Metonymy

I think all the ad examples given made sense to me, but I think the use of metonymy to describe certain examples confused me. The “Auto” and “Sales” examples confused me most since I couldn’t pin down a definition of metonymy that wasn’t just “something that references another thing,” which feels too broad to be useful. Also, even though Cohn says that there is no narrative relationship between the panels, I feel like that is an arbitrary definition of narrative that confused me more since they made such an effort to say that it wasn’t.

Metaphor

These examples felt pretty simple and effective to me. The main difference I understood between a metonym and a metaphor is that metaphors are used to relate the traits between two things, whereas a metonym won’t use two distinct items, and instead will use two already related things.

Blending

The way Cohn juxtaposed blending and metaphors didn’t really make any sense to me. The main argument seemed to be that blending evokes a metaphorical relationship, but in the times where the metaphor does not fully relate two concepts. I don’t understand this because no metaphor ever equates two things exactly, but Cohn seemed to poke holes in the “metaphors” of the blending section but not in the metaphor section.