Synecdoche vs Metonymy
October 7, 2010 12:02 PM Subscribe
When people use the airport code of the San Francisco international airport (SFO) to refer to the city of San Francisco, is that an example of synecdoche or metonymy? Can it be both? The airport isn't within the city limits of San Francisco, if that makes a difference.
What other airports or airport codes, if any, are commonly used to refer to cities? For instance, is Chicago ever referred to as O'Hare or Portland as PDX? Are there any airport codes that actually coincide with abbreviations for the city?
What other airports or airport codes, if any, are commonly used to refer to cities? For instance, is Chicago ever referred to as O'Hare or Portland as PDX? Are there any airport codes that actually coincide with abbreviations for the city?
I've seen 'SCL' used to refer to Santiago, Chile, though not speech, just in writing.
For my money, it's an example of a Synecdoche, referring to the whole by the part.
posted by signal at 12:09 PM on October 7, 2010
For my money, it's an example of a Synecdoche, referring to the whole by the part.
posted by signal at 12:09 PM on October 7, 2010
is Chicago ever referred to as O'Hare or Portland as PDX?
I've heard Portland referred to as PDX. It's been done on Metafilter repeatedly, for example.
St. Louis is sometimes referred to as STL, which is the airport code, but it's also a pretty obvious abbreviation of St. Louis. I'm not sure if it's intentionally referring to the airport code or not.
posted by jedicus at 12:10 PM on October 7, 2010
I've heard Portland referred to as PDX. It's been done on Metafilter repeatedly, for example.
St. Louis is sometimes referred to as STL, which is the airport code, but it's also a pretty obvious abbreviation of St. Louis. I'm not sure if it's intentionally referring to the airport code or not.
posted by jedicus at 12:10 PM on October 7, 2010
Neither, IMO. It's more of a language device -- used to draw a distinction when there are multiple airports serving the same location, such as Los Angeles and New York -- that has gained traction with other usages (e.g. someone hears a power traveler referring to SFO to distinguish between other "San Francisco airports" such as Oakland and San Jose, then goes on to use the term to refer to the city, out of context with the airport).
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 12:12 PM on October 7, 2010
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 12:12 PM on October 7, 2010
I've seen Chicago referred to as ORD (and other cities named by their airport codes), but mostly among people who fly all the time.
posted by sonofdust at 12:13 PM on October 7, 2010
posted by sonofdust at 12:13 PM on October 7, 2010
It sounds like both synecdoche or metonymy to me.
I'm Canadian, so I hear lots of YYC (Calgary), YVR (Vancouver), and YYZ (Toronto). I think it may have been made significantly more popular by Twitter, as #XXX saves a lot of space and avoids the kind of mess you get with, e.g., #NY or #NYC or #NewYork and so on. Also, I think it's a bit of a 'cool kid lingo' thing, a 'special club' kind of thing.
posted by demagogue at 12:16 PM on October 7, 2010
I'm Canadian, so I hear lots of YYC (Calgary), YVR (Vancouver), and YYZ (Toronto). I think it may have been made significantly more popular by Twitter, as #XXX saves a lot of space and avoids the kind of mess you get with, e.g., #NY or #NYC or #NewYork and so on. Also, I think it's a bit of a 'cool kid lingo' thing, a 'special club' kind of thing.
posted by demagogue at 12:16 PM on October 7, 2010
It's synecdoche, in that a city's airport is part of its whole. Mostly you hear it for Portland, seems like; other usages I have seen felt forced (SEA, SFO, MSP). And you don't see it done with very large cities and their airports. This might be because in larger cities like L.A., San Francisco, or NY, airports usually have a distinct character and identity from the city itself - they're their own place.
I wonder, is there a connection between this kind of usage and locations where a large fraction of its (young adult) population have moved there from somewhere else? I suppose this is a theory largely based on the isolated PDX example, so it might not be worth much.
posted by aught at 12:18 PM on October 7, 2010
I wonder, is there a connection between this kind of usage and locations where a large fraction of its (young adult) population have moved there from somewhere else? I suppose this is a theory largely based on the isolated PDX example, so it might not be worth much.
posted by aught at 12:18 PM on October 7, 2010
I call Oklahoma City OKC, as do many others here in OK -- but I'm told that the connection to the airport code is coincidental -- apparently some tourism board decided calling Oklahoma City "OC" sounded dumb. FWIW, I think they were right.
I grew up in NY and never heard anyone try to refer to it as "JFK" or "LGA"; same with DTW, LAX, or SJC (Detroit, LA, San Jose). I do kind of wish that people referred to Grand Rapids as GRR, though.
Here's my off-the-cuff theory: it's more likely to catch on if the city name:
a) doesn't already have a common abbreviation
b) has an airport code that is like enough the city name that it will be recognized; *or* is only being used in a context where everyone will recognize the airport code (i.e., locals)
c) the city name has at least four syllables, making a three-syllable airport code more efficient.
posted by obliquicity at 12:19 PM on October 7, 2010
I grew up in NY and never heard anyone try to refer to it as "JFK" or "LGA"; same with DTW, LAX, or SJC (Detroit, LA, San Jose). I do kind of wish that people referred to Grand Rapids as GRR, though.
Here's my off-the-cuff theory: it's more likely to catch on if the city name:
a) doesn't already have a common abbreviation
b) has an airport code that is like enough the city name that it will be recognized; *or* is only being used in a context where everyone will recognize the airport code (i.e., locals)
c) the city name has at least four syllables, making a three-syllable airport code more efficient.
posted by obliquicity at 12:19 PM on October 7, 2010
Another example that may be partly coincidental, but the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area can be referred to as DFW.
posted by jedicus at 12:20 PM on October 7, 2010
posted by jedicus at 12:20 PM on October 7, 2010
I'm no help on the why front, but people refer to Providence as PVD, though mostly in writing. (and the Providence airport is also not in Providence)
posted by brainmouse at 12:20 PM on October 7, 2010
posted by brainmouse at 12:20 PM on October 7, 2010
I have many friends in Portland and they all refer to their town as PDX.
I'm from Chicago and never referred to it as ORD *until* I was no longer living there *and* started traveling all the time. Now I almost exclusively use airport codes as a shorthand for where I'm traveling to.
posted by FlamingBore at 12:28 PM on October 7, 2010
I'm from Chicago and never referred to it as ORD *until* I was no longer living there *and* started traveling all the time. Now I almost exclusively use airport codes as a shorthand for where I'm traveling to.
posted by FlamingBore at 12:28 PM on October 7, 2010
sonofdust, would those people refer to Chicago as "ORD" if they were flying into Midway for some reason?
Also, I'm from Philadelphia and I can't imagine someone referring to it as "PHL". If I heard someone refer to "PHL" I'd figure they meant the airport. But since Philly has only one airport, most Philadelphians would jusy say "I'm going to the airport". Two reasons come to mind. First, there's the obvious shortening to "Philly". Second, there's a competing three-letter form: in sports scores when a three-letter abbreviation is needed it usually seems to be "PHI" -- see mlb.com, nba.com, nfl.com, nhl.com) which kind of makes more sense as it's the first three letters. But then again, the fact that Portland starts with POR doesn't stop people from referring to Portland (the city) as PDX.
I live in Oakland now and I hear "SFO" a lot, because "the airport" is ambiguous. (Oddly enough, I'm not sure how people refer to the Oakland airport. Maybe they just call it "the Oakland airport".) It seems like the dynamics would be different in two-airport cities. The Bay Area is kind of borderline as a "two-airport city" because the two airports are on opposite sides of the bay and both named after different cities. (And yes, I know I just ignored San Jose.)
posted by madcaptenor at 12:31 PM on October 7, 2010
Also, I'm from Philadelphia and I can't imagine someone referring to it as "PHL". If I heard someone refer to "PHL" I'd figure they meant the airport. But since Philly has only one airport, most Philadelphians would jusy say "I'm going to the airport". Two reasons come to mind. First, there's the obvious shortening to "Philly". Second, there's a competing three-letter form: in sports scores when a three-letter abbreviation is needed it usually seems to be "PHI" -- see mlb.com, nba.com, nfl.com, nhl.com) which kind of makes more sense as it's the first three letters. But then again, the fact that Portland starts with POR doesn't stop people from referring to Portland (the city) as PDX.
I live in Oakland now and I hear "SFO" a lot, because "the airport" is ambiguous. (Oddly enough, I'm not sure how people refer to the Oakland airport. Maybe they just call it "the Oakland airport".) It seems like the dynamics would be different in two-airport cities. The Bay Area is kind of borderline as a "two-airport city" because the two airports are on opposite sides of the bay and both named after different cities. (And yes, I know I just ignored San Jose.)
posted by madcaptenor at 12:31 PM on October 7, 2010
Are there any airport codes that actually coincide with abbreviations for the city?
Salt Lake City International Airport's code is SLC and based on anecdotal evidence that is also an abbreviation used to refer to the city.
posted by Rhomboid at 12:36 PM on October 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
Salt Lake City International Airport's code is SLC and based on anecdotal evidence that is also an abbreviation used to refer to the city.
posted by Rhomboid at 12:36 PM on October 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
Rhomboid: "Are there any airport codes that actually coincide with abbreviations for the city?
Salt Lake City International Airport's code is SLC and based on anecdotal evidence that is also an abbreviation used to refer to the city."
Just about to say that conveniently the abbreviation and airport code for my city are the same so I frequently use it. I also use it for cities that have one airport serving it just because it's easier to use when I'm typing on my phone.
posted by msbutah at 12:50 PM on October 7, 2010
Salt Lake City International Airport's code is SLC and based on anecdotal evidence that is also an abbreviation used to refer to the city."
Just about to say that conveniently the abbreviation and airport code for my city are the same so I frequently use it. I also use it for cities that have one airport serving it just because it's easier to use when I'm typing on my phone.
posted by msbutah at 12:50 PM on October 7, 2010
Synecdoche, wherein a specific part of something is used to refer to the whole, is usually understood as a specific kind of metonymy. Sometimes, however, people make an absolute distinction between a metonym and a synecdoche, treating metonymy as different from rather than inclusive of synecdoche. (...)When the distinction is made, it is the following: when A is used to refer to B, it is a synecdoche if A is a component of B and a metonym if A is commonly associated with B but not actually part of its whole.
So you could say it's both, or that it's a metonymy but not a synechoche because the airport is outside the city limits.posted by JohnMarston at 12:50 PM on October 7, 2010
Best answer: There are two ways to define synecdoche and metonymy; a) you can define synecdoche as a special case of metonymy (because parts/attributes of something—synechdochical—are, by definition, intimate associations—metonymical), or b) you can stipulate that they are mutually exclusive categories (i.e. this requires metonyms do not involve part-whole or attribute relationships). Either relation is valid [Wikipedia]. (Although, I prefer (a), because it is mathematically cleaner.) But, the choice does affect how the figure of speech "SFO" is classified: if "SFO" is a synecdoche, then it may or may not be a metonym depending on which of these two definitions you choose.
Next we look at whether "SFO" is a synecdoche at all. By definition, a synecdoche is a rhetorical figure "wherein a specific part of something is used to refer to the whole". The problem is that it's not clear if the term refers to geographical SF, or conceptual SF. That is, international airports usually play an integral role as part of a cosmopolitan centre, even if they are physically situated miles away. So "SFO" may or may not be a synecdoche, depending on which view of the relationship you want to take.
And finally, for the case that "SFO" is not a synecdoche, we still have to rule on whether it is a metonymy. By definition, a metonym names something intimately associated with that thing or concept [Wikipedia]. In the case of international airport codes, this case rests on whether the person using it is part of the "jet set", as they call it, or not. Because, really, the subtext of it is just a silly bit of name-dropping.
This completes my analysis.
posted by polymodus at 12:56 PM on October 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
Next we look at whether "SFO" is a synecdoche at all. By definition, a synecdoche is a rhetorical figure "wherein a specific part of something is used to refer to the whole". The problem is that it's not clear if the term refers to geographical SF, or conceptual SF. That is, international airports usually play an integral role as part of a cosmopolitan centre, even if they are physically situated miles away. So "SFO" may or may not be a synecdoche, depending on which view of the relationship you want to take.
And finally, for the case that "SFO" is not a synecdoche, we still have to rule on whether it is a metonymy. By definition, a metonym names something intimately associated with that thing or concept [Wikipedia]. In the case of international airport codes, this case rests on whether the person using it is part of the "jet set", as they call it, or not. Because, really, the subtext of it is just a silly bit of name-dropping.
This completes my analysis.
posted by polymodus at 12:56 PM on October 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
Sea-Tac is more commonly used as slang to refer to Seattle than just SEA. The nickname became so common, they renamed the city that the airport is actually in to SeaTac in 1990.
posted by yeti at 1:07 PM on October 7, 2010
posted by yeti at 1:07 PM on October 7, 2010
If I may weigh in...
A synecdoche is a metonymy, but a metonymy is not necessarily a synecdoche. If I say I'm going to [airport] t and mean by that that I am going to [the city that contains that airport], then it is a synecdoche in the sense that a part of that city is standing in for the whole. This usage seems really odd to me, though, and isn't one I'm familiar with. So, I'm having trouble saying that the example you provide is unequivocally a synecdoche because the usage seems so odd. I think that if somebody says "I'm flying into LAX" they're not deploying "LAX" as a synecdoche because it is literally true which seems to me violates the sense of synecdoche as figurative.
posted by synecdoche at 1:35 PM on October 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
A synecdoche is a metonymy, but a metonymy is not necessarily a synecdoche. If I say I'm going to [airport] t and mean by that that I am going to [the city that contains that airport], then it is a synecdoche in the sense that a part of that city is standing in for the whole. This usage seems really odd to me, though, and isn't one I'm familiar with. So, I'm having trouble saying that the example you provide is unequivocally a synecdoche because the usage seems so odd. I think that if somebody says "I'm flying into LAX" they're not deploying "LAX" as a synecdoche because it is literally true which seems to me violates the sense of synecdoche as figurative.
posted by synecdoche at 1:35 PM on October 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
Sea-Tac is more commonly used as slang to refer to Seattle than just SEA. The nickname became so common, they renamed the city that the airport is actually in to SeaTac in 1990.
I lived in Seattle for seven years and never heard anyone refer to Seattle as Sea-Tac. People call the airport Sea-Tac; maybe that's what you meant?
Now I live in Portland, and people here DO call it PDX (even though that's one syllable longer than Portland). Portland State University even adopted pdx.edu as its domain name.
posted by rabbitrabbit at 1:43 PM on October 7, 2010
I lived in Seattle for seven years and never heard anyone refer to Seattle as Sea-Tac. People call the airport Sea-Tac; maybe that's what you meant?
Now I live in Portland, and people here DO call it PDX (even though that's one syllable longer than Portland). Portland State University even adopted pdx.edu as its domain name.
posted by rabbitrabbit at 1:43 PM on October 7, 2010
Very, very, very, very common in Canada. YYC is Calgary. YYZ is Toronto (even though the airport is in Mississauga). YVR is Vancouver (even though the airport is in Richmond).
The only US city I've know that does this regularly is PDX.
posted by ethnomethodologist at 1:57 PM on October 7, 2010
The only US city I've know that does this regularly is PDX.
posted by ethnomethodologist at 1:57 PM on October 7, 2010
Hmm, I've lived in the Bay Area my whole life, and have never heard anyone refer to San Francisco as SFO, unless they are specifically talking about the airport. Locals call it "the City" or "SF". If someone told me they were going to spend Friday night in SFO, I'd assume they were going there to pick up a friend. So I would say it is not synechdoche, because any time I've seen someone use SFO to refer to the City, they've gotten weird looks or been corrected.
In case it's relevant, most of the people I know came here from other states or countries to work in San Francisco, so this isn't a case of only knowing natives.
posted by oneirodynia at 2:43 PM on October 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
In case it's relevant, most of the people I know came here from other states or countries to work in San Francisco, so this isn't a case of only knowing natives.
posted by oneirodynia at 2:43 PM on October 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
People refer to Austin as the ATX. Or, at least, I do ...
posted by theRussian at 2:57 PM on October 7, 2010
posted by theRussian at 2:57 PM on October 7, 2010
Robyn Hitchcock has a song that seems to refer to the Seattle-Tacoma metro as Sea-Tac. They have the best computers and coffee and smack!
posted by GaelFC at 3:41 PM on October 7, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by GaelFC at 3:41 PM on October 7, 2010 [2 favorites]
yeti: Sea-Tac is more commonly used as slang to refer to Seattle than just SEA.
rabbitrabbit: I lived in Seattle for seven years and never heard anyone refer to Seattle as Sea-Tac.
I would also like to dispute yeti's assertion. The Robyn Hitchcock song notwithstanding, there is a very good reason why Seattleites would not refer to Seattle as Sea-Tac -- the "Tac" refers to Tacoma and there's no way Seattleites would voluntarily associate Seattle with Tacoma. Further, as yeti points out, there is already a neighboring but separate city called SeaTac which would make referring to the actual city of Seattle as SeaTac all the more strange.
posted by mhum at 3:43 PM on October 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
rabbitrabbit: I lived in Seattle for seven years and never heard anyone refer to Seattle as Sea-Tac.
I would also like to dispute yeti's assertion. The Robyn Hitchcock song notwithstanding, there is a very good reason why Seattleites would not refer to Seattle as Sea-Tac -- the "Tac" refers to Tacoma and there's no way Seattleites would voluntarily associate Seattle with Tacoma. Further, as yeti points out, there is already a neighboring but separate city called SeaTac which would make referring to the actual city of Seattle as SeaTac all the more strange.
posted by mhum at 3:43 PM on October 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
Umm, isn't the airport code for Austin AUS?
As mentioned above, The ATL is very commonly used for Atlanta. One might suppose that's because the airport there is so important (and, for most people outside Atlanta, the defining feature), but I would guess it's just as likely that the abbreviation for Atlanta (e.g., in sports scores, as mentioned for Philadelphia) is always ATL anyway. Where PDX is obviously the airport code, ATL could go either way.
I think something like obliquicity's rules are at play here... which is why ORD, JFK, etc. are rarely used--because they serve more to obscure than to abbreviate, and because it would seem too much like one was referring to the airport instead of the city. (PDX doesn't really follow this rule, but POR is kind of a lame abbreviation, and maybe Portland thrives on being a little hipper than the rule anyway...)
posted by SuperNova at 3:43 PM on October 7, 2010
As mentioned above, The ATL is very commonly used for Atlanta. One might suppose that's because the airport there is so important (and, for most people outside Atlanta, the defining feature), but I would guess it's just as likely that the abbreviation for Atlanta (e.g., in sports scores, as mentioned for Philadelphia) is always ATL anyway. Where PDX is obviously the airport code, ATL could go either way.
I think something like obliquicity's rules are at play here... which is why ORD, JFK, etc. are rarely used--because they serve more to obscure than to abbreviate, and because it would seem too much like one was referring to the airport instead of the city. (PDX doesn't really follow this rule, but POR is kind of a lame abbreviation, and maybe Portland thrives on being a little hipper than the rule anyway...)
posted by SuperNova at 3:43 PM on October 7, 2010
Response by poster: synecdoche: I think that if somebody says "I'm flying into LAX" they're not deploying "LAX" as a synecdoche because it is literally true which seems to me violates the sense of synecdoche as figurative.
The usage that I'm referring to is not so much the literally true, as in your example, but more along the lines of people asking about the location of good neighborhoods in LAX, referring to the city rather than the airport. I don't know if people actually use that airport code for Los Angeles but it comes up every now and then on Metafilter for San Francisco. If you do a search for "SFO," you'll see some examples (it showed up yesterday in Metatalk).
I've never actually noticed anyone say it out loud, at least for my original example, so it may just be a written thing. Thanks everyone for helping to illustrate the larger pattern.
posted by Jeff Howard at 4:20 PM on October 7, 2010
The usage that I'm referring to is not so much the literally true, as in your example, but more along the lines of people asking about the location of good neighborhoods in LAX, referring to the city rather than the airport. I don't know if people actually use that airport code for Los Angeles but it comes up every now and then on Metafilter for San Francisco. If you do a search for "SFO," you'll see some examples (it showed up yesterday in Metatalk).
I've never actually noticed anyone say it out loud, at least for my original example, so it may just be a written thing. Thanks everyone for helping to illustrate the larger pattern.
posted by Jeff Howard at 4:20 PM on October 7, 2010
Another America city where people use the airport code as shorthand for the city is Albuquerque, where it is very common to refer to the city as ABQ (although it is more common written than spoken). This is mainly because no one can spell Albuquerque, though.
posted by heurtebise at 4:54 PM on October 7, 2010
posted by heurtebise at 4:54 PM on October 7, 2010
I've lived in SF for five years, and I've only rarely seen SFO used to refer to anything but the airport--my experience tallies with oneirodynia's in that people usually say "the City" or "SF," or they pronounce the entire name, "San Francisco." Re. "Frisco," see below:
Anyway, some excellent work above. The main reason I write separately is to say that while SFO (the airport) is outside the bounds of SF (the City), it is owned and operated by the City of San Francisco, so associating it with the City is quite proper. (It's also not unique in this regard; many of San Francisco County's jail cells are actually located in San Mateo. If you build your city on the end of a peninsula, a land crunch is pretty much inevitable.)
posted by tellumo at 5:25 PM on October 7, 2010 [3 favorites]
Whoever after due and proper warning shall be heard to utter the abominable word "Frisco," which has no linguistic or other warrant, shall be deemed guilty of a High Misdemeanor, and shall pay into the Imperial Treasury as penalty the sum of twenty-five dollars.--Norton I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico, 1872.
Anyway, some excellent work above. The main reason I write separately is to say that while SFO (the airport) is outside the bounds of SF (the City), it is owned and operated by the City of San Francisco, so associating it with the City is quite proper. (It's also not unique in this regard; many of San Francisco County's jail cells are actually located in San Mateo. If you build your city on the end of a peninsula, a land crunch is pretty much inevitable.)
posted by tellumo at 5:25 PM on October 7, 2010 [3 favorites]
Datapoint: I've never heard or seen Indianapolis referred to as "IND" outside of the context of airline travel in 30+ years of living here. "Indy" is commonly used as a short form. (And with the exception of a certain fictional archeologist, "Indy" is short for Indianapolis, never Indiana. If you're writing about independent films, music, etc., it's "indie," not "indy.")
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 7:03 PM on October 7, 2010
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 7:03 PM on October 7, 2010
Are there any airport codes that actually coincide with abbreviations for the city?
BCN for Barcelona.
posted by ersatz at 12:28 PM on October 9, 2010
BCN for Barcelona.
posted by ersatz at 12:28 PM on October 9, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
I don't think it is either synecdoche or metonymy, but I love how Sioux City embraced its airport code: http://www.flysux.com/
posted by pointystick at 12:05 PM on October 7, 2010 [2 favorites]