CONVENTIONS USED IN METAPHOR DESCRIPTIONS

back to Table of Contents

CONVENTIONS USED IN METAPHOR DESCRIPTIONS

``Special-Case'' Relationship

A metaphor M1 is a SPECIAL CASE of a metaphor M2 if manifestations of M1 are also ipso facto manifestations of M2. For instance, Cognizing as Seeing is a special case of Cognizing as Physically Sensing.

M1 is a QUASI SPECIAL CASE of M2 if there is some (variable) sense in which M1 is approximately a special case of M2. For instance, one possibility is that most but not all manifestations of M1 are also manifestations of M2.

``Overlap'' Relationship

M1 OVERLAPS M2 if some special case of M1 is also a special case of M2. For instance, Cognizing as Seeing overlaps with Ideas as Physical Objects because there is a special case of the former that could be called Cognizing as Seeing Mental Objects, where the seen objects are mental entities (e.g., ideas) that are simultaneously being viewed as physical objects.

Obviously, a special-case relationship is also an overlap.

Mixed Metaphor

A metaphor M1 is MIXED with a metaphor M2 when some utterance uses a combination of both to describe a state of mind. There are various ways such mixing can happen. (I will add comments about this later.)

An utterance that is within the overlap of two metaphors also mixes those metaphors. But there are other forms of mixing.