Languages & Linguistics
Figure of Speech
A figure of speech is a word or phrase used in a non-literal way to create a specific effect, such as metaphor, simile, personification, or hyperbole. These devices add depth and creativity to language by conveying meaning beyond the literal interpretation of the words. They are commonly used in literature, poetry, and everyday speech to evoke imagery and emotion.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
11 Key excerpts on "Figure of Speech"
eBook - ePubClarity and Coherence in Academic Writing
Using Language as a Resource
- David Nunan, Julie Choi(Authors)
- 2023(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
6 Using figurative languageDOI: 10.4324/9781003179092-7In this chapter, we address the use of figurative language in academic writing. This phrase refers to the use of language in which words and phrases carry a meaning which differs from their literal or everyday meaning. They can be unexpected and creative, or, overused. For some figurative expressions, the meaning can be derived from their literal origins. In other instances, the relationship between the figurative and the literal is (metaphorically speaking) lost in time, and it takes an etymologist, a linguist who studies the origins of words and the way their meanings have been transformed through time to reveal the relationship.Types of figurative language discussed in the chapter include similes, metaphors, idioms, colloquialisms, clichés, and slang. It isn’t always easy to assign a phrase to a particular figurative ‘label’. Through extended use and overuse, similes and metaphors, which begin life as fresh and creative, can become idioms which can, in turn, become cliches. We focus on similes and metaphors more than the other figures of speech because they are more common in academic writing. You’ll also find idioms and colloquialisms and occasionally clichés and slang. In the hands of an experienced writer, these can give a chatty, humorous, or ironic tone to the text. Our advice is to treat idioms and colloquialisms with care and to avoid cliches and slang.Literal and figurative meanings
There is considerable confusion over terminology in the literature. Some writers argue that figurative language and figures of speech are synonymous that both refer to the use of expressions whose meaning can’t be derived from the literal or dictionary meaning of a word. Others argue that figurative language
eBook - PDFPolitics & Rhetoric
Coming to Terms with Terms
- G. Yoos(Author)
- 2009(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
And as a result of such category shifts, questions arise about the implications that follow from the interpretive accounts of why these categorical shifts are being made. Shifts of meaning occur in all uses of various rhetorical figures such as irony, metaphor, oxymoron, synecdoche, metonymy, personification, meiosis, hyperbole, simile, and even allegory. It is noteworthy in our attempts to define figures that the usual way we define them is by how we interpret them (Yoos 1971). The first basic point that should be noted about figurative language is based on their surface literality. It starts with the use of literal terms. We start with the terms such as “snake in the grass.” But John is not such a crawling creature. But 104 Politics & Rhetoric the literal terms of “snake in the grass” provide a stable foundation from which we extend and interpret the meanings of the Figure of Speech, which in turn we interpret from the presumptions we have about the human behaviors that are like that of snakes. They are hidden and dangerous, and even treacherous. Metaphors, for example, use a reservoir of words taken from usages that are used literally and unambiguously in certain other contexts to say precisely what we do mean to say. And if that literal meaning of what we say is not true or impossible, or a distortion, or an exaggeration, the awareness that it is a “truth controverting-statement” made by the speaker or author shifts our attention to things that might be implied by anyone controverting deliberately the truth of any statement. It leads us to look at things in new and different ways. And given the context of the statement, the presumptions of the context immedi- ately suggest what is maximally relevant among the associated connections to the conventional literal denotations of the terms used. Metaphor brings to our attention, in a condensed and a focused way, things difficult to summarize or express in our use of literal senses of words.
eBook - PDF- R. Holme(Author)
- 2003(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
28 2 Using Figurative Language In the last chapter, a key point was that studying metaphor was more than looking at an attractive but unusual use of language. For this study such figures of speech are interesting because of what they reveal about the thought processes that produce them. The processes revealed by fig- urative language allow us to conceptualise abstract meaning. Abstraction begins as a Figure of Speech but becomes an accepted convention of lan- guage. At first sight, therefore, it might seem perverse to begin our study of the pedagogical interest of this idea by returning to the rarer figures of speech that reveal how we engage in the ubiquitous process of abstrac- tion. I am going to postpone my look at the larger role of metaphor and think instead about how we can help students to attain a better and more confident control of figurative language and idiom. There are three reasons to do this. First an appropriate instructional sequence should start with the obvi- ous acts of metaphor production. The skills that are developed by recog- nising the obvious might then be turned to uncovering forms that are hidden by their familiarity. Second, linguistic creativity is a function of successful language use. Metaphor formation, whether of real or imagined originality, underpins such creativity. It therefore follows that students should be encouraged to adopt the linguist licence that live metaphor requires. They can treat the target language less as a prefabricated environment to which they must adapt their capacity for expression and more as a resource that will respond to their expressive needs. Third, live metaphor is about finding new or hitherto unexposed meanings. To encourage metaphor’s process of meaning-creation may be to encourage students to ask what even mundane words mean in a wider and deeper sense. For example, we can explore Wittgenstein’s (1953)
eBook - PDFFoundations for Syriac Lexicography IV
Colloquia of the International Syriac Language Project
- Kristian S. Heal, Alison G. Salvesen(Authors)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Gorgias Press(Publisher)
21 C HAPTER 2. M ETAPHOR , L EXICOGRAPHY AND M ODERN L INGUISTICS : S HOULD F IGURATIVE S PEECH F IGURE IN F UTURE A NCIENT -L ANGUAGE L EXICA ? Terry C. Falla Whitley College, University of Melbourne What is always needed in the appreciation of art, or life, is the larger perspective. Connections made, or at least attempted, where none existed before, the straining to encompass in one’s glance at the varied world the common thread, the unifying theme through immense diversity, a fearlessness of growth, of search, of looking, that enlarges the private and the public world. And yet in our particular society, it is the narrowed and narrowing view of life that often wins. (Alice Walker) 1 Since the publication in 1755 of Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language, figurative speech has been an accepted category of meaning in numerous dictionaries of both ancient and modern languages. Figurative speech, however, is no longer controversy free. Indeed, to accept in its entirety the highly influential cognitive linguistic theory on metaphor by Lakoff, Johnson, and Turner―abbreviated as the Lakoff-Johnson-Turner Theory (LJTT)―is to eschew the very notion of figurative speech in a dictionary. In the field of ancient-language lexicography, The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew (DCH) excludes the marking of figurative or metaphorical speech along with certain other features and includes other more recent features in accordance with what it terms “the commonly accepted principles of modern linguistic theory.” At the other end of the spectrum is A Semantic Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew (SDBH). It understands well the implications of the LJTT, but utilizes it and cognitive linguistics to identify and present metaphor in lexical form. These differing approaches leave us with the question: should figurative speech figure in future ancient-language 1 Walker, In Search of Our Mothers’ Gardens , 5.
eBook - PDF- Marie Lund(Author)
- 2017(Publication Date)
- Aarhus University Press(Publisher)
The Function of Rhetorical Figures 71 given function as a series of possibilities. These possibilities cannot be separated into different levels, a ‘figurative’ and a ‘literal’: Instead, the choices available to a speaker can be thought of as less to more constitutive or iconic. The figures of speech occupy examined territory on this continuum of expressive possibili- ties. They have traditionally been used (and hence identified) as particularly effective ways of saying what can also be said in many other ways. They are, in other words, ideally but not exclusively constitutive of a text’s many meanings, simply doing better what it is possible to do with other means, or even doing best what they are traditionally identified as doing. 29 It follows that it cannot be decided once and for all what will be the most appropriate expression. The concrete situation dictates whether it would be best to use a rhetorical figure. The enactment of the aposiopesis is the strongest choice for expressing that something is inexpressible, but that does not mean that it will always be the most effective way. It is possible to imagine situations where it would be a wiser rhetorical choice to state “I cannot/will not say what he read in that letter.” 30 In sum, practical as well as theoretical implications follow from Fahnestock’s redefinition of rhetorical figures. By thinking of rhetori- cal figures as better, but not unique, ways to obtain certain discursive functions, she manages to maneuver away from some of the difficul- ties of definition that have troubled the field. This enables her, firstly, to account for why a valid theoretical explanation of the separation between figurative language and ‘un-figured,’ ‘normal’ usage has never been given. Secondly, it offers her a way out of the defining difficulties: 29 Ibid. 30 Ibid., 23. This page is protected by copyright and may not be redistributed.
eBook - PDF- Herbert L. Colston(Author)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
Creativity also interacts with figurative language and pragmatic effects through the more specific sense of an individual’s internal needs. As dis- cussed in Chapter 4 regarding cathartic conceptualization, figurative lan- guage itself, by supporting the means of creativity for speakers/writers, often enables therapeutic benefits. These are achieved in part through the internal pragmatic effects on speakers that some figures perform. People with a high personal need for creativity also can use figurative language to satisfy their personal drive to create or encounter novelty, unusualness, nonsequitorial or otherwise nonstandard content. New Figures Either by enhancing or tweaking preexisting figures or through relatively new mechanisms, a number of clever construction types might be evolv- ing into new kinds of figurative language. As with the retroactive negation construction, these new figures may be only passing fads. Or they may have more longevity. But they nonetheless have ingredients of figurative or Is Figurative Language Used Up? 173 indirect language – some form of nonveridicality with intended meanings that surpass mere underdeterminedness, a structure that itself may encap- sulate or iconize meaning, accompanying pragmatic effects. Thus they remain candidates for new figures either now or in some possible future retro reawakening. Contextual expressions serve as the central component in several new figure candidates. This could be the result of increased exposure and access to content enabled by Internet surfing and streaming media. Greater overall quantity of content itself, increasingly available to people through broad- cast, movies, podcasts, the Internet and other distribution outlets, also could be a contributing factor.
eBook - PDFAdvances in the History of Rhetoric
The First Six Years
- Richard Leo Enos, David Beard(Authors)
- 2007(Publication Date)
- Parlor Press, LLC(Publisher)
2 Aristotle has taken his asyndeton from “the end of Lysias, Against Era-tosthenes (12.100): ‘You have listened, you have seen, you have suffered, you have [the fact]. You be the judge’” (Kennedy 282, n. 268). Sara Newman 236 his corpus in prominent places and in roles quite different than the traditional approach to metaphor and to Aristotle’s understanding of this subject allows. 3 According to that traditional wisdom, language is a matter of style and thus accessory to knowledge production. Within this stylistic realm, figurative language may enhance linguistic effects if its individ-ual figures are used with appropriate restraint and in suitable contexts. To clarify and encourage these proper uses, rhetorical treatises have characteristically divided the figures on the basis of form and func-tion. But, because these categories have been applied in an arbitrary manner, they have mattered less than their overall message—that the figures are linguistic afterthoughts (Fahnestock 18 – 20 ). One notable exception lies outside this otherwise exclusive grouping; in contrast to the “other” figures, metaphor has always enjoyed an independent scholarly life and an ascendant theoretical status. In contemporary coinage, then, metaphor can refer either to an “implied comparison” or to “figurative language” more broadly construed. Finally, these at-titudes and their attendant problems owe a considerable debt to Aris-totle’s definition of metaphor in the Poetics and the Rhetoric which is the source of all subsequent metaphorical theories and of metaphor’s purported figural authority (in fact, his broader discussions of figures are the foundation for all subsequent systems of tropes and schemes; see Newman, Chapter Eight). At present, the traditional approach to language and to metaphor has been superceded by others that grant to them epistemic and con-ceptual capacities.
eBook - PDFLanguage and Memory
Aspects of Knowledge Representation
- Hanna Pishwa(Author)
- 2011(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter Mouton(Publisher)
Chapter 14 Nonliteral language, persuasion, and memory Roger J. Kreuz and Aaron Ashley* 1. Introduction In his seminal work How To Do Things With Words , the philosopher John Austin (1962) provided a critical insight about language: that we use words not only to communicate with one another, but also to achieve certain ends - to praise, promise, or apologize, for example. Another important thing that people do with words is to persuade. Persuasion - the act of changing another's attitudes and beliefs - is the life blood of lawyers, politicians, recruiters, and potential suitors. It is also a multi-billion dollar business, as corporations attempt to influence consumers, via advertising, to see their brands in a positive light. Not surprisingly, therefore, persuasion has been the subject of academic interest for many years. Researchers in social psychology and marketing, in particular, have attempted to understand the processes by which persuasion is successful or unsuccessful. This research has focused on the persuasive message itself, the person doing the persuading, and the target of the mes-sage. These three factors interact in complex ways, and it is beyond the scope of this chapter to summarize this work. Instead, we will focus on one critical aspect of the persuasive message: the use of figurative or nonliteral language. Nonliteral language has also been a topic of considerable interest to scholars, particularly in the fields of rhetoric and literary criticism, and, more recently, psycholinguistics. Roberts and Kreuz (1994) identified eight forms of nonliteral language that have received at least some attention from empirical researchers (although there is debate about how many such forms exist, and precisely how they differ from literal language, e.g. Gibbs 1994, 2003). Definitions and examples of these eight forms appear in Table 1.
eBook - ePubPsychology and the Poetics of Growth
Figurative Language in Psychology, Psychotherapy, and Education
- Howard R. Pollio, Jack M. Barlow, Harold J. Fine, Marilyn R. Pollio(Authors)
- 2023(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
In this regard he outlines a program to contrast literal and metaphoric language and then goes on to suggest the development of an abstract–figurative scale by which children could come to learn how to evaluate the appropriateness of figurative usage. All of these suggestions stress figurative-language training as an integral part of a developmental reading program from primary school through college. In terms of specific teaching techniques, Ferguson (1958) has suggested that students refer to all of their experiences on a certain day in terms of the specialized vocabulary used in a particular field, making sure to change fields each day. In this way, Ferguson feels that new uses for words and new relationships might be revealed. Hughes (1967) feels that students should not be taught figurative language by being given definitions of the different figures of speech. Through personal experience, students should become so sensitized to metaphoric usage that they discover it everywhere – in science, in slang, in advertising, as well as in literature. Such personal experience should begin in the primary grades and in order to help in this regard Hughes provides practical (although commonplace) methods such as simile stems and similar tools to be used in the early school years. The results of such activities would result in both creative writing skills and in an increased sensitivity to literature. In order to help expand and teach vocabulary, and, indeed, language itself, Heiman (1967) also suggests the use of slang. He feels that slang expressions can be related to four different areas of linguistics, only one of which need concern us here: the classification of various figures of speech. Using slang expressions which are themselves figures of speech can enable a teacher to help students identify, define, differentiate and remember the different types of figurative expressions
eBook - PDF- Joachim Knape, Alan L. Fortuna(Authors)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter(Publisher)
Easy idioms bridge the gaps and comfortable metaphors ease us through the traffic.” 35 Heinrich Lausberg remains silent for a while. He is obviously thinking over Tyler’s point. Then he says, “the fixed idiomatic expressions you mentioned do not belong in my rhetorical thesaurus. They are partially complex – i.e. simply ‘multilexical’ – constructions, but they remain lexicalized expressions of single languages. You could call them formulas or idioms. Like words, they belong in the dictionaries of single languages or dictionaries for particular groups (lawyers, sportsmen, youth etc.). Rhetorical figures, on the other hand, are constructions which are not restricted to a single language. They follow universal rules of production which are at a minimum valid for the Indo-Ger- manic languages. The rhetorician distinguishes between three kinds of figures: 1. tropes, 2. schemes, and 3. figures of thought. Rhetorical figures like meta- phor, anaphora and chiasmus can be created in every language, which is why one can also speak of a second, rhetorical grammar. But what should such a grammar look like? The production of rhetorical schemes (a) follows rules of 34 Lausberg 1960, p. xxviii and § 1246, p. 904. 35 Tyler 1987, pp. 105 ff. Language or Rhetoric? A Dialog 85 construction and rhetorical schemes (b) can be recognized due to a fixed struc- ture. For example, the rule of production for the figure ‘chiasmus’ in all lan- guages is, ‘construct two sentences in such a way that they are parallel in syntax, but reverse the order of the corresponding words, the pattern being a mirror inversion at a particular axis’. Its pattern can be represented as follows: abc|cba. Here a few examples: ‘But many that are first shall be last, and the last shall be first’ or ‘when the going gets tough, the tough get going’.” “The important thing is what we do with such rhetorical figures,” Stephen Tyler says.
eBook - PDF- Hans-Jörg Schmid(Author)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter Mouton(Publisher)
In this section, a number of studies of the function of figurative language in dis-course have been summarized, using Halliday’s three-way model of functional meaning. Although the picture is not yet complete, some aspects of figurative lan-guage having been more fully investigated than others, two observations can be made. Firstly, the ideational function of metaphor does not seem to be the most im-portant of the three; indeed, there are grounds for considering it as the least import-ant. Metaphor clusters or bursts seem to coincide with interpersonal and textual functions, rather less so than with ideational ones, though there is inevitably some ideational content. Secondly, figurative language often seems to carry out more than one of the three functions simultaneously: Moon’s (1998) example of the worm has turned shows interpersonal and textual functions combined. The inter-personal and ideational are also combined in almost all evaluative uses of figu-rative language. Figurative expressions normally refer to an entity or an attribute while indicating how this is evaluated. For instance, one of Deignan’s (2010) examples is the expression down at heel ; this means ‘in need of repair’ and also connotes squalor and dishonesty. It is relatively rare for a figurative expression to mean simply ‘bad’ or ‘good’, that is, to evaluate alone. Despite this overlapping of functions, Halliday’s model usefully frames these functions and provides import-ant insights into figurative language use in discourse. Figurative language in discourse 451 3. Figurative language and discourse type The use of figurative language in specific genres and registers has been the object of a number of studies. Cameron (1999) points out that certain discourse commu-nities make extensive use of systematic metaphors that are less widely used in the language generally. She refers to this phenomenon as “discourse systematicity”.
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
