Keywords
cognitive semantics
football news
media language
sport journalism
Categories
How to Cite
Abstract
Metonymy is a form of language use in the world that is commonly used in sports discourse, especially football, to present information more concisely and expressively. This research aims to analyze the use of types of metonymy in football news and identify the dominant pattern in its use. This research uses qualitative research methods with data sources from several football websites. The data analysis used is data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion drawing. The results showed that there are seven types of metonymy found in football news, namely part for whole, producer for product, object for user, controller for controlled, institution for people responsible, place for institution, and place for event. The most dominant type of metonymy is Controller for Controlled with a percentage of 26.67%, followed by Institution for People Responsible with 20% occurrence. Furthermore, object for user is in the third position with 15% occurrence. The use of metonymy in football news is to make the delivery of information more concise, expressive, and interesting for readers. In addition, metonymy is also used to clarify the relationship between an entity and the role or action it represents, so that the news is easier to understand and has its own appeal in its writing style.
References
Abdel-Raheem, A. (2023). Cartooning and sexism in the time of Covid-19: Metaphors and metonymies in the Arab mind. Discourse and Society, 34(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265221113028
Alduais, A., Al-Khawlani, A., Almaghlouth, S., & Alfadda, H. (2022). Cognitive linguistics: Analysis of mapping knowledge domains. Journal of Intelligence, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence10040093
Barcelona, A. (2003a). Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within cognitive linguistics: An update. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 207–277). Walter de Gruyter.
Barcelona, A. (2003b). Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective. Walter de Gruyter.
Boers, F., & Demecheleer, M. (1998). A cognitive semantic approach to teaching prepositions. ELT Journal, 52(3). https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/52.3.197
Bowerman, J. (2019). What’s really going on with the ham sandwich? An investigation into the nature of referential metonymy. International Review of Pragmatics, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-201810012
Busri, H., & Badrih, M. (2022). Representation of linguistic characteristics in mass media. KEMBARA: Journal of Scientific Language Literature and Teaching, 8(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v8i1.19324
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publication.
Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gambarova, A. (2021). Origins and causes of the cognitive linguistics. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(2). Retrieved from https://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/2608
Guan, S., & Sun, Y. (2023). Multimodal metaphor and metonymy in political cartoons as a means of country image construction. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 27(2). https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-31664
Hasar, R. V. (2017). Metaphor and metonymy in ancient dream interpretation: The case of islamic-Iranian culture. Journal of Ethnology and Folkloristics, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/jef-2017-0014
Jakobson, R. (2009). The metaphoric and metonymic poles. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 41–48). Walter de Gruyter.
Jennifer, J., Putro, P. T. N., & Adi, V. C. (2020). Metonymy of the word ‘Indonesia’ in phrases ‘Proud Of Indonesia’ used on facebook. ELTR Journal, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.37147/eltr.v3i1.54
Jiang, L., Al-Shaibani, G. K. S., Yang, F., Cheng, M., & Huang, M. (2022). The metonymic mechanism of English translation of Chinese intangible cultural heritage terms from the perspective of cognitive psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.957485
Knowles, M., & Moon, R. (2006). Introducing metaphor. Routledge.
Koowuttayakorn, S. (2018). An investigation of Instagram’s metonymy: A multimodal social semiotic approach. Journal : Language Education and Acquisition Research Network Journal, 11(1).
Kovecses, Z., & Radden, G. (1998). Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1998.9.1.37
Lakoff, G. (1988). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Methapors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1990). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. University of Chicago Press.
Littlemore, J., & Tagg, C. (2018). Metonymy and text messaging: A framework for understanding creative uses of metonymy. Applied Linguistics, 39(4). https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw018
McCombs, M. (2013). Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion. John Wiley & Sons.
Merina, Y., & Sevrika, H. (2018). Metonymy : the Way To Convey Information. Proceedings of ISELT FBS Universitas Negeri Padang, 6(1), 140-148.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage Publication.
Mittelberg, I. (2019). Visuo-Kinetic signs are inherently metonymic: How embodied metonymy motivates forms, functions, and schematic patterns in gesture. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(FEB). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00254
Moritz, I., & Marinic, I. (2023). T The use of visual metonymy in English textbooks for young learners: Evidence from Croatia. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1302.03
Negro, I. (2019). Metaphor and metonymy in food idioms. Languages, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/languages4030047
Panther, K. U. (2008). The role of conceptual metonymy in meaning construction. F. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez & M. Peña Cervel (Ed.), Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction (pp. 353-386). Walter de Gruyter.
Panther, K. U., & Thornburg, L. L. (2003). Metonymy and pragmatics inferencing. John Benjamins Pub.
Peirsman, Y., & Geeraerts, D. (2006). Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2006.007
Perez-Sobrino, P. (2016). Multimodal metaphor and metonymy in advertising: A corpus-based account. Metaphor and Symbol, 31(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2016.1150759
Rakhimov, M. M. (2020). Methods in cognitive linguistics. International Journal on Integrated Education, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.31149/ijie.v3i2.321
Roque, L. S., Kendrick, K. H., Norcliffe, E., & Majid, A. (2018). Universal meaning extensions of perception verbs are grounded in interaction. Cognitive Linguistics, 29(3). https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2017-0034
Saric, A. (2016). Metonymies in textbooks intended for teaching German for specific purpose at the faculty of food technology. International Journal of Linguistics, 8(6). https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v8i6.10516
Sato, A. (2018). Different levels of figurativity on metonymic expressions. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3088291
Suzuki, K. (2017). Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. English Linguistics, 34(1). https://doi.org/10.9793/elsj.34.1_183
Talmy, L. (2018). Toward a cognitive semantics. The MIT Press.
Tseng, M. Y., & Zhang, G. (2022). Conceptual metonymy and emotive-affective meaning at the interface: Examples from online medical consultations. Lingua, 268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103192
Winter, B., & Perek, F. (2023). Cognitive linguistics. In L. Wei., Z. Hua., & J. Simpson (Eds.), The routledge handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 309–321). Taylor and Francis.
Younes, A. S., & Altakhaineh, A. R. M. (2022). Metaphors and metonymies used in memes to depict COVID-19 in Jordanian social media websites. Ampersand, 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2022.100087
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Nehemia Anugrah Parasian, Mulyadi Mulyadi (Author)