Metaphtonymy in the Pictographic Titles of Children's Books Based on Jakobson's Theory of Metony

 
The concrete language of images is more easily understood by children than the abstract language of text. As a result, graphic designers of children's books incorporate pictograms into title typography in addition to the cover image to enhance visual communication. Pictograms are simple visual signs that lack detailed features. The high frequency of visual metonymies and metaphors in pictographic games within books is the basis for selecting this topic for research. Roman Jakobson, a distinguished Russian linguist, and literary theorist, emphasises the connection between two metonymic poles associated with the syntagmatic axis and a metaphoric pole linked to the paradigmatic axis, suggesting that only one can prevail in both verbal and non-verbal arts, such as painting and cinema. In contrast, scholars like Genette, Ullmann, Eco, Metz, Goossens, and other post-Jakobson structuralists focus on metaphtonymy, which refers to the coexistence of metonymy and metaphor. This research aims not only to demonstrate the feasibility of coexistence but also to establish the necessity of blending these two poles within pictographic games. This analytical-descriptive study seeks to investigate how metaphtonymy relates to the graphics of children's book titles. The case studies featured in this paper include pictograms from the covers of seven titles aimed at age groups "A" and "B." The results indicate that metonymy serves as an invisible foundation for the metaphors present in these pictographic title games.
Research Questions
This study investigates two central questions: 1) What roles do the syntagmatic axis and substitution fulfill in pictographic titles in children's literature? 2) How do the virtual and metaphorical dimensions of language interact within the framework of pictographic titles?
 
Methodology
In this analytical-descriptive research, data were gathered using library-based methods. The focus is on pictographic books that feature pictographic titles, specifically targeting children in age groups "A" and "B." The statistical sample comprises thirty-one titles of pictographic books characterised by Persian typography (including both original works and translations), along with twelve titles from books that utilise English typography. This statistical population is confined to publications released between early 2013 and late 2023, with a purposive non-probabilistic sampling approach employed.
Discussion and Results
The syntagmatic relationship fundamentally refers to the connection between units that combine to create a higher-level unit (Safavi, 2004: 27-28). For instance, the combination of three phonemes— “p,” “e,” and “n”—results in forming the word “pen.” This illustrates that three linguistic units (phonemes) synthesize into one linguistic unit at a higher level (the word). Jakobson (1963) characterises syntagmatic relationships within language chains and discourse as “positional contiguity,” while he describes syntagmatic relationships in reality as “semantic proximity” (Metz, 2016: 102). Consequently, linguistic elements such as phonemes “p,” “e,” and “n” exemplify positional contiguity, whereas a horn associated with an animal's head represents semantic proximity.
The substitution relationship denotes the ability to replace linguistic units. For example, in the sentence “Michael ate an apple,” one could substitute “Jozeph” for “Michael” as the subject or replace “apple” with “Orrange.” Firstly, both “Michael” and “Jozeph” exist at an equivalent linguistic level as words; thus, substituting them does not elevate to a higher level like a sentence. Secondly, these linguistic units possess potential substitutability; unlike “Michael” and “apple,” which can coexist within a single sentence contextually, “Michael” and “Jozeph” cannot appear together in any given sentence. Therefore, it can be concluded that while “parole” serves as the context for syntagmatic axes, “langue” provides context for paradigmatic axes.
In Wallace's (2019) typography for How to Catch a Unicorn, rather than employing the base form of the letter "i," a unicorn's horn is utilised; additionally, instead of placing a dot over “i,” a star symbol is incorporated (see Fig 1). The linguistic structure inherent in this book title (the syntagmatic arrangement of letters) converts this combination of horn and star—visual signifiers—into reading signifiers. This indicates that letters positioned along the syntagmatic axis alongside visual signifiers represent them as the letter “i.” Jakobson posits that each linguistic sign can manifest only one dominant aspect: it may either be metaphorical (anchored in paradigmatic axes) or metonymic (anchored in syntagmatic axes); however, theorists such as Genette, Ullmann, and Goossens contend there exists no contradiction between these two aspects but rather advocate for their coexistence and intermingling. This analysis confirms Genette’s and Ullmann’s perspectives by demonstrating that within this typography, the representation of the book's title is concurrently influenced by both syntagmatic relationships (metonymic pole) and paradigmatic relationships (metaphorical pole).
 
Fig 1. Cover design of How to Catch a Unicorn by Wallace, A. (2019)
 
The relationship between the term "unicorn" and the letter "i" exemplifies a part-to-whole relationship, as "i" constitutes a component of the reading signifier (the spelling) of "unicorn." Consequently, this relationship is grounded in the syntagmatic axis, whereby substituting "unicorn" for "i" represents a form of metonymy characterised by a part-to-whole connection. This metonymy emerges from positional contiguity, which refers to proximity in morphological structure.
Conversely, there exists a part-to-whole relationship between the horn and the unicorn as well. This relationship also relies on the syntagmatic axis; using a unicorn's horn in place of the unicorn itself constitutes yet another instance of metonymy with a part-to-whole relation. This particular metonymy arises from semantic proximity, reflecting real-world associations.
In light of the typography presented in this book title, the first instance of metonymy occurs within the reading sign system (as a word), while the second instance manifests within the visual sign system (as an image). The connection between the letter "i" (the reading signifier) and the starry horn (the visual signifier) is predicated on similarity. Based on this similarity, in spelling "unicorn," the starry horn serves as a substitute for the letter "i." Such substitution illustrates an application of metaphorical language.
Additionally, there exists another connection between "unicorn" (the reading signifier) and a unicorn adorned with a starry horn (the visual signifier). The unicorn—particularly when embellished with sparkling stars—symbolises the rainbow community, representing LGBTQ+ individuals. The association between this visual representation of a unicorn and homosexuality gains significance within the metaphorical framework of language. Thus, comprehending and interpreting these interchangeable signs utilised in this typography requires an interactive chain of metaphors (illustrated horizontally in Diagram 1) and metonymies (illustrated vertically in Diagram 1).
 
 
Diagram 1. Metaphor and metonymy in the lettering of the title How to Catch a Unicorn
 
A pictogram represents a convergence of verbal (reading) and non-verbal (visual) languages. This research indicates that both syntagmatic (combination) and paradigmatic (selection) axes are essential in shaping pictographic games found in children's book titles, facilitating a simultaneous manifestation of metaphorical and metonymic meanings across verbal and visual dimensions. Metonymies can be actualised through two mechanisms: positional contiguity and semantic proximity. Jakobson describes syntagmatic relationships within language chains and discourse as "positional contiguity," while he refers to syntagmatic relationships in reality as "semantic proximity." When a letter from a title is removed, and a pictographic image assumes the reading function of that absent letter, this substitution is based on positional contiguity and occurs within the metonymic dimension of language. Conversely, there exists a resemblance between the absent letter and the pictographic image that emerges within the paradigmatic axis and reflects the metaphorical dimension of language. Consequently, replacing a visual pictogram for one of the letters in a title primarily relies on the metonymic dimension rather than on its metaphorical aspect. The virtual and metaphorical poles within these pictograms not only coexist but also intertwine. Even if Jakobson's theory—asserting that one aspect predominates in literary works and visual arts—is valid, it posits that the metonymic dimension precedes its metaphorical counterpart. In essence, for the prominence of the metaphorical pole within the paradigmatic axis to be established, it is essential for the realisation of the metonymic pole within the syntagmatic axis; however, this prominence can sometimes lead to diminished visibility or obscurity of the metonymic pole beneath typographies grounded in pictograms.