Dimensions of metaphor

Two rating studies examined several dimensions of metaphorical sentences. A pool of 260 metaphors was constructed, all in the form “(noun phrase) is/are (noun phrase).” In Study 1 all of the items, and in Study 2, 98 of the items were evaluated on ten scales presumed to be important to the comprehension or interpretation of metaphors: semantic relatedness of the subject and predicate, comprehensibility, imageability, imageability of the subject (topic), imageability of the predicate (vehicle), degree of metaphoricity, metaphor goodness, ease of interpretation, number of alternative interpretations, and felt familiarity of the metaphoric ground. Both experiments revealed the rated dimensions to be highly interrelated, but some analyses allowed evaluation of alternative predictions based on current theoretical approaches to metaphor quality and interpretation. The results indicated consistent but mixed support for the general poisitions under consideration as each appeared to have strong and weak areas of applicability. The interrelationships among the scales are discussed, together with implications of the findings for current theories and future metaphor research.

[1]  DeWitt H. Parker,et al.  Philosophy in a New Key , 1941 .

[2]  R. Tagiuri,et al.  Person perception and interpersonal behavior , 1959 .

[3]  C C ANDERSON,et al.  THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE METAPHOR. , 1964, The Journal of genetic psychology.

[4]  An intra-verbal explication of the nature of metaphor , 1965 .

[5]  Albert Borgmann,et al.  The Structure of Language , 1954, The Classical Review.

[6]  Richard P. Honeck,et al.  Semantic memory for metaphor: The conceptual base hypothesis , 1975, Memory & cognition.

[7]  Paul Newell Campbell,et al.  Metaphor and linguistic theory , 1975 .

[8]  Robert G. Malgady,et al.  Modifiers in metaphors: Effects of constituent phrase similarity on the interpretation of figurative sentences , 1976 .

[9]  R. M. Billow.  Metaphor: A review of the psychological literature. , 1977 .

[10]  R. Verbrugge,et al.  Metaphoric comprehension: Studies in reminding and resembling , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  Allan Paivio,et al.  Integrative processing of concrete and abstract sentences , 1977 .

[12]  H. Pollio,et al.  The anomaly of anomaly , 1977, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research.

[13]  H. Pollio,et al.  Sense and nonsense in thinking about anomaly and metaphor , 1979 .

[14]  D. G. MacKay,et al.  Metaphor and Thought , 1980 .

[15]  Michael G. Johnson,et al.  Some cognitive aspects of figurative language: Association and metaphor , 1979 .

[16]  Robert R. Hoffman,et al.  Cognition and Figurative Language , 1980 .

[17]  Comparative judgments of animal intelligence and pleasantness , 1980 .

[18]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Aptness in metaphor , 1981, Cognitive Psychology.

[19]  P. Gildea,et al.  On understanding nonliteral speech: Can people ignore metaphors? , 1982 .

[20]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Understanding and appreciating metaphors , 1982, Cognition.