COGNITIVE AND PRAGMATICS ASPECTS OF METONYMY IN TERMINOLOGICAL UNITS FORMATION IN BUSINESS AND IT COMMUNICATION

Abstract

The article presents a comprehensive study of the cognitive and pragmatic mechanisms underlying the metonymic reinterpretation of terminological units within modern English business and IT discourse. The relevance of this research stems from the rapid digitalization of management and the pressing need for the “intellectual compression” of information to facilitate effective communication under significant time constraints. The research aims to provide a descriptive and cognitive-semantic analysis of existing metonymic models while substantiating the pragmatic risks associated with the employment of highly concentrated semantic units. The theoretical framework is anchored in the concepts of Idealized Cognitive Models (ICM) and the theory of domain matrix. The paper clearly distinguishes between the phenomenon of “domain highlighting” and the actual metonymic “shift of reference”. Using the term TRIAGE as a case study, the research demonstrates a complex migration of knowledge between matrices, where the domains of [RESOURCE DEFICIT] and [PRIORITY] are highlighted, while [MEDICINE] and [ETHICS] are shadowed. Based on the analysis of empirical data, five dominant models are identified: PRODUCER FOR PRODUCT (exemplified by the terms Salesforce and Slack), PLACE FOR INSTITUTION (Silicon Valley, Wall Street), INSTRUMENT FOR PROCESS (The Cloud, Pipeline, Sprint), PART FOR WHOLE (Headcount, The Stack), CONTROLLER FOR CONTROLLED (The Board, HR). Particular attention is devoted to the pragmatic dimension, specifically the phenomena of “ontological friction” and the risk of “pragmatic failure” in communication between specialists and the “out-group”. The study substantiates that while the metonymization of management language promotes knowledge condensation; it also leads to depersonalization and heightened risks of misunderstanding. The conclusions section defines the primary reasons for utilizing metonymy and the hazards of excessive linguistic metonymization. Finally, the article outlines prospects for investigating the interpretation of metonymic constructions by artificial intelligence.