|Abstract||Theorists often associate certain “poetic” qualities with metaphor – most especially, producing an open-ended, holistic perspective which is evocative, imagistic and affectively-laden. I argue that, on the one hand, non-cognitivists are wrong to claim that metaphors only produce such perspectives: like ordinary literal speech, they also serve to undertake claims and other speech acts with propositional content. On the other hand, contextualists are wrong to assimilate metaphor to literal loose talk: metaphors depend on using one thing as a perspective for thinking about something else. I bring out the distinctive way that metaphor works by contrasting it with two other poetic uses of language, juxtapositions and “telling details,” that do fit the accounts of metaphor offered by non-cognitivists and contextualists, respectively.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Jakub Mácha (2011). Metaphor in the Twilight Area Between Philosophy and Linguistics. In P. Stalmaszczyk & K. Kosecki (eds.), Turning Points in the Philosophy of Language and Linguistics. Peter Lang.
Ben Vedder (2002). On the Meaning of Metaphor in Gadamer's Hermeneutics. Research in Phenomenology 32 (1):196-209.
Sam Glucksberg & Catrinel Haught (2006). On the Relation Between Metaphor and Simile: When Comparison Fails. Mind and Language 21 (3):360–378.
Mark Phelan (2010). The Inadequacy of Paraphrase is the Dogma of Metaphor. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 91 (4):481-506.
Elisabeth Camp (2006). Metaphor in the Mind: The Cognition of Metaphor. Philosophy Compass 1 (2):154-170.
Elisabeth Camp (2006). Metaphor and That Certain 'Je Ne Sais Quoi'. Philosophical Studies 129 (1):1 - 25.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads33 ( #36,617 of 549,198 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #15,251 of 549,198 )
How can I increase my downloads?