ is a great deal of uncertainty regarding defining metonymy and categorizing words as metonymical. Most definitions are vague, thereby giving the confusing implication that any word can reflect metonymy if used in the right context. In Hugh Bredin's article “Metonymy,” he supplies a general definition of the term that states “metonymy is the transfer of the name of a thing to something else that is closely associated with it - such as cause and effect, container and contained, possessor and possessed, and so on; for example, "crown" or "throne" for monarchy” (45).<ref name=Ref4/> Bredin asserts that such a definition is an “enumeration of instances” that poorly explains the exact function of metonymical words. The one aspect that all critics agree upon in regards to metonymy is that synecdoche is its relative. More specifically, synecdoche is a subsection of metonymy. In order to distinguish between metonymy and synecdoche, a person must examine the context of the words used in a given sentence.		Although synecdoche and metonymy are similar, they each have marked differences when applied to or used with words. To begin with, a person must note that there is a great deal of uncertainty regarding defining metonymy and categorizing words as metonymical. Most definitions are vague, thereby giving the confusing implication that any word can reflect metonymy if used in the right context. In Hugh Bredin's article “Metonymy,” he supplies a general definition of the term that states “metonymy is the transfer of the name of a thing to something else that is closely associated with it - such as cause and effect, container and contained, possessor and possessed, and so on; for example, "crown" or "throne" for monarchy” (45).<ref name=Ref4/> Bredin asserts that such a definition is an “enumeration of instances” that poorly explains the exact function of metonymical words. The one aspect that all critics agree upon in regards to metonymy is that synecdoche is its relative. More specifically, synecdoche is a subsection of metonymy. In order to distinguish between metonymy and synecdoche, a person must examine the context of the words used in a given sentence.
	=== Similarities and Differences ===		=== Similarities and Differences ===
	According to Bredin, “Synecdochic relations are structural, and metonymical relations are extrinsic – relations, in the one case, between particulars and their parts, and in the other case between particulars and other particulars” (54).<ref name=Ref4/> While synecdoche focuses on intra-relativity (the relation of the whole and its parts), metonymy focuses on extra-relativity (the mind's association with a word). More specifically, "Every metonymy is a synecdoche, but not every synecdoche is a metonymy. This rule is true because a metonymy must not only be a part of the root word, making a synecdoche, but also be a unique attribute of or associated with the root word" (Modugno 9).<ref name=Ref5/> For example, when referring to a car a person may call it their "wheels" ~~which is~~ a part of the car ~~making~~ the reference a synecdoche. If the person were to refer to the same vehicle as their "ride" then the car reference would become a metonymy.		According to Bredin, “Synecdochic relations are structural, and metonymical relations are extrinsic – relations, in the one case, between particulars and their parts, and in the other case between particulars and other particulars” (54).<ref name=Ref4/> While synecdoche focuses on intra-relativity (the relation of the whole and its parts), metonymy focuses on extra-relativity (the mind's association with a word). More specifically, "Every metonymy is a synecdoche, but not every synecdoche is a metonymy. This rule is true because a metonymy must not only be a part of the root word, making a synecdoche, but also be a unique attribute of or associated with the root word" (Modugno 9).<ref name=Ref5/> For example, when referring to a car a person may call it their "wheels." The mention of a specific part of the car makes the reference a synecdoche. If the person were to refer to the same vehicle as their "ride," then the car reference would become a metonymy.

	=== Examples of Metonymy ===		=== Examples of Metonymy ===

KernelCoconuts: /* Potpourii */

2014-11-06T16:33:16Z

Potpourii

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:33, 6 November 2014
Line 23:		Line 23:
	"Wheels" for a car.		"Wheels" for a car.

	"I gave him a Pepsi." ~~Where the~~ word "Pepsi" represents the aluminum can containing the soda.		"I gave him a Pepsi." The word "Pepsi" represents the aluminum can containing the soda.

	"I'm out of bullets, give me another magazine." "Magazine" represents the container that holds the bullets the soldier needs for his firearm.		"I'm out of bullets, give me another magazine." "Magazine" represents the container that holds the bullets the soldier needs for his firearm.

KernelCoconuts: /* Similarities and Differences */

2014-11-06T16:30:46Z

Similarities and Differences

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:30, 6 November 2014
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Synecdoche and metonymy are similar, but different. There is a great deal of uncertainty regarding defining metonymy and categorizing words as metonymical. Most definitions are vague, thereby giving the confusing implication that any word can reflect metonymy if used in the right context. In Hugh Bredin's article “Metonymy,” he supplies a general definition of the term that states “metonymy is the transfer of the name of a thing to something else that is closely associated with it - such as cause and effect, container and contained, possessor and possessed, and so on; for example, "crown" or "throne" for monarchy” (45).<ref name=Ref4/> Bredin asserts that such a definition is an “enumeration of instances” that poorly explains the exact function of metonymical words. The one aspect that all critics agree upon in regards to metonymy is that synecdoche is its relative. More specifically, synecdoche is a subsection of metonymy. In order to distinguish between metonymy and synecdoche, a person must examine the context of the words used in a given sentence.		Synecdoche and metonymy are similar, but different. There is a great deal of uncertainty regarding defining metonymy and categorizing words as metonymical. Most definitions are vague, thereby giving the confusing implication that any word can reflect metonymy if used in the right context. In Hugh Bredin's article “Metonymy,” he supplies a general definition of the term that states “metonymy is the transfer of the name of a thing to something else that is closely associated with it - such as cause and effect, container and contained, possessor and possessed, and so on; for example, "crown" or "throne" for monarchy” (45).<ref name=Ref4/> Bredin asserts that such a definition is an “enumeration of instances” that poorly explains the exact function of metonymical words. The one aspect that all critics agree upon in regards to metonymy is that synecdoche is its relative. More specifically, synecdoche is a subsection of metonymy. In order to distinguish between metonymy and synecdoche, a person must examine the context of the words used in a given sentence.
	=== Similarities and Differences ===		=== Similarities and Differences ===
	According to Bredin, ~~“synecdochic~~ relations are structural, and metonymical relations are extrinsic – relations, in the one case, between particulars and their parts, and in the other case between particulars and other particulars” (54).<ref name=Ref4/> While synecdoche focuses on intra-relativity (the relation of the whole and its parts), metonymy focuses on extra-relativity (the mind's association with a word). More specifically, "Every metonymy is a synecdoche, but not every synecdoche is a metonymy. This rule is true because a metonymy must not only be a part of the root word, making a synecdoche, but also be a unique attribute of or associated with the root word" (Modugno 9).<ref name=Ref5/> For example, when referring to a car a person may call it their "wheels" which is a part of the car making the reference a synecdoche. If the person were to refer to the same vehicle as their "ride" then the car reference would become a metonymy.		According to Bredin, “Synecdochic relations are structural, and metonymical relations are extrinsic – relations, in the one case, between particulars and their parts, and in the other case between particulars and other particulars” (54).<ref name=Ref4/> While synecdoche focuses on intra-relativity (the relation of the whole and its parts), metonymy focuses on extra-relativity (the mind's association with a word). More specifically, "Every metonymy is a synecdoche, but not every synecdoche is a metonymy. This rule is true because a metonymy must not only be a part of the root word, making a synecdoche, but also be a unique attribute of or associated with the root word" (Modugno 9).<ref name=Ref5/> For example, when referring to a car a person may call it their "wheels" which is a part of the car making the reference a synecdoche. If the person were to refer to the same vehicle as their "ride" then the car reference would become a metonymy.

	=== Examples of Metonymy ===		=== Examples of Metonymy ===

KernelCoconuts: /* Relation to Metonymy */

2014-11-06T16:30:30Z

Relation to Metonymy

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:30, 6 November 2014
Line 3:		Line 3:

	== Relation to Metonymy ==		== Relation to Metonymy ==
	Synecdoche and metonymy are similar, but different. There is a great deal of uncertainty regarding defining metonymy and categorizing words as metonymical. Most definitions are vague, thereby giving the confusing implication that any word can reflect metonymy if used in the right context. In Hugh Bredin's article “Metonymy,” he supplies a general definition of the term that states “metonymy is the transfer of the name of a thing to something else that is closely associated with it - such as cause and effect, container and contained, possessor and possessed, and so on; for example, "crown" or "throne" for monarchy” (45).<ref name=Ref4/> Bredin asserts that such a definition is an “enumeration of instances” that poorly explains the exact function of metonymical words. The one aspect that all critics agree upon in regards to metonymy is that synecdoche is its relative. More specifically, synecdoche is a subsection of metonymy. In order to distinguish between metonymy and synecdoche, a person must examine the context of the words used in a sentence.		Synecdoche and metonymy are similar, but different. There is a great deal of uncertainty regarding defining metonymy and categorizing words as metonymical. Most definitions are vague, thereby giving the confusing implication that any word can reflect metonymy if used in the right context. In Hugh Bredin's article “Metonymy,” he supplies a general definition of the term that states “metonymy is the transfer of the name of a thing to something else that is closely associated with it - such as cause and effect, container and contained, possessor and possessed, and so on; for example, "crown" or "throne" for monarchy” (45).<ref name=Ref4/> Bredin asserts that such a definition is an “enumeration of instances” that poorly explains the exact function of metonymical words. The one aspect that all critics agree upon in regards to metonymy is that synecdoche is its relative. More specifically, synecdoche is a subsection of metonymy. In order to distinguish between metonymy and synecdoche, a person must examine the context of the words used in a given sentence.
	=== Similarities and Differences ===		=== Similarities and Differences ===
	According to Bredin, “synecdochic relations are structural, and metonymical relations are extrinsic – relations, in the one case, between particulars and their parts, and in the other case between particulars and other particulars” (54).<ref name=Ref4/> While synecdoche focuses on intra-relativity (the relation of the whole and its parts), metonymy focuses on extra-relativity (the mind's association with a word). More specifically, "Every metonymy is a synecdoche, but not every synecdoche is a metonymy. This rule is true because a metonymy must not only be a part of the root word, making a synecdoche, but also be a unique attribute of or associated with the root word" (Modugno 9).<ref name=Ref5/> For example, when referring to a car a person may call it their "wheels" which is a part of the car making the reference a synecdoche. If the person were to refer to the same vehicle as their "ride" then the car reference would become a metonymy.		According to Bredin, “synecdochic relations are structural, and metonymical relations are extrinsic – relations, in the one case, between particulars and their parts, and in the other case between particulars and other particulars” (54).<ref name=Ref4/> While synecdoche focuses on intra-relativity (the relation of the whole and its parts), metonymy focuses on extra-relativity (the mind's association with a word). More specifically, "Every metonymy is a synecdoche, but not every synecdoche is a metonymy. This rule is true because a metonymy must not only be a part of the root word, making a synecdoche, but also be a unique attribute of or associated with the root word" (Modugno 9).<ref name=Ref5/> For example, when referring to a car a person may call it their "wheels" which is a part of the car making the reference a synecdoche. If the person were to refer to the same vehicle as their "ride" then the car reference would become a metonymy.

KernelCoconuts: /* References */

2014-11-06T16:22:14Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:22, 6 November 2014
Line 38:		Line 38:
	<references>		<references>

	* <ref name=Ref1>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/synecdoche/ ''Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary ~~Definition~~''] </ref>)		* <ref name=Ref1>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/synecdoche/ ''Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary''] </ref>)
	* <ref name=Ref2> [http://books.google.com/books?id=PY6tAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA281&lpg=PA281&dq=synecdoche+simultaneous&source=bl&ots=n7feDT_Ze_&sig=IjuXQfGNDrDro5I0HmImQo-Q9OU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=sY1aVOWAKcOXNpKDgqAB&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=synecdoche%20simultaneous&f=false/ Fundamentals of the Art of Poetry] </ref>		* <ref name=Ref2> [http://books.google.com/books?id=PY6tAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA281&lpg=PA281&dq=synecdoche+simultaneous&source=bl&ots=n7feDT_Ze_&sig=IjuXQfGNDrDro5I0HmImQo-Q9OU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=sY1aVOWAKcOXNpKDgqAB&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=synecdoche%20simultaneous&f=false/ Fundamentals of the Art of Poetry] </ref>
	* <ref name=Ref3> [http://books.google.com/books?id=1abNK-Ikq9kC&pg=PA165&lpg=PA165&ots=ZT64DBu2MH&focus=viewport&dq=synecdoche+can+be+the+material.something+is+made+out+of&output=html_text/ Write On] </ref>		* <ref name=Ref3> [http://books.google.com/books?id=1abNK-Ikq9kC&pg=PA165&lpg=PA165&ots=ZT64DBu2MH&focus=viewport&dq=synecdoche+can+be+the+material.something+is+made+out+of&output=html_text/ Write On] </ref>

KernelCoconuts: /* Potpourii */

2014-11-06T16:20:47Z

Potpourii

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:20, 6 November 2014
Line 27:		Line 27:
	"I'm out of bullets, give me another magazine." "Magazine" represents the container that holds the bullets the soldier needs for his firearm.		"I'm out of bullets, give me another magazine." "Magazine" represents the container that holds the bullets the soldier needs for his firearm.

	"~~Nice threads~~" for clothing ~~materials~~.		"Threads" for clothing.

	"Mouths to feed" for people to feed.		"Mouths to feed" for people to feed.

KernelCoconuts at 16:19, 6 November 2014

2014-11-06T16:19:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:19, 6 November 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Synecdoche''' (sə-nek-də-kē"<ref name=Ref1/>), which is derived from the Greek synekdoche and translated to "simultaneous comprehension"<ref name=Ref2/>, is a literary device that utilizes a part of an object or the entire object to represent some part of the whole object. This trope can function in many ways as a literary device. It can allow larger groups to represent smaller ones or vice versa.		'''Synecdoche''' (sə-nek-də-kē"<ref name=Ref1/>), which is derived from the Greek synekdoche and translated to "simultaneous comprehension"<ref name=Ref2/>, is a literary device that utilizes a part of an object or the entire object to represent some part of the whole object. This trope can function in many ways as a literary device. It can allow larger groups to represent smaller ones or vice versa.
	For instance, an object can be identified by the material it is made with or by the material it is packaged in. (Mulvey 165).<ref name=Ref3/>		For instance, an object can be identified by the material it is made with or by the material it is packaged in (Mulvey 165).<ref name=Ref3/>

	== Relation to Metonymy ==		== Relation to Metonymy ==

JamilaBrooks37 at 16:12, 6 November 2014

2014-11-06T16:12:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:12, 6 November 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Synecdoche''' (sə-nek-də-kē"<ref name=Ref1/>); from the Greek synekdoche ~~which translates~~ to "simultaneous comprehension"<ref name=Ref2/> is a literary device that utilizes a part of an object or the entire object to represent some part of the whole object. This trope can function in many ways as a literary device. It can allow larger groups to represent smaller ones or vice versa.		'''Synecdoche''' (sə-nek-də-kē"<ref name=Ref1/>), which is derived from the Greek synekdoche and translated to "simultaneous comprehension"<ref name=Ref2/>, is a literary device that utilizes a part of an object or the entire object to represent some part of the whole object. This trope can function in many ways as a literary device. It can allow larger groups to represent smaller ones or vice versa.
	For instance, an object can be identified by the material it is made with or by the material it is packaged in. (Mulvey 165).<ref name=Ref3/>		For instance, an object can be identified by the material it is made with or by the material it is packaged in. (Mulvey 165).<ref name=Ref3/>

JamilaBrooks37: /* Potpourii */

2014-11-06T16:09:11Z

Potpourii

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:09, 6 November 2014
Line 27:		Line 27:
	"I'm out of bullets, give me another magazine." "Magazine" represents the container that holds the bullets the soldier needs for his firearm.		"I'm out of bullets, give me another magazine." "Magazine" represents the container that holds the bullets the soldier needs for his firearm.

	"Nice threads" for ~~the~~ materials ~~of clothes~~.		"Nice threads" for clothing materials.

	"Mouths to feed" for people to feed.		"Mouths to feed" for people to feed.

JamilaBrooks37: /* Potpourii */

2014-11-06T16:07:47Z

Potpourii

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:07, 6 November 2014
Line 23:		Line 23:
	"Wheels" for a car.		"Wheels" for a car.

	"I gave him a Pepsi." Where the word "Pepsi" represents the aluminum can ~~that contains~~ the soda.		"I gave him a Pepsi." Where the word "Pepsi" represents the aluminum can containing the soda.

	"I'm out of bullets, give me another magazine." "Magazine" represents the container that holds the bullets the soldier needs for his firearm.		"I'm out of bullets, give me another magazine." "Magazine" represents the container that holds the bullets the soldier needs for his firearm.