Abstract
Empirical research on metaphor has focused on the interpretation and comprehension of figurative language, while ignoring the production or encoding of metaphors. This research presents a basic model that attempts to explain the encoding of metaphors in expressive communication. A basic premise of the model is that similarity in connotative meaning, measured as proximity in semantic space, leads to metaphor selection. Two experiments that tested the premise are described here. The first utilized a semantic differential based on Osgood's work, while the second utilized a specially developed instrument. Results of both experiments supported the hypothesis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barnett, G.A., Serota, K.B., & Taylor, J.A. (1976). Campaign communication and attitude change: A multidimensional analysis.Human Communication Research, 2, 227–244.
Beardsley, M.C. (1962). The metaphorical twist.Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 22, 293–307.
Berlo, D.K., Lemert, J.B., & Mertz, R.J. (1969). Dimensions for evaluating the acceptability of message sources.Public Opinion Quarterly, 4, 563–576.
Billow, R.M. (1977). Metaphor: A review of the psychological literature.Psychological Bulletin, 84, 81–92.
Bolinger, D. (1965). The atomization of meaning.Language, 41, 555–573.
Bowers, J.W., & Osborne, M.M. (1966). Attitudinal effects of selected types of concluding metaphors in persuasive speeches,Speech Monographs, 33, 147–155.
Camac, M.K., & Glucksberg, S. (1984). Metaphors do not use associations between concepts, they are used to create them.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 13, 443–455.
Campbell, P. (1975). Metaphor and linguistic theory.Quarterly Journal of Speech, 61, 1–12.
Clark, H., & Lucy, P. (1975). Understanding what is meant from what is said: A study in conversationally conveyed requests.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335–339.
Eco, U. (1984).Semiotics and the philosophy of language. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Frentz, T.S. (1974). Toward a resolution of the generative semantics/classical theory controversey: A psycholinguistic analysis of metaphor.Quarterly Journal of Speech, 60, 125–133.
Glucksberg, S., Gildea, P., & Bookin, H.G. (1982). On understanding nonliteral speech: Can people ignore metaphors?Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 85–98.
Helmer, J. (1972). Metaphor.Linguistics, 88, 5–14.
Hewes, D.E. (1983). Confessions of a methodological Puritan: A response to Jackson and Jacobs.Human Communication Research, 9, 187–191.
Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S. (1983). Generalizing about messages: Suggestions for design and analysis of experiments.Human Communication Research, 9, 169–181.
Janus, R.A., & Bever, T.G. (1985). Processing of metaphoric language: An investigation of the three-stage model of metaphor comprehension.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 14, 473–487.
Johnson, M.G., & Malgady, R.G. (1979). Some cognitive aspects of figurative language: Association and metaphor.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 8, 249–265.
Jordon, W.J. (1971). Toward a psychological theory of metaphor.Western Speech, 35, 169–175.
Jordon, W.J. (1972). A reinforcement model of metaphor.Speech Monographs, 39, 223–226.
Jordon, W.J., & McLaughlin, M.L. (1976). Figurativeness as an independent variable in communication research.Communication Quarterly, 4, 31–37.
Katz, A.N., Paivio, A., & Marschark, M. (1985). Poetic comparisons: Psychological dimensions of metaphoric processing.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 14, 365–383.
Koen, F. (1965). An intra-verbal explication of the nature of metaphor.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4, 129–133.
Marschark, M., Katz, A.N., & Paivio, A. (1983). Dimensions of metaphor.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 12, 17–40.
McCroskey, J.C., & Combs, W.H. (1969). The effects of the use of analogy on attitude change and source credibility.Journal of Communication, 19, 333–339.
Ortony, A., Reynolds, R.E., & Arter, J.A. (1978). Metaphor: Theoretical and empirical research.Psychological Bulletin, 85, 919–943.
Osborne, M.M., & Ehninger, D. (1962). The metaphor in public address.Speech Monographs, 29, 223–234.
Osgood, C.E. (1980). The cognitive dynamics of synesthesia and metaphor. In R.P. Honeck & R.R. Hoffman (Eds.),Cognition and figurative language. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Osgood, C.E., & Suci, G.J. (1955). Factor analysis of meaning.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 325–338.
Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.A., & Tannenbaum, P.H. (1957).The measurement of meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Reinsch, N.L., Jr. (1971). An investigation of the effects of the metaphor and simile in persuasive discourse.Speech Monographs, 29, 142–145.
Reinsch, N.L., Jr. (1974). Figurative language and source credibility: A preliminary investigation and reconceptualization.Human Communication Research, 1, 75–80.
Richards, I.A. (1936). Metaphor. In I. A. Richards,The philosophy of rhetoric. London: Oxford University.
Siegel, S. (1956).Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Siltanen, S.A. (1986). “Butterflies are rainbows?”: A developmental investigation of metaphor comprehension.Communication Education, 35, 1–12.
Torgerson, W.S. (1965). Multidimensional scaling of similarity.Psychometrika, 30, 379–393.
Tourangeau, R., & Sternberg, R.J. (1981). Aptness in metaphor.Cognitive Psychology, 13, 27–55.
Winner, E., McCarthy, M., & Gardner, H. (1980). The ontogenesis of metaphor. In R.P. Honeck & R.R. Hoffman (Eds.),Cognition and figurative language. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Whitehead, J. (1968). Factors of source credibility.Quarterly Journal of Speech, 54, 59–63.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Clevenger, T., Edwards, R. Semantic distance as a predictor of metaphor selection. J Psycholinguist Res 17, 211–226 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01686356
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01686356