Eponymy, A Way from Onomasticon to Lexicon; A study from Cognitive Onomastics Perspective

Dastlan, Morteza

doi:10.30473/il.2025.72251.1658

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Morteza Dastlan

Assistant Professor of General Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.30473/il.2025.72251.1658

Abstract

The aim of this study is investigating the relationship between onomasticon, -as depository of proper names- and mental lexicon and also eponymy –as a mechanism for transforming proper names into common words- from cognitive onomastics perspective. It is a basic descriptive research that collected a corpus of data in library method and seeks to find out whether eponymy is active in Farsi and if yes, which word formation processes create common words. The theoretical framework is adapted from Barcelona's (2003) ideas in demonstrating the role of metonymy in emergence of proper names and their frequent reclassification as common nouns, and class-inclusion model of conceptual metaphors comprehension of Glucksberg and Keysar (1990). The analysis of data revealed that in Farsi, eponymy in the form of word-formation processes like derivation, conversion and combination transforms the proper names into common words. This is justifiable on the basis of cognitive concepts like conceptual metaphor and metonymies. The metonyms "PROPER NAME FOR ITS RELATED OBJECT/ ACTION/ CONCEPT", "AGENT FOR ACTION" and "PROTOTYPICAL MEMBER FOR THE CLASS" and class-inclusion model of conceptual metaphor are involved in introducing eponymy. The successive application and interaction of conceptual metaphor and metonyms, indicates the metaphtonymy at work in this process.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Sociolinguistics

References

References

Akmajian, A., Demers, R., Farmer, A. & Harnish, R. (2010). Linguistics; an Introduction to Language and Communication. 6^th Edition. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Andeson, J. M. (2007). The Grammar of Names. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Banaruee, H., Khoshsima, H., Khatin-Zadeh, O. & Askari, A. (2017). Suppression of semantic features in metaphor comprehension, Cogent Psychology, 4:1, 1409323, 1-6.

Barcelona, A. (2003). Names: A metonymic ‘return ticket’ in five languages. Jezikoslovlje. 4(1): 11-41.

Chiwanga, F. E. & Mkiramweni, N. P. (2019). Ethno-ornithology and onomastics in the Natta community, Serengeti district, Tanzania. Heliyon. (5): 1-6.

Clark, E. & Clark, H. (1979). When nouns surface as verbs. Language. 55: 767-811.

Coates, R. (2005). A new theory of properhood. In E. Brylla and M. Wahlberg (eds.), vol.1, (124-137).

Dastlan, M. (2022). The Process of Properization of Animal Common Nouns in Persian; A Study in the Framework of Cognitive Onomastics, Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5, 4, (20), 23-31. [In Persian]

Dirven, R. (1999). Conversion as a conceptual metonymy of event schemata. In K. Panther & G. Radden (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought, (275-287). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Falk, J. S. (1978). Linguistics and Language; A Survay of Basic Concepts and Implications. 2^nd Edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Gary-prieur, M. (1991). Le nom propre constitue-t-il une catégorie linguistique?. Langue française. 92 (1), 4-25.

Givon, T. (2015). The adaptive approach to grammar. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, (43-64). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Glucksberg, S. & Keysar, B. (1990). Understanding metaphorical comparisons: Beyond similarity. Psychological Review. 97(1): 3–18.

Goosens, L. (1990). Metaphtonomy: the interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics. 1: 323-340.

Hanks, P. (2013). Lexical Analysis: Norms and Exploitations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hassandust, M. (2016). An Etymological Dictionary of the Persian Language, 2^nd Edition. Tehran: The Academy of Persian Language and Literature. [In Persian]

Hudson, G. (2000). Essential Introductory Linguistics. Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers.

Kaplan, D. (1978). DTHAT. In P. cole, (ed.), Syntax and Semantics: pragmatics, (221-243). New York: Academic Press.

Kleiber, G. (1981). Problèmes de référence: descriptions définies et noms propres. Paris: Klincksieck.

Kövecses, Z., & Radden, G. (1998). Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics. 9.1: 37-77.

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mignot, E. & Philippe. M. (2022). How proper names enter the lexicon – From the Central Intelligence Agency to CIA: the reduction of full denominative expressions interpreted as a means to achieve (greater) lexicalization. Lexis. Journal in English Lexicology. 20, 1-23.

Mohammadikhah, R. (2015). Drawing of Atlas Dialectics of Kabgiyan of Boirahmad Town. M.A. Thesis on Linguistics. Islamic Azad University Fars science and Research Branch. [In Persian]

Panther, K. & Thornburg, L. (2002). The role of metaphor and metonymy in English –er nominals. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast, (279-319). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Philippe, M. (2020). Le nominal propre. Étude du nom propre en anglais. Doctoral Thesis. Paris: Sorbonne Université.

Pollux, J. (1967). Onomasticon. Stuttgart: Teubner.

Sklyarenko, A. & Sklyarenko, O. (2005). Interrelationship between common nouns and proper nouns, in E. Brylla and M. Wahlberg (eds.), vol.1, (277–282).

Yule, G. (2014). The Study of Language. 5^th Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zabeeh, F. (1968). What is in a Name? An Inquiry into the Semantics and Pragmatics of Proper Names. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

Eponymy, A Way from Onomasticon to Lexicon; A study from Cognitive Onomastics Perspective

References

References

Volume 7, Issue 4 - Serial Number 28December 2024Pages 25-37

Volume 7, Issue 4 - Serial Number 28
December 2024
Pages 25-37