No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 January 2010
Aside from aperçus of Kant, Nietzsche, and of course, Aristotle, metaphor has not, until recently, received its due. The dominant view has been Hobbes': metaphors are an ‘abuse’ of language, less dangerous than ordinary equivocation only because they ‘profess their inconstancy’.
1 Leviathan (Blackwell, 1960), 25.Google Scholar
2 Critique of Judgement (Hafner, 1966), 198.Google Scholar
3 ‘La mythologie blanche’, in Marges de la Philosophie (Editions Minuit, 1972).Google Scholar
4 ‘Metaphor’, in Models and Metaphors (Cornell, 1962).Google Scholar
5 Quoted in Fontanier, P., Les Figures du Discours (Flammarion, 1977), 157.Google Scholar For linguists' researches into the incidence of metaphor, see Sampson, G., Making Sense (Oxford University Press, 1980) Ch. IV.Google Scholar
6 See especially ‘Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbance’, in Selected Writings, II (Mouton, 1971).Google Scholar
7 ‘Über Wahrheit und Luge im aussermoralischen Sinn’, Werke, III (Ullstein, 1979) 314.Google Scholar
8 University of Chicago, 1980. The lines quoted are from pp. 211, 239, 3 and 234.
9 See, for example, Searle, J. R., ‘Metaphor’, in Metaphor and Thought, Ortony, A. (ed.) (Cambridge University Press, 1979).Google Scholar
10 It is hard to agree, therefore, with Quirk and Greenbaum's claim that temporal prepositions have a ‘metaphorical connection’ with place ones (A University Grammar of English (Longman, 1973), 153).Google Scholar
11 Op. cit., 6.
12 Hobbes, , op. cit., 19Google Scholar; Fontanier, , op. cit., 160.Google Scholar
13 Op. cit., 33.
14 See, for instance, Davies, M., ‘Idiom and Metaphor’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (1982)Google Scholar, and my comment on this in Mind (1984).Google Scholar
15 See Olsen, S. H., ‘Understanding Literary Metaphors” in Metaphor: Problems and Perspectives, Miall, D. (ed.) (Harvester, 1982).Google Scholar
16 For this ‘passion de parler’ and a rousing attack on the idea of speech as first and foremost, intentional speech acts, see Merleau-Ponty, M., especially Signes (Gallimard, 1960), 24ff.Google Scholar
17 I borrow this phrase from a stimulating paper by Cohen, Ted, ‘Metaphor and the Cultivation of Intimacy’ in On Metaphor, Sacks, S. (ed.) (University of Chicago, 1979).Google ScholarPubMed I also borrow from him the phrase ‘friends of metaphor’ and the fruitful comparison with jokes.
18 Rhetorica, Works IX (Oxford University Press) 1404b.Google Scholar
19 Although I have joined in the usual talk of metaphor's ‘conveying’ something that the listeners ‘understand’, I agree with those writers, especially Sperber and Wilson, who find it misleading and prefer talking of what metaphors ‘evoke’. See, for example, their paper, ‘Pragmatics’, Cognition 10 (1981).Google Scholar
20 ‘Rudiments de rhétorique cognitive’, Poetique 23 (1975), 414.Google Scholar
21 Reddy, M., ‘The Conduit Metaphor’, in Ortony (ed.), op. cit.Google Scholar
22 Op. cit., 406.
23 Ästhetik, I (Aufbau-Verlag, 1976). 393.Google Scholar
24 Sein und Zeit (Niemeyer, 1979), 138–139.Google Scholar
25 Op. cit.
26 Ibid., 394.