Abstract
A number of philosophers, linguists and psychologists have made the dual claim that metaphor is cognitively significant and that metaphorical utterances have a meaning not reducible to literal paraphrase. Such a position requires support from an account of metaphorical meaning that can render metaphors cognitively meaningful without the reduction to literal statement. It therefore requires a theory of meaning that can integrate metaphor within its sematics, yet specify why it is not reducible to literal paraphrase. I introduce the idea of a “second-order meaning”, of which metaphor is but one instance, that is a function on literal-conventional, i.e., first-order meaning, and outline a linguistic framework designed to provide a representation of linguistic meaning for both. This framework is designed to represent linguistic units ranging from a single word to an entire text since I argue that the by-now familiar position that the sentence is the appropriate unit for metaphor has mislead us into asking the wrong questions about metaphorical meaning. With this apparatus, we can specify the conditions under which an utterance may transcend the constraints on first-order meaning (transgressions not always apparent on the sentential level), without thereby being “meaningless”. Conversely, we can specify the conditions that may render apparently odd utterances first-order meaningful rather than metaphorical. In this way we see how metaphorical language differs both from deviant language and from specialized language such as technical language, fanciful and fantastical language (in fairy tales, science fiction, etc.).
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
Black, Max: 1954, “Metaphor”,Proceedings from the Aristotelian Society 55, 273–94. Reprinted in Black,Models and Metaphors, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1962.
Breton, Andre: 1972,Manifestes du Surréalisme, Jean-Jaques Pauvert, (ed.) Bordeaux, Paris: Delmas, 1924.
Dascal, Marcelo and Margalit, A.: 1974, ‘A New “Revolution” in Linguistics? — “Text-grammars” vs “Sentence-grammars”,’Theoretical Linguistics 1, 195–213.
Davidson, Donald: 1978, ‘What Metaphors Mean’, in Sacks (1978).
Derrida, Jacques: 1975, ‘White Mythology: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy’, F. T. C. Moore (trans.), inNew Literary History, pp. 5–73. Originally published as ‘La mythologie blanche’,Poétique 5 (1971).
Donnellan, Keith: 1977, ‘Reference and Definite Descriptions’, in Stephen P. Schwartz (ed.),Naming, Necessity and Natural Kinds, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Gildea, P. and Glucksberg, S.: (unpublished), ‘On Understanding Metaphor: The Role of Context’.
Glucksberg, Gildea and Bookin: 1982, ‘On Understanding Nonliteral Speech: Can People Ignore Metaphors?’Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 21, 85–98.
Goodman, Nelson: 1968,Languages of Art, Indianapolis, Indiana: Bobbs-Merrill.
Goodman, Nelson: 1978, ‘Metaphor as Moonlighting’, in Sacks, (1978).
Grice, Paul: 1969, ‘Utterer’s Meaning and Intentions’,Philosophical Review 78,147–50.
Grice, Paul: 1975, ‘Logic and Conversation’, in Cole and Morgan (eds.)Syntax and Semantics, volume 3, Speech Acts, New York: Academic Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R.: 1976,Cohesion in English, London: Longman.
Katz, Jerrold and Fodor, J.: 1963, ‘The Structure of Semantic Theory’, Language39, 170–210.
Katz, Jerrold and Fodor, J.: 1971, ‘Semantic Theory’, in Steinberg and Jakobovits (eds.),Semantics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kittay, Eva Feder: 1978,The Cognitive Force of Metaphor, (unpublished dissertation, Graduate School of the City University of New York).
Kittay, Eva Feder and Lehrer, A.: 1981,Studies in Language 5, 31–63.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M.: 1980,Metaphors We Live By, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lehrer, Adrienne: 1974,Semantic Fields and Lexical Structure, Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Lyons, John: 1968,Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics, London: Cambridge University Press.
Lyons, John: 1977,Semantics I, London: Cambridge University Press.
Ortony, A.: 1979,Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ortony, Schallen, Reynolds, and Antos: 1978, ‘Interpreting Metaphors and Idioms: Some Effects of Context on Comprehension’,Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 465–77.
Reddy, Michael: 1969, ‘A Semantic Approach to Metaphor’,Papers from the Fifth regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, April 18–19, pp. 240–51.
Sacks, Sheldon: 1978,On Metaphor, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Saddock, Jerrold: 1979, In Ortony (1979), pp. 46–63.
Searle, John: 1979a,Expression and Meaning, London: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, John: 1979b, ‘Indirect Speech Acts’, in Searle (1979a).
Searle, John: 1979c, ‘Metaphor’, in Searle (1979a) and in Ortony (1979).
Searle, John: 1979d, ‘Literal Meaning’, in Searle (1979a).
Tulving, E. and Thomson, D. M.: 1973, ‘Encoding Specificity and Retrieval Processes in Episodic Memory’,Psychological Review 80.
Walker, Percy: 1958, ‘Metaphor as Mistake’,Sewanee Review 66, 79–99.
Weinreich, Ulrich: 1966. ‘Explorations in Semantic Theory’, in T. A. Sebeok (ed.),Current Trends in Linguistics,3, The Hague: Mouton.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kittay, E.F. The identification of metaphor. Synthese 58, 153–202 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03055304
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03055304