twitter
201
edits
Synecdoche: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
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/> “Synecdoche deals with the intra-relativity: the relation of the whole and its parts. The individual is so far finished as to be characterized by a part of itself” (252).<ref name=Ref5/> While synecdoche focuses on intra-relativity (the relation of the whole and its parts), metonymy focuses on extra-relativity (the “intuitions of necessary relation”). In other words, "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).<ref name=Ref7/> In “A Grouping of Figures of Speech, Based upon the Principle of Their Effectiveness” by Herbert Eveleth Greene writes, “Metonymy names things at a slight remove: instead of naming the thing itself, it names something associated with it, and trusts to the imagination to supply what is not stated, – both the thing unnamed and the relation which bridges the gulf between the two” (438).<ref name=Ref6/> For example, “War is sad.” On the other hand, synecdoche deals with words or relations between words such as alternate names for the same thing. For example, nickel can be interchanged with five coin piece (Bredin 52).<ref name=Ref4/> | 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/> “Synecdoche deals with the intra-relativity: the relation of the whole and its parts. The individual is so far finished as to be characterized by a part of itself” (252).<ref name=Ref5/> While synecdoche focuses on intra-relativity (the relation of the whole and its parts), metonymy focuses on extra-relativity (the “intuitions of necessary relation”). In other words, "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).<ref name=Ref7/> In “A Grouping of Figures of Speech, Based upon the Principle of Their Effectiveness” by Herbert Eveleth Greene writes, “Metonymy names things at a slight remove: instead of naming the thing itself, it names something associated with it, and trusts to the imagination to supply what is not stated, – both the thing unnamed and the relation which bridges the gulf between the two” (438).<ref name=Ref6/> For example, “War is sad.” On the other hand, synecdoche deals with words or relations between words such as alternate names for the same thing. For example, nickel can be interchanged with five coin piece (Bredin 52).<ref name=Ref4/> | ||
=== Examples of Metonymy === | |||
The "White House", the "Kremlin", and "Downing Street" can be used to represent the governments of the United States of America, Russia, and Great Britain, respectively. | |||
"Hollywood" for the American film industry. | |||
== Examples == | == Examples == | ||
=== In Popular Culture and Society === | === In Popular Culture and Society === | ||
| Line 30: | Line 34: | ||
In Daniel Novak's article "If Re-Collecting Were Forgetting: Forged Bodies and Forgotten Labor "Little Dorrit," he examines the existence of synecdoche in Charles Dickens's ''Little Dorrit.'' According to Novak, synecdoche functions in literature as "the exaggeration and isolation of a body part so that its dominance of physical size and semiotic voice the essence of the entire character." Novak uses the bases of this definition to claim that Dickens "effaces the boundary between the material world of things and the organic structures of body, by packaging all parts of the body, no matter how ostensibly central as “accessories” – loose members in the world of commodities" (21). The characters in the novel serve as parts of the whole in the society of the text. In the novel, the life of a character is used to reflect or show a relation to a segment of society. <ref name=Ref8/> | In Daniel Novak's article "If Re-Collecting Were Forgetting: Forged Bodies and Forgotten Labor "Little Dorrit," he examines the existence of synecdoche in Charles Dickens's ''Little Dorrit.'' According to Novak, synecdoche functions in literature as "the exaggeration and isolation of a body part so that its dominance of physical size and semiotic voice the essence of the entire character." Novak uses the bases of this definition to claim that Dickens "effaces the boundary between the material world of things and the organic structures of body, by packaging all parts of the body, no matter how ostensibly central as “accessories” – loose members in the world of commodities" (21). The characters in the novel serve as parts of the whole in the society of the text. In the novel, the life of a character is used to reflect or show a relation to a segment of society. <ref name=Ref8/> | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||