T-Space at The University of Toronto Libraries >
University of Toronto at Scarborough >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title: ||Aptness is more important than comprehensibility in preference for metaphors and similes|
|Authors: ||Chiappe, Dan L.|
Kennedy, John M.
|Issue Date: ||2003|
|Publisher: ||Elsevier Science|
|Citation: ||Chiappe, D. L., Kennedy, J. M., & Chiappe, P. (2003). Aptness is more important than comprehensibility in preference for metaphors and similes. Poetics, 31(1), 51-68.|
|Abstract: ||Figurative comparisons can be expressed as metaphors (e.g., “politics is a circus”) or similes (e.g., “politics is like a circus”). What determines the form in which a comparison is expressed? We examine two potential factors—aptness and comprehensibility. To be apt is to capture important features of a topic. Comprehensibility means being relatively easy to understand. We show both of these judgments are related to errors in a recognition memory test (i.e., remembering a simile as a metaphor or a metaphor as a simile). However, aptness was a better predictor of the errors than comprehensibility. Furthermore, while both aptness and comprehensibility predicted preference for the metaphor or simile form of comparisons in a direct test of preference, aptness explained unique variance, while comprehensibility did not. We argue that although comparisons have to be comprehensible to be proper metaphors or similes, aptness is more important in determining whether a comparison is preferred as a metaphor or as a simile.|
|Appears in Collections:||Psychology|
Kennedy, John M.
Items in T-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.