In this paper an attempt will be made to analyse a number of surnames either directly derived from animal names or variously associated with representatives of the animal world which may be said to embody and provide a variation on the general conceptual metaphor HUMAN BEING IS ANIMAL and/or the ANIMAL NAME FOR PERSON ASSOCIATED WITH THAT NAME metonymy. Animal-related surnames represent a fragment of the English lexicon where morphology and (broadly understood) semantics meet and exert mutual infl uence on each other. It seems that in animal-based nomination language users employ such morphological mechanisms as, for example, affi xation or compounding which, in turn, seem to be conceptually motivated by metaphor and metonymy.
The aim of this paper is to analyse various animal-specifi c complex lexical units together with patterns that can be held responsible for their underlying conceptual structure. Many examples of the data investigated in the paper seem to represent compounds as they are traditionally understood in the literature of the subject (see, among others, Bauer 2003; Katamba and Stonham 2006; Lieber and Štekauer 2009; Fàbregas and Scalise 2012; Bauer et al. 2013); however, others do not meet the basic criteria for compoundhood as postulated by, for example, Altakhaineh (2016). In my research I use the term animal-specifi c complex lexical units with reference to all animal-related composite expressions being the result of the working of metaphor-metonymy interaction.