On the continuity and range of certain figures of speech

Authors

  • Manuel Arce Arenales Universidad de Costa Rica

Keywords:

metaphor, figures of speech, nonlogical inference, context dependency, autism

Abstract

In this paper I argue that all metaphors may not be classifiable in the same manner, regardless of whether one takes a Gricean or a “direct” view of metaphor.  In other words, it might be that some metaphors are continuous with such phenomena as hyperbole and approximation, whereas others may be of a distinct interpretive type, specifically one that requires a nonlogical inference within a given context.  In any case, since metaphor is always not merely context dependent, but shared-context dependent,  knowledge or modeling of another mind is requisite, and if this is the case not surprisingly autists, even if they can adequately handle ordinary literal speech, will not be able to adequately comprehend metaphorical language.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arce Arenales, Manuel (2002). Visitas al desván. San José, Costa Rica: Editores Alambique.

Arce Arenales, Manuel (2004). De leguas y minutos. San José, Costa Rica: Editores Alambique.

Arce Arenales, Manuel (2005). Las huellas del zapatero. San José, Costa Rica: Editores Alambique.

Arce Arenales, Manuel (2005). Murciélagos de fuego. San José, Costa Rica: Editores Alambique.

Bezuidenhout, A. (2001). Metaphor and what is said: A defense of a direct expression view of metaphor. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 25:156-186.

Davidson, Donald (1978). What Metaphors Mean, reprinted in Inquiries Into Truth and Interpretation (1984). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Forbes Inc. (2000). The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company

Grice, H. (1989). Logic and conversation. In Studies in the way of words, pages 3-57. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Happé, F. (1993). Communicative competence and theory of mind in autism: atest for relevance theory. Cognition, 48:101-119.

Happé, F. (1995). Understanding minds and metaphors: Insights from the study of figurative language in autism. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10(4):275-295.

Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Lakoff, George (1990). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Nanavutty, Piloo (translator and commentator) (1999). The Gathas of Zarathushtra: Hymns in Praise of Wisdom. Ahmadabad: Mapin Publishing Pvt. Ltd.

Oxford University Press (1985). The Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary. London: Oxford University Press

Ricoeur, Paul (1977). The Rule of Metaphor. Trans. Robert Czerny. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Sperber D. and Wilson D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell, 2nd. Edition.

Sperber D. and Wilson D. (2002). Pragmatics, modularity and mind-reading. Mind & Language, 17(1-2):3-23.

Stern, J. (2000). Metaphor in Context. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Thomas, Dylan (1971). Collected Poems. New York: New Direction Books.

Wearing, C. (2006). Metaphor and what is said. Mind and Language.

Wearing, Catherine. (2006). Autism, Metaphor, and Relevance Theory [DRAFT], presented at the WORKSHOP ON LANGUAGE, CONTEXT, AND COGNITION, May 2006, Punta del Este, Uruguay.

Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber (2005). Handbook of Pragmatics. En Horn, Laurence. And Gregory Ward (eds.). Relevance Theory (pp. 607-632). Oxford: Blackwell.

Published

2008-12-01

Issue

Section

Ensayos

How to Cite

On the continuity and range of certain figures of speech (M. . Arce Arenales, Trans.). (2008). Humanitas, 5(5), 29-40. https://revistahumanitas.ucatolica.ac.cr/index.php/humanitas/article/view/246