Part of
Visual MetaphorsEdited by Réka Benczes and Veronika Szelid
[Benjamins Current Topics 124] 2022
► pp. 33–60
Edited by Réka Benczes and Veronika Szelid
[Benjamins Current Topics 124] 2022
► pp. 33–60
Uncanny resemblance
Words, pictures, and conceptual representations in the field of metaphor
What is the relation between the three following elements: words, pictures, and conceptual representations? And how do these three elements work, in defining and explaining metaphors? These are the questions that we tackle in our interdisciplinary contribution, which moves across cognitive linguistics, cognitive sciences, philosophy and semiotics. Within the cognitive linguistic tradition, scholars have assumed that there are equivalent and comparable structures characterizing the way in which metaphor works in language and in pictures. In this chapter we analyze contextual visual metaphors, which are considered to be the most complex ones, and we compare them to those that in language are called indirect metaphors. Our proposal is that a syllogistic mechanism of comprehension permeates both metaphors expressed in the verbal modality as well as metaphors expressed in the pictorial modality. While in the verbal modality the metaphoric syllogism is solved by inference, we argue that in the pictorial modality the role of inference is performed through mental imagery.
Keywords: visual metaphor, linguistic metaphor, conceptual metaphor, picture perception, visual mental imagery
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Visual metaphors as elliptic syllogisms
- 3.The relationship between the picture-maker and the viewer
- 4.Visual perception and mental imagery
- 5.Invariance Principle, occlusion shape and occlusion size
- 6.Aesthetically relevant properties represented by mental imagery
- 7.Imagery view of visual metaphors
- 8.Conclusions
-
Acknowledgements -
Notes -
References
References (56)
Aristotle (Trans. by C. D. C. Reeve). (2018). Rhetoric. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.
Baxandall, M. (1985). Patterns of intentions: On the historical explanation of pictures. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Black, M. (1955). Metaphor. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 55, 273–294. 
Bolognesi, M., & Vernillo, P. (2019). How abstract concepts emerge from metaphorical images: The metonymic way. Language and Communication, 69, 26–41.
Bolognesi, M., & Aina, L. (2017). Similarity is closeness: Using distributional semantic spaces to model similarity in visual and linguistic metaphors. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 15(1), 101–137.
Bolognesi, M. (2017). Using semantic features norms to investigate how the visual and verbal modes afford metaphor construction and expression. Language and Cognition, 9(3), 525–552.
(2016). Modeling semantic similarity between metaphor terms of visual vs linguistic metaphors through Flickr tag distributions. Frontiers in Communication, 1(9).
Borst, G., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2008). Visual mental imagery and visual perception: Structural equivalence revealed by scanning processes. Memory and Cognition, 36(4), 849–862.
Caramazza, A. (1996). Pictures, words and the brain. Nature, 383(6597), 216–217.
Carroll, N. (1994). Visual metaphor. In J. Hintikka (Ed.), Aspects of metaphor (pp. 189–218). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Repr. in N. Carroll. (2001), Beyond aesthetics: Philosophical essays (pp. 347–368). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cavazzana, A. (2017). Il ruolo cognitivo della metafora in Arthur C. Danto [The cognitive role of metaphor in Arthur C. Danto’s approach]. Estetica. Studi e ricerche, 7(1), 57–72.
(2019). Imagining: The role of mental imagery in the interpretation of visual metaphors. In A. Benedek & K. Nyíri (Eds.), Perspectives on visual learning, vol. 3: Image and metaphor in the new century (pp. 71–82). Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences/Budapest University of Technology and Economics.
Cuccio, V. (2018). Attention to metaphor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Danto, A. C. (1981). The transfiguration of the commonplace: A philosophy of art. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Davidson, D. (1967). Truth and meaning. Synthese, 17(3), 304–323.
(1974). On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 47, 5–20.
(1977). The method of truth in metaphysics. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 2, 244–254.
(1986). A nice derangement of epitaphs. In R. Grandy & R. Warner (Eds.), Philosophical grounds of rationality (pp. 156–174). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
De Houwer, J., & Hermans, D. (1994). Differences in the affective processing of words and pictures. Cognition and Emotion, 8(1), 1–20.
Finke, R. A., Pinker, S., & Farah, M. J. (1989). Reinterpreting visual patterns in mental images. Cognitive Science, 13(1), 51–78.
Forceville, C. (1996). Pictorial metaphor in advertising. London: Routledge.
Forceville, C., & Urios-Aparisi, E. (Eds.). (2009). Multimodal metaphor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ganis, G., & Schendan, H. E. (2011). Visual imagery. WIREs Cognitive Science, 2, 239–252.
Glaser, W. R. (1992). Picture naming. Cognition, 42(1–3), 61–105.
Gombrich, E. H. (1963). Visual metaphors of value in art. In E. H. Gombrich (1978), Meditations on a hobby horse and other essays on the theory of art (pp. 12–29). London: Phaidon.
Hinojosa, J. A., et al. (2009). Electrophysiological differences in the processing of affective information in words and pictures. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 173–189.
Hyman, J. (2006). The objective eye: Color, form, and reality in the theory of art. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Kellman, P. J., & Shipley, T. F. (1991). A Theory of visual interpolation in object perception. Cognitive Psychology, 23(2), 141–221.
Kosslyn, S. M., Behrmann, M., & Jeannerod, M. (1995). The cognitive neuroscience of mental imagery. Neuropsychologia, 33, 1335–1344.
Kosslyn, S. M., Thompson, W. L., Kim, I. J., & Alpert, N. M. (1995). Topographical representations of mental images in primary visual cortex. Nature, 378, 496–498.
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago press.
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lee, T. S., & Nguyen, M. (2001). Dynamics of subjective contour formation in the early visual cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98(4), 1907–1911.
Mairal, R., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F. (2009). Levels of description and explanation in meaning construction. In C. Butler & J. Martin Arista (Eds.), Deconstructing constructions (pp. 153–198). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Michotte, A., Thinès, G., & Crabbé, G. (1964). Les compléments amodaux des structures perceptives [Amodal completions of perceptual structures]. Studia Psychologica. Louvain: Publications Universitaires de Louvain.
Nanay, B. (2010). Perception and imagination: Amodal perception as mental imagery. Philosophical Studies, 150, 239–254.
(2016a). Aesthetics as philosophy of perception. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(2016b). Imagination and perception. In A. Kind (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy of imagination (pp. 124–134). London: Routledge.
(2018). The Importance of amodal completion in everyday perception. i-Perception, 9, 1–16.
(forthcoming). Perception and the arts. In C. Mag Uidhir (Ed.), Art and philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ortony, A. (1979). Beyond literal similarity. Psychological Review, 86(3), 161–180.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
(2010). Dual coding theory and the mental lexicon. Mental Lexicon, 5, 205–230.
Panofsky, E. (1939). Studies in iconology: Humanistic themes in the art of the Renaissance. Boulder: Westview Press (1972).
Pérez Sobrino, P. (2017). Multimodal metaphor and metonymy in advertising. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stampoulidis, G., & Bolognesi, M. (2019). Bringing metaphors back to the streets: A corpus-based study for the identification and interpretation of rhetorical figures in street art. Visual Communication.
Stampoulidis, G., Bolognesi, M., & Zlatev, J. (2019). A cognitive semiotic exploration of metaphors in Greek street art. Cognitive Semiotics, 12 (1).
Steen, G. (2008). The Paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 23(4), 213–241.
(2011). The contemporary theory of metaphor – now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 26–64.
(Ed.). (2018). Visual metaphor: Structure and process. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Steen, G. J., et al. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Taikh, A., Hargreaves, I. S., Yap, M. J., & Pexman, P. M. (2015). Semantic classification of pictures and words. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(8), 1502–1518.
Van Mulken, M., Le Pair, R., & Forceville, C. (2010). The impact of perceived complexity, deviation and comprehension on the appreciation of visual metaphor in advertising across three European countries. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 3418–3430.
Van Mulken, M., van Hooft, A., & Nederstigt, U. (2014). Finding the tipping point: Visual metaphor and conceptual complexity in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 43(4), 333–343.