Structural resemblance in figurative language use

Laburpena

Structural resemblance underlies metaphor and similebased on analogical reasoning of this kind: A is to B as C is toD, so A is C and B is D (Gentner and Markman, 1997). At thelow level, it is based on the structural properties of entities(e.g., the heart is to blood circulation what a pump is to ahydraulic system), and, at the high level, on the structuralproperties of events (e.g., words are to emotional damage asa dagger is to physical injury in Your words were a dagger tomy heart). High-level analogy underlies what Lakoff andJohnson (1980) termed structural metaphors, like ARGUMENTIS WAR, where debaters are to an argument as contenders ina battle are to war (e.g., She attacked my ideas).When complemented with metonymy, structuralresemblance underlies paragon and allegory. Paragon is alow-level analogy where an entity is treated as a paradigmaticexample of a certain attribute for which it is metonymic: SirAlex (A) is to football (B) as Lennon (C) is to pop music (D); so,Sir Alex (A) is the Lennon (C) of football (B). Allegory rests onhigh- level structural resemblance combined with themember-for-class metonymy in the metaphoric target. Thus,in “The Prodigal Son”, the wayward son –who squanders hisinheritance and later returns to his father asking forforgiveness– stands for any repentant sinner. In the analogy,the relationship between God and the sinner (A) is to a sinner’s repentance (B) what the relationship between aforgiving father and his wayward son (C) is to the latter’srealization of his unwise decisions (D). Therefore, God is aforgiving father and a sinner is a wayward son. This analysisof structural resemblance provides an initial integrativeframework to be refined as other resemblance-basedlinguistic phenomena accrue.