A tradition going back to Coleridge asserts that The Pilgrim’s Progress is not a true allegory but rather a proto-novel expressive of early modern individualism. The work is radically individualistic, but it is also truly an allegory. Recent research has emphasized how closely related metaphor often is to metonymy and how intimately the two can interact to produce metaphtonymy. This interaction is just as important in allegory as in purely linguistic metaphor and metonymy. The Pilgrim’s Progress makes subtle use of conceptual metaphtonymy to express its individualism. Although the degree of individualism these cognitive structures express is greater than anything in earlier allegorical tradition, the structures themselves are inherited from medieval allegories such as Everyman. This sharing of major cognitive structure with earlier medieval allegories shows that The Pilgrim’s Progress is truly an allegory. An area in which the interaction of metaphor and metonymy is particularly notable is that of blending. The occurrence of highly creative blending in at least some of its scenes is further evidence for the truly allegoric nature of The Pilgrim’s Progress.
BarcelonaA (ed.) (2000) Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads – A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
2.
BarsalouLW (1983) Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition11(3): 211–227.
3.
BunyanJ (1987 [1666]) Grace Abounding To The Chief of Sinners (ed. OwensWR). London: Penguin.
4.
BunyanJ (2003) The Pilgrim’s Progress (ed. OwensWR). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5.
CawleyAC (1989) Everyman. In: StrayerJ (ed) Dictionary of the Middle Agesvol. 4. New York: Scribner, pp. 526–528.
6.
ColeridgeST (1969) Notes for lectures and marginal notes in a copy of The Faerie Queene 1819. In: AlpersP (ed.) Edmund Spenser – A Critical Anthology. London: Penguin, pp. 140–141.
7.
CoulsonSOakleyT (2003) Metonymy and conceptual blending. In: PantherK-UThornburgLL (eds) Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 51–79.
8.
CrispP (2001) Allegory: conceptual metaphor in history. Language and Literature10(1): 5–19.
9.
CrispP (2005) Allegory and symbol – a fundamental opposition?Language and Literature14(4): 325–338.
10.
CrispP (2008) Between extended metaphor and allegory: Is blending enough?Language and Literature17(4): 291–308.
11.
CroftW (1993) The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. Cognitive Linguistics4(4): 335–370.
12.
CroftWCruseDA (2004) Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
DamroschL (1985) Experience and allegory in Bunyan. In: DamroschLGod’s Plot and Man’s Stories: Studies in the Fictional Imagination from Milton to Fielding. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 121–186.
14.
DeignanA (2005) Metaphor and Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
15.
DirvenR (1993) Metonymy and metaphor: Different mental strategies of Conceptualization. Tijdschrift voor germaanse filologie jaargang82: 1–28.
16.
FainsilberLOrtonyA (1987) Metaphorical uses of language in the expression of emotions. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity2(4): 239–250.
17.
FauconnierG (1994 [1985]) Mental Spaces. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
FauconnierGTurnerM (1999) Metonymy and conceptual integration. In: PantherK-URaddenG. (eds) Metonymy in Language and Thought. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 77–90.
19.
FauconnierGTurnerM (2000) Metaphor, metonymy and binding. In: BarcelonaA (ed.) Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads – A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 133–145.
20.
FauconnierGTurnerM (2002) The Way We Think – Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
21.
GibbsR (2000) Making good psychology out of blending theory. Cognitive Linguistics11(3/4): 347–358.
22.
GibbsR (2001) Evaluating contemporary models of figurative language understanding. Metaphor and Symbol16(3/4): 317–331.
23.
GoossensL (1990) Metaphtonymy: the interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics1(3): 323–342.
24.
GradyJ (1999) A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor – correlation vs. resemblance. In: GibbsRWSteenGJ (eds) Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics – Selected Papers from the Fifth International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, July 1997. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 79–100.
25.
HillC (1988) A Turbulent, Seditious, and Factious People – John Bunyan and his Church 1628–1688. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26.
KovecsesZRaddenG (1998) Metonymy: developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics9(1): 37–77.
27.
LakoffG (1987) Women, Fire and Dangerous Things – What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
28.
LakoffG (1990) The invariance hypothesis: is abstract reason based on image-schemas?Cognitive Linguistics1(1): 39–74.
29.
LakoffG (1993) The contemporary theory of metaphor. In: OrtonyA (ed.) Metaphor and Thought (2nd edn). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 202–251.
30.
LakoffGJohnsonM (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
31.
LakoffGJohnsonM (1999) Philosophy in the Flesh – The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.
32.
LewisCS (1936) The Allegory of Love – A Study of Medieval Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33.
McKeonM (1987) The Origins of the English Novel 1600–1740. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
34.
NellistB (1980) The Pilgrim’s Progress and allegory. In: NeweyV (ed.) The Pilgrim’s Progress: Critical and Historical Views. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, pp. 132–153.
35.
OakleyTCrispP (2011) Honeymoons and pilgrimages: conceptual integration and allegory in old and new media. Metaphor and Symbol – Special Issue on Cognitive Allegory26(2): 152–159.
36.
OwensWR (1987) Introduction. In: Bunyan JGrace Abounding To The Chief of Sinners (ed. OwensWR). London: Penguin, pp. vii–xxiii.
37.
PantherK-URaddenG (eds) (1999) Metonymy in Language and Thought. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
38.
PantherK-UThornburgLL (eds) (2003) Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
39.
PantherK-UThornburgLL (2007) Metonymy. In: GeeraertsDCuyckensH (eds) Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 236–263.
40.
WattI (1963 [1957]) The Rise of the Novel. London: Penguin.
