Aptness in Metaphor.
Abstract
The traditional view treats metaphor as a comparison. Because this view has difficulty in explaining the basis of the supposed comparison, etc., two other theories have been proposed. One treats metaphors as anomalies--intentional mistakes. The other view treats metaphors as interactions, in which one concept is somehow seen in terms of another. The authors propose a variant of this view: in metaphor, one sees a concept from one class in terms of a concept from another class. Their view requires that the similarity (or distance) of the two concepts be analyzed into two components: (a) the degree to which two concepts occupy dissimilar positions with respect to their category or domain (which they call within-domain distance); and (b) the degree to which the categories themselves are dissimilar (which they call between-domain distance). Each of the views makes predictions about the relations among similarity, aptness, and comprehensibility in metaphor. The authors constructed tests of those relationships and, overall, their findings consistently supported their domains-interaction view over versions of the comparison and anomaly views.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Oct 30, 1978
- Accession Number
- ADA062489
Entities
People
- Robert Sternberg
- Roger Tourangeau
Organizations
- Yale University