But the cat as a whole is absent; only its parts – back, muzzle, tongue – and its actions – rubbing, licking, jumping – are explicit representations of the animal. Eagleton's theory on the “transition from metaphor to metonymy”3 is therefore summarized here. The cat metaphor has been broken down into a series of metonyms, the parts of which are linked only by contiguity, a perfect reflection of Prufrock's descent into an inability to communicate his thoughts. Metonyms in place of metaphor are apparent throughout the text – the humans who also appear are hollowed out in parts, appearing as disembodied arms and eyes but never as whole beings. This language foreshadows Prufrock's worst fear: that he will undergo a "reduction," to use Kenneth Burke's term for metonymy, which he indeed does. As Prufrock asks himself: “Do I dare/disturb the universe?” » the dreaded “they” exclaim such notions as “How fine her hair is getting!” and “But how thin his arms and legs are!” - as he philosophizes on such vast and universal issues, his decaying body parts are pointed out by the omnipresent voices and eyes. The conjunction "but" suggests a rejection of the other qualities that Prufrock possesses and instead a hyperfocus on his physicality: the fact that he is losing weight is just another reminder that