METAPHOR-METONYMIC INTERACTION IN TERMINOLOGY

Abstract. The article analyzes the cognitive and semantic characteristics of conceptual metaphtonymy as a phenomenon of cognitive combination of metaphor and metonymy. Conceptual metaphor and metonymy are mental mechanisms formed as a result of the interaction of two or more conceptual areas. Formed as a result of semantic reinterpretation, metaphor and metonymy become units of secondary indirect nomination and allow us to think about one content area using the concepts of another area. The considered cognitive phenomena are based on the associative principle, as a result of which the same object can be considered both metonymically and metaphorically. Being different cognitive phenomena, metaphor and metonymy, however, are not mutually exclusive and interact both in common language and in terminological combinations. Despite the fact that many scientists have long been engaged in the study of metaphor-metonymic interaction, the problem of describing and classifying metaphtonymic models remains relevant. The purpose of the research is to analyze metaphor-metonymic processes in investment terminology. Phraseological term units are formed in the professional environment as fixed idiomatic combinations. The cognitive structure of such terminological combinations is revealed through their component structure. The article presents a review of the classifications of the analyzed phenomenon, gives different scientists’ points of view on the issue, and identifies a new type of metaphtonymic relations by the example of a «to dress up a portfolio» term. Metaphor and metonymy, interacting in blending, turn out to be the connecting elements for identifying the meaning of the expression «to dress up a portfolio». The blending of the meanings of the elements leads to the fact that in reality the phrase is neither a pure metaphor nor a metonymy, but serves as an example of the combination of metaphorical and metonymic projections. Only when analyzing a blend consisting of metaphor-metonymic connections, it becomes possible to give a correct interpretation of the idiomatic term. Since this example does not apply to any of the types of metaphtonymy proposed by L. Goossens and F. Ruiz de Mendoza, it seems necessary to propose a new type of metaphor-metonymic interaction – a combination, when a metaphor and a metonymy exist on absolutely equal rights being a part of an idiomatic terminological combination.

Keywords: metaphor, metonymy, metaphtonymy, a term, an idiom, combining