Places and Spaces: The Role of Metonymy in Organizational Talk

Cultural meaning making as reflected in, and constituted by, organizational talk is an established field of interest in organizational analysis. However, the discursive mechanics of the process whereby this cultural meaning making is created and maintained are less well understood. The premise of th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of management studies 2004-12, Vol.41 (8), p.1301-1323
Hauptverfasser: Musson, Gill, Tietze, Susanne
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1323
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1301
container_title Journal of management studies
container_volume 41
creator Musson, Gill
Tietze, Susanne
description Cultural meaning making as reflected in, and constituted by, organizational talk is an established field of interest in organizational analysis. However, the discursive mechanics of the process whereby this cultural meaning making is created and maintained are less well understood. The premise of this paper is that taken‐for‐granted assumptions embedded in organizational talk can be explored through the analysis of metonymy, a trope which is under explored in the linguistic turn in organization studies. This lack of focus on metonymy is, we believe, related to the fundamentally conventional nature of the trope in use, which expresses ideas, values and relationships that seem natural, normal and routine but which are culturally bound. We address this gap and carry out a metonymical analysis of organizational talk about physical places and spaces in one organization, to show how cultural norms and meanings are reflected, maintained, and potentially changed in these figures of speech. We show how metonymic chains based on buildings can reflect, reify and simplify the symbolic order of the organization, how these symbolic meanings can be transferred on to other inanimate objects and the constructions thereby spread, how people can be constructed within this symbolic chain, and how these metonymic chains can be invoked to potentially confirm, challenge or change the organizational order.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00476.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_38018755</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>792944451</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5286-3a6e6366a30d7dbf0df09fb42df9fdb4a0b7b4728e1b65e52341def8ac5deb053</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkM1u1DAUhS0EEkPhHSwW7BL8FzuDBBKqSguaMogGWF45sU2TJnGIMzDh6XEaNAtWWDr2lXy-6-uDEKYkpXG9bFIqpEqkyGXKCBFplJLp8QHanC4eog0hjCWM5-QxehJCQ8hiIxv05lOrKxuw7g2-GZbyFS5uLf7sW4u9w9d28v3czbju8X78rvv6t55q3-sWF7q9e4oeOd0G--zveYa-vLsozq-S3f7y_fnbXVJlLJcJ19JKLqXmxChTOmIc2bpSMOO2zpRCk1KVQrHc0lJmNmNcUGNdrqvM2JJk_Ay9WPsOo_9xsGGCrg6VbVvdW38IED9Gc5Utxuf_GBt_GOO4AehWMMYUVdGUr6Zq9CGM1sEw1p0eZ6AEllShgSU8WMKDJVW4TxWOEd2t6GgHW524stWN78Jk4CdwLWjc5qh7lOs6Ko8aoignFChnHG6nLrZ7vbb7Vbd2_u8x4MP--iZWkU9Wvg6TPZ54Pd6BVFxl8O3jJaii-FpciSw--wdbK6VL</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>194222717</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Places and Spaces: The Role of Metonymy in Organizational Talk</title><source>RePEc</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Musson, Gill ; Tietze, Susanne</creator><creatorcontrib>Musson, Gill ; Tietze, Susanne</creatorcontrib><description>Cultural meaning making as reflected in, and constituted by, organizational talk is an established field of interest in organizational analysis. However, the discursive mechanics of the process whereby this cultural meaning making is created and maintained are less well understood. The premise of this paper is that taken‐for‐granted assumptions embedded in organizational talk can be explored through the analysis of metonymy, a trope which is under explored in the linguistic turn in organization studies. This lack of focus on metonymy is, we believe, related to the fundamentally conventional nature of the trope in use, which expresses ideas, values and relationships that seem natural, normal and routine but which are culturally bound. We address this gap and carry out a metonymical analysis of organizational talk about physical places and spaces in one organization, to show how cultural norms and meanings are reflected, maintained, and potentially changed in these figures of speech. We show how metonymic chains based on buildings can reflect, reify and simplify the symbolic order of the organization, how these symbolic meanings can be transferred on to other inanimate objects and the constructions thereby spread, how people can be constructed within this symbolic chain, and how these metonymic chains can be invoked to potentially confirm, challenge or change the organizational order.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-2380</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1467-6486</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00476.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JMASB2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Culture ; Language ; Linguistics ; Organization theory ; Organizational analysis ; Organizational behavior ; Speech ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Journal of management studies, 2004-12, Vol.41 (8), p.1301-1323</ispartof><rights>Copyright Blackwell Publishing Dec 2004</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5286-3a6e6366a30d7dbf0df09fb42df9fdb4a0b7b4728e1b65e52341def8ac5deb053</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5286-3a6e6366a30d7dbf0df09fb42df9fdb4a0b7b4728e1b65e52341def8ac5deb053</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1467-6486.2004.00476.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1467-6486.2004.00476.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,3994,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://econpapers.repec.org/article/blajomstd/v_3a41_3ay_3a2004_3ai_3a8_3ap_3a1301-1323.htm$$DView record in RePEc$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Musson, Gill</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tietze, Susanne</creatorcontrib><title>Places and Spaces: The Role of Metonymy in Organizational Talk</title><title>Journal of management studies</title><description>Cultural meaning making as reflected in, and constituted by, organizational talk is an established field of interest in organizational analysis. However, the discursive mechanics of the process whereby this cultural meaning making is created and maintained are less well understood. The premise of this paper is that taken‐for‐granted assumptions embedded in organizational talk can be explored through the analysis of metonymy, a trope which is under explored in the linguistic turn in organization studies. This lack of focus on metonymy is, we believe, related to the fundamentally conventional nature of the trope in use, which expresses ideas, values and relationships that seem natural, normal and routine but which are culturally bound. We address this gap and carry out a metonymical analysis of organizational talk about physical places and spaces in one organization, to show how cultural norms and meanings are reflected, maintained, and potentially changed in these figures of speech. We show how metonymic chains based on buildings can reflect, reify and simplify the symbolic order of the organization, how these symbolic meanings can be transferred on to other inanimate objects and the constructions thereby spread, how people can be constructed within this symbolic chain, and how these metonymic chains can be invoked to potentially confirm, challenge or change the organizational order.</description><subject>Culture</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>Organization theory</subject><subject>Organizational analysis</subject><subject>Organizational behavior</subject><subject>Speech</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0022-2380</issn><issn>1467-6486</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>X2L</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkM1u1DAUhS0EEkPhHSwW7BL8FzuDBBKqSguaMogGWF45sU2TJnGIMzDh6XEaNAtWWDr2lXy-6-uDEKYkpXG9bFIqpEqkyGXKCBFplJLp8QHanC4eog0hjCWM5-QxehJCQ8hiIxv05lOrKxuw7g2-GZbyFS5uLf7sW4u9w9d28v3czbju8X78rvv6t55q3-sWF7q9e4oeOd0G--zveYa-vLsozq-S3f7y_fnbXVJlLJcJ19JKLqXmxChTOmIc2bpSMOO2zpRCk1KVQrHc0lJmNmNcUGNdrqvM2JJk_Ay9WPsOo_9xsGGCrg6VbVvdW38IED9Gc5Utxuf_GBt_GOO4AehWMMYUVdGUr6Zq9CGM1sEw1p0eZ6AEllShgSU8WMKDJVW4TxWOEd2t6GgHW524stWN78Jk4CdwLWjc5qh7lOs6Ko8aoignFChnHG6nLrZ7vbb7Vbd2_u8x4MP--iZWkU9Wvg6TPZ54Pd6BVFxl8O3jJaii-FpciSw--wdbK6VL</recordid><startdate>200412</startdate><enddate>200412</enddate><creator>Musson, Gill</creator><creator>Tietze, Susanne</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Blackwell</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>DKI</scope><scope>X2L</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200412</creationdate><title>Places and Spaces: The Role of Metonymy in Organizational Talk</title><author>Musson, Gill ; Tietze, Susanne</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5286-3a6e6366a30d7dbf0df09fb42df9fdb4a0b7b4728e1b65e52341def8ac5deb053</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Culture</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>Organization theory</topic><topic>Organizational analysis</topic><topic>Organizational behavior</topic><topic>Speech</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Musson, Gill</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tietze, Susanne</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>RePEc IDEAS</collection><collection>RePEc</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Journal of management studies</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Musson, Gill</au><au>Tietze, Susanne</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Places and Spaces: The Role of Metonymy in Organizational Talk</atitle><jtitle>Journal of management studies</jtitle><date>2004-12</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>1301</spage><epage>1323</epage><pages>1301-1323</pages><issn>0022-2380</issn><eissn>1467-6486</eissn><coden>JMASB2</coden><abstract>Cultural meaning making as reflected in, and constituted by, organizational talk is an established field of interest in organizational analysis. However, the discursive mechanics of the process whereby this cultural meaning making is created and maintained are less well understood. The premise of this paper is that taken‐for‐granted assumptions embedded in organizational talk can be explored through the analysis of metonymy, a trope which is under explored in the linguistic turn in organization studies. This lack of focus on metonymy is, we believe, related to the fundamentally conventional nature of the trope in use, which expresses ideas, values and relationships that seem natural, normal and routine but which are culturally bound. We address this gap and carry out a metonymical analysis of organizational talk about physical places and spaces in one organization, to show how cultural norms and meanings are reflected, maintained, and potentially changed in these figures of speech. We show how metonymic chains based on buildings can reflect, reify and simplify the symbolic order of the organization, how these symbolic meanings can be transferred on to other inanimate objects and the constructions thereby spread, how people can be constructed within this symbolic chain, and how these metonymic chains can be invoked to potentially confirm, challenge or change the organizational order.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00476.x</doi><tpages>23</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-2380
ispartof Journal of management studies, 2004-12, Vol.41 (8), p.1301-1323
issn 0022-2380
1467-6486
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_38018755
source RePEc; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Culture
Language
Linguistics
Organization theory
Organizational analysis
Organizational behavior
Speech
Studies
title Places and Spaces: The Role of Metonymy in Organizational Talk
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T12%3A52%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Places%20and%20Spaces:%20The%20Role%20of%20Metonymy%20in%20Organizational%20Talk&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20management%20studies&rft.au=Musson,%20Gill&rft.date=2004-12&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1301&rft.epage=1323&rft.pages=1301-1323&rft.issn=0022-2380&rft.eissn=1467-6486&rft.coden=JMASB2&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00476.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E792944451%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=194222717&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true