Metaphor as a resemblance phenomenon: A re-examination of the role of similarity in conceptual metaphor

Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José

doi:10.1075/cogls.00110.rui

Article published In:

Cognitive Approaches to Mind, Language, and Society: Theory and description
Edited by Mario Serrano-Losada and Daniela Pettersson-Traba
[Cognitive Linguistic Studies 11:1] 2024
► pp. 8–33

Theoretical approaches to figurative language

Metaphor as a resemblance phenomenon

A re-examination of the role of similarity in conceptual metaphor

Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez | Universidad de La Rioja

Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) departed from tradition in metaphor studies by treating this phenomenon as an ordinary one used in everyday reasoning. From its inception, this theory made emphasis on the role of experiential correlation in accounting for metaphorical thought to the detriment of its long-standing treatment in terms of similarity. This experientialist thesis was later strengthened by making it part of a broader theoretical framework that treated correlation metaphor as an embodied phenomenon where an essential part of its role in reasoning was due to its ability to give rise to conceptual conflation. Against the background provided by this theoretical context, this article reexamines the role of correlation, conflation, and embodiment in terms of two distinctions: low and high-level similarity, on the one hand, and structural and non-structural similarity, on the other hand. The analytical categories that support these distinctions are used to provide an improved understanding of the nature of metaphorical thought, including correlation metaphor, structural metaphor, several forms of analogy, synesthetic metaphor, and metaphorical amalgams.

Keywords: analogy, correlation metaphor, correlation metonymy, experiential correlation, low and high-level similarity, mediated similarity, resemblance metaphor, structural and non-structural similarity

Article outline

1.Introduction
2.Conceptual metaphor theory
- 2.1Correlation versus similarity
- 2.2Experiential correlation in metaphorical reasoning
3.Revisiting experiential correlation
- 3.1Correlation and metonymy
- 3.2Differences between correlation metonymy and metaphor
4.The role of structural similarity in metaphor
- 4.1Non-eventive structural similarity
- 4.2Eventive structural similarity
5.Mediated structural similarity
6.Conclusion
Notes
References

Published online: 6 June 2024

https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00110.rui

References (36)

References

Barcelona, A. (2018). General description of the metonymy database in the Córdoba project, with particular attention to the issues of hierarchy, prototypicality, and taxonomic domains. In O. Blanco-Carrión, A. Barcelona & R. Pannain (Eds.), Conceptual metonymy: Methodological, theoretical, and descriptive issues (pp. 27–54). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Bergen, B. K. (2012). Louder than words: The new science of how the mind makes meaning. New York: Basic Books.

Bhatt, R. (1999). Ability modals and their actuality entailments. In K. N. Shahin, S. Blake & E.-S. Kim (Eds.), The proceedings of the 17th West Coast Conference on formal linguistics (pp. 74–87). CA: CSLI.

Bond, B., & Stevens, S. S. (1969). Cross-modality matching of brightness to loudness by 5-year-olds. Perception & Psychophysics, 6 (6A), 337–339.

Casasanto, D., & Gijssels, T. (2015). What makes a metaphor an embodied metaphor?. Linguistics Vanguard, 1 (1), 327–337.

Dodge, E., & Lakoff, G. (2005). Image schemas: From linguistic analysis to neural grounding. In B. Hampe (Ed.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 57–92). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Dupriez, B. (1991). A dictionary of literary devices: Gradus, A-Z. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Gibbs, Jr. R. W. (2006). Metaphor interpretation as embodied simulation. Mind and Language, 21 (3), 434–458.

(2014). Embodied metaphor. In J. Littlemore & J. R. Taylor (Eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 167–184). London: Blooomsbury.

Grady, J. E. (1997). Theories are buildings revisited. Cognitive Linguistics, 8 (4), 267–290.

(1999). A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: Correlation vs. resemblance. In R. W. Gibbs, Jr. & G. J. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 79–100). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Grady, J. E., & Ascoli, G. A. (2017). Sources and targets in primary metaphor theory: Looking back and thinking ahead. In B. Hampe (Ed.), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse (pp. 27–45). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Karttunen, L. (1971). Implicative verbs. Language, 47 (2), 340–358.

Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

(2008). The neural theory of metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 17–38). New York: Cambridge University Press.

(2014). Mapping the brain’s metaphor circuitry: Metaphorical thought in everyday reason. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8 1, Article 958.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

(1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.

Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Vol. I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Leech, G. N. (1969). A linguistic guide to English poetry. London: Longman.

Panther, K.-U., & Thornburg, L. (1999). The potentiality for actuality metonymy in English and Hungarian. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 333–357). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Peña-Cervel, M. S., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2022). Figuring out figuration: A cognitive linguistic account. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Plümacher, M. (2007). Color perception, color description and metaphor. In M. Plümacher & P. Holz (Eds.), Speaking of colors and odors (pp. 61–84). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Rich, A. N., & Mattingley, J. B. (2002). Anomalous perception in synaesthesia: A cognitive neuroscience perspective. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3 1, 43–52.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2017). Metaphor and other cognitive operations in interaction: From basicity to complexity. In B. Hampe (Ed.), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse (pp. 138–159). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

(2020). Understanding figures of speech: Dependency relations and organizational patterns. Language & Communication, 71 1, 16–38.

(2021). Ten lectures on cognitive modeling: Between grammar and language-based inferencing. Leiden: Brill.

(2022). Analogical and non-analogical resemblance in figurative language: A cognitive-linguistic perspective. In S. Wuppuluri & A. C. Grayling (Eds.), Metaphors and analogies in sciences and humanities (pp. 269–293). Cham: Springer.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Masegosa, A. G. (2014). Cognitive modeling: A linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Barreras Gómez, M. A. (2022). Linguistic and metalinguistic resemblance. In A. Bagasheva, B. Hristov & N. Tincheva (Eds.), Figurativity and human ecology (pp. 15–41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Pérez Hernández, L. (2001). Metonymy and the grammar: Motivation, constraints and interaction. Language & Communication, 21 (4), 321–357.

Santibáñez Sáenz, F. (1999). Semantic structure, relational networks, and domains of reference. Journal of English Studies, 1 1, 271–288.

Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., & Shimojo, S. (2000). Illusions: What you see is what you hear. Nature, 408 1, 788–788.

Strik Lievers, F. (2016). Synaesthetic metaphors in translation. Studi e Saggi Linguistici, 54 (1), 43–69.

(2017). Figures and the senses: Towards a definition of synaesthesia. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 15 (1), 83–101.

Winter, B. (2019). Synaesthetic metaphors are neither synaesthetic nor metaphorical. In L. J. Speed, C. O’Meara, L. San Roque & A. Majid (Eds.), Perceptual metaphors (pp. 105–126). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.