Talk:Metonymy

message: I think the introduction has too much jargon and should be narrower and more direct.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by OhDoTell (talk • contribs) 00:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This concern appears to have been addressed. I was quite impressed with the simple opening sentences, especially with the non-traditional-Wiki example, using Hollywood. Some good thinking, there. Leptus Froggi (talk) 15:09, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simpler Introduction 

message: What about dates, like "The Fourth of July" meaning "American Independence Day" or "May Fourth" meaning "The ideas in China about nationalism and modernization that resulted in and were a result of the 'May Fourth Incident'"?  Another good one is "a September 11th" meaning "An incident of terrorism on a grand scale like what happened on 11 September 2011" 198.207.26.2 (talk) 20:31, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, yes, good idea. Leptus Froggi (talk) 15:11, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates as metonymy 

message: So the term Arab Street instantiates what--metaphorical toponymy? That's too many levels of abstraction to be wieldy (nevermind catchy).
Patronanejo (talk) 07:40, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arab Street 

message: I am loathe to remove the items from the "bibliography", but many of them have no footnotes or parenthetical citations to show what they are supposed to support. Please help clean up the citation style if you can. Otherwise, I will probably move the books to the further reading section, and mark various assertions in the article as needing citation for verification. Thanks, Cnilep (talk) 02:22, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear citation style 

message: The nucleus of the first syllable in metonymy is the DRESS vowel; [ɛ]. Not [i].
192.76.7.216 (talk) 18:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phonetic Transcription 

message: Hello!
When I learned about enthymemes, something clicked for me in figuring out the definition of metonymy
I added the section relating metonymy to enthymemes in order to clarify this concept using the much more easily understood concept of syllogism for my fellow scholars who might have trouble making connections between the definition of metonymy and its use, much like I did. 
I'm a communication major working at a research university in a class on rhetoric and would appreciate any constructive comments or suggestions.
Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by KBB24 (talk • contribs) 04:31, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Edit 3/5/14 Enthymeme example 

message: I know I'm being a bit picky here - the idea is clear enough. But this sentence is factually incorrect:
Whitehall is a street in London, not a city or capital, that's London of course. And we never (to my knowledge) use "London" to represent the UK government. And - we perhaps more commonly refer to it as Westminster after the palace of Westminster (also known as the Houses of Parliament) where the government meets.
is more accurate but maybe a bit clumsy. Any thoughts? Welcome to use that if others agree. I feel that this is quite a high profile page so best to suggest the idea on the talk page first rather than just jump in and try to fix it. Robert Walker (talk) 11:35, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Good proposal as-is—thoughts on tweaking include (1) could just switch to a second example using a city, such as Washington and Moscow, if want to avoid the issue or (2) "national capital or another geographical location" could be "national capital (or a street or building)"—concrete, maybe less clumsy. Streets and buildings include Downing Street, Westminster, Whitehall, Kremlin, White House. — ¾-10 22:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Whitehall is a street, not a city

message: I butchered the 'graph in question, complaining in a remark in the markup to the effect that
:I, and no doubt a few other dunces, don't know whether our colleague meant (by "substitute"): 
:* "alternate name for" or 
:* "vaguer term that may be more accessible to the dunces who don't specialize in LitThry". 
: Note that we dunces might, nevertheless even improve ourselves by reading appropriately linked WP articles on some of the other 7 terms!
   (On the other hand, that i might may have left it insufficiently clear to some, the fact that i doubt i will ever consult Burke's even-older-than-i-am monograph.)--Jerzy•t 06:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Metonymy and related figures of speech ..." (currently 'graph 4 of lead section of the acc'nying article) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Metonymy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130816080831/http://rhetoric.byu.edu/Figures/M/metalepsis.htm to http://rhetoric.byu.edu/figures/m/metalepsis.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031015050215/http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/acl2003/lexfig/pdfs/Peters.pdf to http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/acl2003/lexfig/pdfs/Peters.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:44, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: 'containment' could use better examples. 'white house' & 'pentagon' function quite similarly to toponyms, I think. 
you could say that a toponymic name can persist even when the signified entity moves somewhere else. But do we know that container names can't do that? Or maybe that's a primary distinguisher between these two types of metonyms? If so, the article should say so. 
I think a lot of this article is just structuralists drumming up business for themselves. skakEL 11:59, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  containment sounds a lot like toponymy unless it gets better examples 

message: Is saying America when talking about the United States of America also an example? --FredTC (talk) 12:57, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  America and USA 

message: Isn't the use of the Kremlin to describe the government of Russia an example of synecdoche? Although synecdoche is a type of metonymy, given that these two are often confused, wouldn't it make more sense to have a different example? BobEret (talk) 11:07, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the Kremlin example actually synecdoche? 

message: The Meaning Relationships section of this article feels inappropriately detailed to me. The tone and structure also feel less like an encyclopedic article and more like an educational text. There is way too much information here for it to be a reference in the style of other Wikipedia articles 217.208.166.155 (talk) 08:03, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  “Meaning relationships” section 

message: No supporting evidence or even an explanation for how Israeli Hebrew somehow metaphorically rose from the ashes despite being in continuous contact use for millennia. 2600:4040:9CEE:8500:48F2:FA82:7FD3:54 (talk) 19:45, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hebrew cited as having risen from the ashes