This short paper is a rebuttal of Iwata’s (2014) criticisms of Broccias (2013). By using Iwata’s (2014) own paraphrase for path conceptualisation, it is shown that path conceptualisation is not impossible in Type B resultatives and, at the same time, that path conceptualisation is not always active in Type A resultatives. Further, it is argued that Iwata’s (2014) criticism of the notion of ‘‘tight links’’ is based on a series of paradoxes, which throw his theory into disarray. Finally, it is shown that the notion of ‘‘tight links’’ is needed in the analysis of the resultative phrase to one’s death because the notion of metonymy to which Iwata (2014) appeals is problematic. Thus, the need for a more flexible approach, based on blending operations, is highlighted.
Tight metaphors vs. deadly metonymies: A further rebuttal of Iwata's bipartite adjectival resultatives
BROCCIAS, CRISTIANO
2014-01-01
Abstract
This short paper is a rebuttal of Iwata’s (2014) criticisms of Broccias (2013). By using Iwata’s (2014) own paraphrase for path conceptualisation, it is shown that path conceptualisation is not impossible in Type B resultatives and, at the same time, that path conceptualisation is not always active in Type A resultatives. Further, it is argued that Iwata’s (2014) criticism of the notion of ‘‘tight links’’ is based on a series of paradoxes, which throw his theory into disarray. Finally, it is shown that the notion of ‘‘tight links’’ is needed in the analysis of the resultative phrase to one’s death because the notion of metonymy to which Iwata (2014) appeals is problematic. Thus, the need for a more flexible approach, based on blending operations, is highlighted.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
