Dear jazz2012,
It is perfectly correct to use the word "stone" in a sentence to
represent urns and statues fashioned from that substance. To compose
such a sentence is to use the rhetorical device known as synecdoche.
Synecdoche is a type of metaphor in which the part stands for the whole,
the whole for a part, the genus for the species, the species for the
genus, the material for the thing made, or in short, any portion, section,
or main quality for the whole or the thing itself (or vice versa).
* Farmer Jones has two hundred head of cattle and three hired hands.
Here we recognize that Jones also owns the bodies of the cattle,
and that the hired hands have bodies attached. This is a simple
part-for-whole synecdoche. Here are a few more:
* If I had some wheels, I'd put on my best threads and ask for
Jane's hand in marriage.
* The army included two hundred horse and three hundred foot.
* It is sure hard to earn a dollar these days.
* Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became
a living soul. --Genesis 2:7
And notice the other kinds of substitutions that can be
made:
* Get in here this instant or I'll spank your body. [Whole for
part--i.e. "body" for "rear end"]
* Put Beethoven on the turntable and turn up the volume. [Composer
substituted for record]
* A few hundred pounds of twenty dollar bills ought to solve
that problem nicely. [Weight for amount]
* He drew his steel from his scabbard and welcomed all
comers. [Material for thing made]
* Patty's hobby is exposing film; Harold's is burning up gasoline
in his dune buggy. [Part for whole]
* Okay team. Get those blades back on the ice. [Part for whole]
Virtual Salt: A Handbook of Rhetorical Devices
http://www.virtualsalt.com/rhetoric.htm#Synecdoche
The sentence "I will move my stone from the garage to the garden"
exhibits the kind of synecdoche where the material stands for the
objects. Compare this to the example above, "He drew his steel from
his scabbard". Also note that it is correct to use the syntactically
singular "stone" in your sentence rather than the plural "stones"
because you are invoking the material of which the objects are made,
rather than the objects themselves, and the material is uncountable.
In fact, to say "stones" would be misleading, since this would suggest
shapeless pieces of stone rather than finished objects.
In sum, your sentence has the wholehearted approval of classical
rhetoric and modern grammar.
Regards,
leapinglizard |
