The ministry of higher and secondary specialized education of the republic of uzbekistan

§1.2. Characterizing metaphor and metonymy

Metonymy and related figures of speech are common in everyday speech and writing. Synecdoche and metalepsis are considered specific types of metonymy. Polysemy, multiple meanings of a single word or phrase, sometimes results from relations of metonymy. Both metonymy and metaphor involve the substitution of one term for another. In metaphor, this substitution is based on some specific analogy between two things, whereas in metonymy the substitution is based on some understood association orcontiguity.

American literary theorist Kenneth Burke considers metonymy as one of four "master tropes": metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony. He discusses them in particular ways in his book A Grammar of Motives. Whereas Roman Jakobson argued that the fundamental dichotomy in trope was between metaphor and metonymy, Burke claims that the fundamental dichotomy is between irony and synecdoche, which he also describes as the dichotomy between dialectic and representation, or again between reduction and perspective. ¹

In addition to its use in everyday speech, metonymy is a figure of speech in some poetry and in much rhetoric. Greek and Latin scholars of rhetoric made significant contributions to the study of metonymy

Synecdoche, in which a specific part of something is used to refer to the whole, is usually understood as a specific kind of metonymy. Sometimes an absolute distinction is made between a metonymy and a synecdoche, treating metonymy as different from, rather than inclusive of, synecdoche. There is a similar problem with the terms simile and metaphor.

When the distinction is made, it is the following: when "A" is used to refer to "B", it is a synecdoche if A is a component of B or if B is a component of A, and a metonym if A is commonly associated with B but not part of its whole or a whole of its part. Thus, "twenty thousand hungry mouths to feed" is a synecdoche because mouths (A) are a part of the people (B) referred to. "America votes" is also a synecdoche because America is a whole of which the people who voted are a part. On the other hand, "The White House said" is metonymy, but not synecdoche, for the president of the United States and his staff, because, although the White House is associated with the president and his staff, the building is not a part of the people.

Similarly, metalepsis is closely related to and sometimes understood as a specific kind of metonymy. Metalepsis is a figure of speech in which a word or a phrase from figurative speech is used in a new context. The new figure of speech refers to an existing one.  For example, in the idiom "lead foot", meaning someone who drives fast, lead is a heavy substance, and a heavy foot on the accelerator pedal would cause a vehicle to go quickly. The use of "lead foot" to describe a person follows the intermediate substitution of "lead" for"heavy". The figure of speech is a "metonymy of a metonymy".

Metaphor clarity or identify hidden similarities between two ideas. Metaphors are often compared with other types of figurative language, such as , hyperbole, metonymy and simile. One of the most commonly cited examples of a metaphor in English literature comes from the "All the world's a stage" monologue from As You Like It:²

All the world's a stage,

And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances ...

The concept of metonymy also informs the nature of polysemy, i.e., how the same phonological form (word) has different semantic mappings (meanings). If the two meanings are unrelated, as in the word pen meaning both writing instrument and enclosure, they are considered homonyms. Within logical polysemies, a large class of mappings may be considered to be a case of metonymic transfer (e.g., "chicken" for the bird, as well as its meat; "crown" for the object, as well as the institution). Other cases where the meaning is polysemous, however, may turn out to be more metaphorical, e.g., "eye" as in the "eye of the needle

Metonymy works by the contiguity (association) between two concepts, whereas the term "metaphor" is based upon their analogous similarity. When people use metonymy, they do not typically wish to transfer qualities from one referent to another as they do with metaphor.^[10] There is nothing press-like about reporters or crown-like about a monarch, but "the press" and "the crown" are both common metonyms.

Some uses of figurative language may be understood as both metonymy and metaphor; for example, the relationship between "a crown" and a "king" could be interpreted metaphorically (i.e., the king, like his gold crown, could be seemingly stiff yet ultimately malleable, over-ornate, and consistently immobile). However, in the phrase "lands belonging to the crown", the word "crown" is definitely a metonymy. The reason is that monarchs by and large indeed wear a crown, physically. In other words, there is a pre-existent link between "crown" and "monarchy". On the other hand, when Ghil'ad Zuckermann argues that the Israeli language is a "phoenicuckoo cross with some magpie characteristics", he is definitely using metaphors.^[11]:4 There is no physical link between a language and a bird. The reason the metaphors "phoenix" and "cuckoo" are used is that on the one hand hybridic "Israeli" is based on Hebrew, which, like a phoenix, rises from the ashes; and on the other hand, hybridic "Israeli" is based on Yiddish, which like a cuckoo, lays its egg in the nest of another bird, tricking it to believe that it is its own egg. Furthermore, the metaphor "magpie" is employed because, according to Zuckermann, hybridic "Israeli" displays the characteristics of a magpie, "stealing" from languages such as Arabic and English.

Two examples using the term "fishing" help clarify the distinction The phrase "to fish pearls" uses metonymy, drawing from "fishing" the idea of taking things from the ocean. What is carried across from "fishing fish" to "fishing pearls" is the domain of metonymy. In contrast, the metaphorical phrase "fishing for information" transfers the concept of fishing into a new domain. If someone is "fishing" for information, we do not imagine that the person is anywhere near the ocean; rather, we transpose elements of the action of fishing (waiting, hoping to catch something that cannot be seen, probing) into a new domain (a conversation). Thus, metaphor works by presenting a target set of meanings and using them to suggest a similarity between items, actions, or events in two domains, whereas metonymy calls up or references a specific domain (here, removing items from the sea).

Sometimes, metaphor and metonymy may both be at work in the same figure of speech, or one could interpret a phrase metaphorically or metonymically. For example, the phrase "lend me your ear" could be analyzed in a number of ways. One could imagine the following interpretations:

• 
  Analyze "ear" metonymically first – "ear" means "attention" (because people use ears to pay attention to each other's speech). Now, when we hear the phrase "Talk to him; you have his ear", it symbolizes he will listen to you or that he will pay attention to you. Another phrase "lending an ear (attention)", we stretch the base meaning of "lend" (to let someone borrow an object) to include the "lending" of non-material things (attention), but, beyond this slight extension of the verb, no metaphor is at work.
  
• 
  Imagine the whole phrase literally – imagine that the speaker literally borrows the listener's ear as a physical object (and the person's head with it). Then the speaker has temporary possession of the listener's ear, so the listener has granted the speaker temporary control over what the listener hears. The phrase "lend me your ear" is interpreted to metaphorically mean that the speaker wants the listener to grant the speaker temporary control over what the listener hears.
  
• 
  First, analyze the verb phrase "lend me your ear" metaphorically to mean "turn your ear in my direction," since it is known that, literally lending a body part is nonsensical. Then, analyze the motion of ears metonymically – we associate "turning ears" with "paying attention," which is what the speaker wants the listeners to do.
  

It is difficult to say which analysis above most closely represents the way a listener interprets the expression, and it is possible that different listeners analyse the phrase in different ways, or even in different ways at different times. Regardless, all three analyses yield the same interpretation. Thus, metaphor and metonymy, though different in their mechanism, work together seamlessly.^[13]

Other examples of metonym and metaphor overlap are found in biblical literature. For example, “tongues” is a metonym for languages in 1 Cor. 12:30, and “sleep” is a metonym for Lazarus’ death in John 11:11.^[14] In the Hebrew Bible, “fire” is a metonymic image for Samson’s uncontrollable rage.^[15] He snaps cords with his strength, which are likened to flax dissolved in fire (Judg. 15:14), and sets the Philistines’ fields on fire

Main article: List of metonyms

Here are some broad kinds of relationships where metonymy is frequently used:

• 
  Containment: When one thing contains another, it can frequently be used metonymically, as when "dish" is used to refer not to a plate but to the food it contains, or as when the name of a building is used to refer to the entity it contains, as when "the White House" or "The Pentagon" are used to refer to the U.S. presidential staff or the military leadership, respectively.³
  
• 
  A physical item, place, or body part used to refer to a related concept, such as "the bench" for the judicial profession, "stomach" or "belly" for appetite or hunger, "mouth" for speech, various terms^[which?] for the genitalia for sexual desire or satisfaction of said desire, being "in diapers" for infancy, "palate" for taste, "the altar" or "the aisle" for marriage, "hand" for someone's responsibility for something ("he had a hand in it"), "head" or "brain" for mind or intelligence, or "nose" for concern about someone else's affairs, (as in "keep your nose out of my business"). A reference to Timbuktu, as in "from here to Timbuktu," usually means a place or idea is too far away or mysterious. Metonymy of objects or body parts for concepts is common in dreams.
  
• 
  Tools/instruments: Often a tool is used to signify the job it does or the person who does the job, as in the phrase "his Rolodex is long and valuable" (referring to the Rolodex instrument, which keeps contact business cards ... meaning he has a lot of contacts and knows many people). Also "the press" (referring to the printing press), or as in the proverb, "The pen is mightier than the sword."
  
• 
  Product for process: This is a type of metonymy where the product of the activity stands for the activity itself. For example, in "The book is moving right along," the book refers to the process of writing or publishing.
  
• 
  Punctuation marks often stand metonymically for a meaning expressed by the punctuation mark. For example, "He's a big question mark to me" indicates that something is unknown.^[18] In the same way, 'period' can be used to emphasise that a point is concluded or not to be challenged.
  
• 
  Synecdoche: A part of something is often used for the whole, as when people refer to "head" of cattle or assistants are referred to as "hands." An example of this is theCanadian dollar, referred to as the loonie for the image of a bird on the one-dollar coin. United States one hundred-dollar bills are often referred to as "Bens", "Benjamins" or "Franklins" because they bear a portrait of Benjamin Franklin. Also, the whole of something is used for a part, as when people refer to a municipal employee as "the council" or police officers as "the law".
  
• 
  Toponyms: A country's capital city or some location within the city is frequently used as a metonym for the country's government, such as Washington, D.C., in the United States; Ottawa in Canada; Tokyo in Japan; New Delhi in India; Downing Street or Whitehall in the United Kingdom; and the Kremlin in Russia. Similarly, other important places, such as Wall Street, Madison Avenue, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, Vegas, and Detroit are commonly used to refer to the industries that are located there (finance, advertising,high technology, entertainment, gambling, and motor vehicles, respectively). Such usage may persist even when the industries in question have moved elsewhere, for example, Fleet Street continues to be used as a metonymy for the British national press, though it is no longer located in the physical street of that name⁴
  

A place is often used as a metonym for a government or other official institutions, for example, Brussels for the institutions of the European Union, The Hague for the International Court of Justice or International Criminal Court, Nairobi for the government of Kenya, the White House and Capitol Hill for the executive and legislative branches, respectively, of the United States federal government, or Foggy Bottom for the U.S. State Department. A place can represent an entire industry: for instance, Wall Street is often used metonymically to describe the entire U.S. financial and corporate banking sector.^[19] Common nouns and phrases can also be metonyms: red tape can stand for bureaucracy, whether or not that bureaucracy uses actual red tape to bind documents. In Commonwealth realms, The Crown is a metonym for the state in all its aspects.^[20]

Western culture studied poetic language and deemed it to be rhetoric. A. Al-Sharafi supports this concept in his book Textual Metonymy, "Greek rhetorical scholarship at one time became entirely poetic scholarship."^[21] Philosophers and rhetoricians thought that metaphors were the primary figurative language used in rhetoric. Metaphors served as a better means to attract the audience’s attention because the audience had to read between the lines in order to get an understanding of what the speaker was trying to say. Others did not think of metonymy as a good rhetorical method because metonymy did not involve symbolism. Al-Sharafi explains, "This is why they undermined practical and purely referential discourse because it was seen as banal and not containing anything new, strange or shocking."^[21]

Greek scholars contributed to the definition of metonymy. For example, Isocrates worked to define the difference between poetic language and non-poetic language by saying that, "Prose writers are handicapped in this regard because their discourse has to conform to the forms and terms used by the citizens and to those arguments which are precise and relevant to the subject-matter." In other words, Isocrates proposes here that metaphor is a distinctive feature of poetic language because it conveys the experience of the world afresh and provides a kind of defamiliarisation in the way the citizens perceive the world. Democritus described metonymy by saying, "Metonymy, that is the fact that words and meaning change." Aristotle discussed different definitions of metaphor, regarding one type as what we know to be metonymy today.

Latin scholars also had an influence on metonymy. The treatise Rhetorica ad Herennium states metonymy as, "the figure which draws from an object closely akin or associated an expression suggesting the object meant, but not called by its own name."^[21] The author describes the process of metonymy to us saying that we first figure out what a word means. We then figure out that word’s relationship with other words. We understand and then call the word by a name that it is associated with. "Perceived as such then metonymy will be a figure of speech in which there is a process of abstracting a relation of proximity between two words to the extent that one will be used in place of another."^[21]Cicero viewed metonymy as more of a stylish rhetorical method and described it as being based on words, but motivated by style

Metonymy became important in French structuralism through the work of Roman Jakobson. In his 1956 essay "The Metaphoric and Metonymic Poles", Jakobson relates metonymy to the linguistic practice of [syntagmatic] combination and to the literary practice of realism. He explains:

The primacy of the metaphoric process in the literary schools of Romanticism and symbolism has been repeatedly acknowledged, but it is still insufficiently realized that it is the predominance of metonymy which underlies and actually predetermines the so-called 'realistic' trend, which belongs to an intermediary stage between the decline of Romanticism and the rise of symbolism and is opposed to both. Following the path of contiguous relationships, the realistic author metonymically digresses from the plot to the atmosphere and from the characters to the setting in space and time. He is fond of synecdochic details. In the scene of Anna Karenina's suicide Tolstoy's artistic attention is focused on the heroine's handbag; and in War and Peace the synecdoches "hair on the upper lip" or "bare shoulders" are used by the same writer to stand for the female characters to whom these features belong.

Jakobson's theories were important for Claude Lévi-Strauss, Roland Barthes, Jacques Lacan, and others. dreams can use metonyms.

Metonyms can also be wordless. For example, Roman Jakobson^[25] argued that cubist art relied heavily on nonlinguistic metonyms, while surrealist art relied more on metaphors.

Lakoff and Turner^[26] argued that all words are metonyms: “Words stand for the concepts they express.” Some artists have used actual words as metonyms in their paintings. For example, Miró’s 1925 painting "Photo: This is the Color of My Dreams" has the word “photo” to represent the image of his dreams. This painting comes from a series of paintings called peintures-poésies (paintings-poems) which reflect Miró’s interest in dreams and the subconscious^[27] and the relationship of words, images, and thoughts. Picasso, in his 1911 painting "Pipe Rack and Still Life on Table" inserts the word “Ocean” rather than painting an ocean: These paintings by Miró and Picasso are, in a sense, the reverse of arebus: the word stands for the picture, instead of the picture standing for the word.

Metonymy is often confused with another figure of speech called “synecdoche.” These devices resemble one another, but are not the same. Synecdoche refers to a thing by the name of one of its parts. For example, calling a car “a wheel” is a synecdoche, as a part of a car – the “wheel” – stands for the whole car.

In a metonymy, on the other hand, the word we use to describe another thing is closely linked to that particular thing, but is not a part of it. For example, the word “crown” is used to refer to power or authority is a metonymy. It is not a part of the thing it represents.

Metonymy is also different from a metaphor, which draws resemblance between two different things. For instance, in the sentence, “You are sunlight and I moon,” (Sun and Moon by Miss Saigon), sunlight and the moon, and humans are quite different things without any association. However, metaphor attempts to describe one thing in terms of another based on a supposed similarity.

Metonymy, however, develops a relation on the grounds of close association, as in “The White House is concerned about terrorism.” The White House here represents the people who work in it.

Examples of Metonymy in Everyday Life

For a better understanding, let us observe a few metonymy examples:

• 
  “England decides to keep check on immigration.” (England refers to the government.)
  
• 
  “The pen is mightier than the sword.” (Pen refers to written words, and sword to military force.)
  
• 
  “The Oval Office was busy in work.” (The Oval Office is a metonymy, as it stands for people who work in the office.)
  
• 
  “Let me give you a hand.” (
  

The given lines are from Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Act ⁵

Mark Anthony uses “ears” to say that he wants the people present to listen to him attentively. It is a metonymy because the word “ears” replaces the concept of paying attention

CHAPTER II

§2.1. Description of the method or activity in teaching

Today is the whole world teaching foreign languages, especially English has become an essential part of education in all its’ branches. We can even find two main types of English language teaching methodology like teaching English using traditional and modern methodology. But at the latest period in the whole world teachers tend to use modern methodology all the time. This becomes clear when we look at the results achieved using these two methods. As results

show today modern methodology allows learns to communicate the real language rather than the traditional method.

Taking into consideration this factor the government of our country is doing a lot in order to develop foreign language teaching in Uzbekistan using modern methodology. As a clear example of this we can mention the presidential decree N1875 dated December 10, 2012 “On measures of developing foreign language learning”. As it is mentioned in this decree, it is important to teach foreign languages using communicative methods, which enables teachers to encourage their students to become creative learners. In this article we

decided to analyze the peculiarities of both traditional and modern methodology of teaching English.

Clearly, one of the aims of any methodology in foreign language teaching is to improve the foreign language ability of the student. However, traditional methodology is based largely on a reduction on the integrated process of using a

foreign language into subsets of discrete skills and areas of knowledge in isolation. Following on from this, traditional methodologies are strongly associated with the teaching of language which is used in a certain field related to the students’ life or work.⁶ As stated in the book “Teaching English as a foreign language”, “the recognition that many students of English need the language for specific instrumental proposes has led to the teaching of ESP-English for Special or teaching output created: they uniform the reader about “the proliferation of courses

and materials being designed to teach English for science, medicine, agriculture, engineering, tourism and like “ which actually meant that the content of the course was limited to the specific vocabulary and grammar of the chosen field. For example, agricultural courses included exclusively agricultural vocabulary and all grammar was presented only in an agricultural context. Vocabulary, phrases, and sample sentences from other fields and activities, even from the realm of specifically communicative English, were excluded. Unlike traditional methodology, modern mythology is much more student-centered. According to Jim Scrivener, the teacher’s main role is to “help learning to happen” which includes “involving” students in what is going on “by enabling them to work at their own speed, by not giving long explanations, by encouraging them to participate talk, interact, do things, etc. Briefly put, the students are the most active element in this process. The teacher is here not to explain but to encourage and help students to explore, try out, make learning interesting, etc. Though being essential, the aim of learning a foreign language according to modern methodology is still discussed, and there is a variety of possible aims. In his book “Learning Teaching”, “Jim Scrivener claims, that nowadays a great emphasis is put on “communication of meaning”. He also highlights the communicative competence which is, as he defines it, “being able to use the language for meaningful communication”. The reason of choosing this theme is that we are interested in methods of teaching English focusing on the development of language learning skills.

Teaching should be student-centered, motivation springs from within, it can be sparked, but not imposed from without, language learning and teaching are successful when they meet student’s needs in particular circumstance, the acquired language skills must serve the students in everyday life. Language teaching and language learning are successful if they look like a cooperation process when one’s feelings, values and aspirations are revealed either at a very deep level or in surface activities such as games, simulations, dramatizations, etc.

Students should acquire knowledge of the language actively through use as experience is constantly transformed by deeds. Control of language includes the ability to understand messages and implicate them in the context. Development of language control is impossible without creativity when students experience the use of the new language as an social skill. Various activities are related to literary, historical, philosophical, sociological or other content being studied in the language. New medium present additional opportunities for students to view and hear themselves as they attempt to us the language in authentic ways. As for testing, it shouldn’t be punitive, it should be a learning experience that is part of the ongoing course, involving students in working out interesting problems, being motivational and a means of growth for students. Interactive methods make it possible entrance another culture, developing are tolerance for difference without confusion of the own sense of identity. The

use of interactive methods also implies taking the language and its learning out of the classroom as the world opens up throng travel, technology and shared interests. Second language learning is a developmental process.⁷ Learners use existing knowledge to make the incoming information comprehensible and they must actively use the new information, while introduction, interactive methods teacher should take into considerations students preferred learning style and to much the teaching style to achieve optimal learning in the classroom.

Thus many professionals refer to this methodology as the Communicative Language approach. Another group of authors headed by Broughton point out that foreign languages are taught “not simply for the learner to be able to write to a foreign pen friend” but to broaden his or her horizons by introducing “certain ways of thinking about time, space and quantity and attitudes towards” issues we have to face in everyday life.

§2.2. Lesson planning and handouts

Lesson plan

Instructor: Karimov Bekzod

Course title: Methodology

Theme: Metaphor and metonymy

Level: Intermediate

Time consuming: 80 min

Aims:

1. Practical - improving the educational competence of the students ; checking knowledge of theme; improving comprehensive critical writing skills;

2. Educative – students will be able to use new language base in their speech. Using various range of language structures will enable them to utilize in daily cases. They will be able to be active participants in teaching .

3. Developmental - developing critical and thinking skills, speaking skills using additional tools - dictionaries, computer or Internet resources for effective language acquisition.

4. Upbringing - attitude to foreign and native culture, polite manners of communication within the group while doing activities (taking turns speaking, being patient until someone speaks, etc.), rules of using Internet in mobile phone.

Objectives

• 
  teach students the diversity of language structures related to the topic
  
• 
  enable students to communicate using the structures freely.
  

Outcomes of the lesson: At the end of the lesson students will be able to use different types of utilizing of metaphoric and metonymic phrase.

Aids – laptop, handouts, whiteboard, marker, E-board, cards, speakers

Lesson outline

• 
  Opening time (5min)
  

-greeting:

-attendance check:

• 
  Warm up: time -8 mins
  

Activity 1

Objective: to trigger students and draw their attention to the given topic

Time: 8 min

Materials:, board, picture

Interactional mode: whole group work

• 
  Main part: 60 mins
  

• 
  Pre-stage: 1 activity
  

Activity 2

Objective: to inform the topic and enable students to go into the topic, to improve their language skills

Time: 15 min

Materials: e-board, marker

Interactional mode: group work

• 
  While stage: 2 activities
  

Activity 3

Objective: to teach students to use some sentences of metonymy or metaphor with examples conveying them.

Time: 15 minute

Materials: Handout 1

Interactional mode: pair work

Activity 4.

Objective: to improve student’s critical thinking and make learners try to express their feelings using speaking skills

Time: 20 min

Material: Handout 2

Interactional mode: mini group work

• 
  Post stage: 1 activity
  

Activity 5

Objective: to ensure that students catch the lesson fully and check their knowledge

Materials: Handout 3

Time: 10 minutes

Interactional mode: Individual work

• 
  Conclusion: 7 mins
  

1. 
   Feedback
   
2. 
   Assessment
   
3. 
   Home – assignment:
   

• 
  As a home-activity ask the students to prepare power point presentation on the topic: metaphor and metonymy
  

Activity 1

As a lead-in activity: display the pictures below on the board and draw student’s attention to the situations and ask them what metaphoric and metonymic statements can be used in each situation. Listen to the student’s suggestions and use each of them to introduce.