Roman Jakobson, the famous Russian linguist's analysis of speech disorders (aphasia) led him to conclude that people who use Metaphors tend to substitute meaning, and people who use Metonymies tend to associate meaning.
An example of Metaphor, as the substituted would be: 'A pen is a figure of Speech, that sharpens'. The Metaphoric Pen is the substitute of the real or the represented as writing.
However the Pen can simultaneously be associated, or in other words, the Pen can be associated with writing. The transition of a figure of speech from a metaphor to that of metonymy is simultaneous. There is fluidity of interspatial conceptions of meaning. This state of interspatial fluidity is not assumed by Roman Jakobson.Roman Jakobson tends to keep both boundaries exclusive rather than being inclusive. Again, the problem of both the Metaphor and the Metonymy is the problem of meaning (located) with a referent. This referent is itself, is a meaning -named or the represented as the Noun.
According to Roman Jakobson, those who substitute meanings as metaphors, suffer from the disorder of language called continuity and those who associate meanings as metonymies tender to suffer from a similarity disorder.
Continuity would imply a going on to the next where as similarity would imply a resemblance. Here again, the problem of continuity and similarity is that both of them overlap. They have to be connected to a field of the inclusive rather their exclusivity as postulated by Jakobson
Roman Jakobson also draws a graphical sign called the cross or the plus, and tries to retain the meaning of the substituted, as a metaphor on the vertical axis, and tries to retain meaning of the associated as the metonymy on the horizontal axis.
Other literary theorists wholike Jacques Lacan have combined Jakobson's model of metaphor as a substitute (metaphor), and metonymy as an (associated) with Saussure the linguist's.
The model of Saussure's axis is, the vertical axis represents paradigmatic (all possibilities that can be replaced as the meaning of a sentence) and the horizontal axis as the syntagmatic (that is all possibilities of meaning that can be used with the variance ofthe syntax).
Example of the Paradigmatic.
1. Slow and steady win the Race
2. Quick and the Unstable loose the contest.
Here, the idea of meaning is retained though the structure/paradigmis changed.
Exampleof the Syntagmatic
1. Slow and Steady Win the Race
2. The race is won by the slow and the steady.
Here the Syntax is changed without changing the meaning.
It is rather ambiguous to separate the axis of meaning as the paradigmatic and syntagmaticand to connote it withan applicationthat the paradigmatic axis is a substitute where as syntagmatic axis is associated.
The problem is: meanings are always submerged in multiplicity and any change in one will change all the others to combine the sense of meaning to be similar or different depending upon one's intent to be in meaning.
Meaning is retained as the recognitionof the familiar or the represented. Retention of meaning as the 'recognized- familiar' is communicative and pedagogic. Recognition of Meaning as the familia, isdenotative in character and it is always subject to the produced.
When meaning becomes substituted and associated, it is already diverting itself to another. Associations and Substitutions of meanings are submergences and cannot be seen in exclusivities.Substitutions and Associations are performative in character. Substitutions and Associations are processual as defamiliarization and highly contextual, possessingconnotative significances.