metaphors often rely on one or several metonymic shifts

Most metaphors actually rely on one or more metonymic shifts in order to fully function. This has important implications for thinking about how dynamic metonymy actually is in use. It's easy to say, "[[metonymy relies on pre-existing chains of knowledge]]" when you restrict yourself to the textbook examples of metonymy ("nice wheels" etc.). But it's another thing when you see how dynamic metonymy actually is in real-world implementation, where it's deployed in specific contexts that leverage and play on contextual inferences. ## Two examples Here are two examples from [[de Mendoza Ibáñez et al 2003 - Cognitive operations and pragmatic implication|de Mendoza Ibáñez et al]] in the volume, [[Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing (2003)]]. ### 1. "My lips are sealed" Consider the phrase, "my lips are sealed." This is a metaphor, but it's one that requires a subtle metonymy shift in order for the audience to process it: ![[diagram_lips_are_sealed.png]] See pp. 43-44 <hr> ### 2. "She is the life and soul of the party" Same deal, but the shifts are slightly more complicated: ![[diagram_life_of_the_party.png]] See pp. 44-45