Cover not available

In:Visual Metaphors
Edited by Réka Benczes and Veronika Szelid
[Benjamins Current Topics 124] 2022
► pp. 33–60

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Uncanny resemblance

Words, pictures, and conceptual representations in the field of metaphor

 | Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
 | University of Bologna
Published online: 9 September 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.124.03cav
Abstract
What is the relation between the three following elements: words, pictures, and conceptual representations? And how do these three elements work, in defining and explaining metaphors? These are the questions that we tackle in our interdisciplinary contribution, which moves across cognitive linguistics, cognitive sciences, philosophy and semiotics. Within the cognitive linguistic tradition, scholars have assumed that there are equivalent and comparable structures characterizing the way in which metaphor works in language and in pictures. In this chapter we analyze contextual visual metaphors, which are considered to be the most complex ones, and we compare them to those that in language are called indirect metaphors. Our proposal is that a syllogistic mechanism of comprehension permeates both metaphors expressed in the verbal modality as well as metaphors expressed in the pictorial modality. While in the verbal modality the metaphoric syllogism is solved by inference, we argue that in the pictorial modality the role of inference is performed through mental imagery.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Visual metaphors as elliptic syllogisms
  • 3.The relationship between the picture-maker and the viewer
  • 4.Visual perception and mental imagery
  • 5.Invariance Principle, occlusion shape and occlusion size
  • 6.Aesthetically relevant properties represented by mental imagery
  • 7.Imagery view of visual metaphors
  • 8.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (56)
References
Aristotle (Trans. by C. D. C. Reeve). (2018). Rhetoric. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baxandall, M. (1985). Patterns of intentions: On the historical explanation of pictures. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Black, M. (1955). Metaphor. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 55, 273–294. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolognesi, M., & Vernillo, P. (2019). How abstract concepts emerge from metaphorical images: The metonymic way. Language and Communication, 69, 26–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolognesi, M., & Aina, L. (2017). Similarity is closeness: Using distributional semantic spaces to model similarity in visual and linguistic metaphors. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 15(1), 101–137. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolognesi, M. (2017). Using semantic features norms to investigate how the visual and verbal modes afford metaphor construction and expression. Language and Cognition, 9(3), 525–552. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Modeling semantic similarity between metaphor terms of visual vs linguistic metaphors through Flickr tag distributions. Frontiers in Communication, 1(9). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Borst, G., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2008). Visual mental imagery and visual perception: Structural equivalence revealed by scanning processes. Memory and Cognition, 36(4), 849–862. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caramazza, A. (1996). Pictures, words and the brain. Nature, 383(6597), 216–217. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carroll, N. (1994). Visual metaphor. In J. Hintikka (Ed.), Aspects of metaphor (pp. 189–218). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Repr. in N. Carroll. (2001), Beyond aesthetics: Philosophical essays (pp. 347–368). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cavazzana, A. (2017). Il ruolo cognitivo della metafora in Arthur C. Danto [The cognitive role of metaphor in Arthur C. Danto’s approach]. Estetica. Studi e ricerche, 7(1), 57–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Imagining: The role of mental imagery in the interpretation of visual metaphors. In A. Benedek & K. Nyíri (Eds.), Perspectives on visual learning, vol. 3: Image and metaphor in the new century (pp. 71–82). Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences/Budapest University of Technology and Economics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuccio, V. (2018). Attention to metaphor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Danto, A. C. (1981). The transfiguration of the commonplace: A philosophy of art. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davidson, D. (1967). Truth and meaning. Synthese, 17(3), 304–323. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1974). On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 47, 5–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1977). The method of truth in metaphysics. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 2, 244–254. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1986). A nice derangement of epitaphs. In R. Grandy & R. Warner (Eds.), Philosophical grounds of rationality (pp. 156–174). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Houwer, J., & Hermans, D. (1994). Differences in the affective processing of words and pictures. Cognition and Emotion, 8(1), 1–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finke, R. A., Pinker, S., & Farah, M. J. (1989). Reinterpreting visual patterns in mental images. Cognitive Science, 13(1), 51–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forceville, C. (1996). Pictorial metaphor in advertising. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forceville, C., & Urios-Aparisi, E. (Eds.). (2009). Multimodal metaphor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ganis, G., & Schendan, H. E. (2011). Visual imagery. WIREs Cognitive Science, 2, 239–252. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glaser, W. R. (1992). Picture naming. Cognition, 42(1–3), 61–105. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gombrich, E. H. (1963). Visual metaphors of value in art. In E. H. Gombrich (1978), Meditations on a hobby horse and other essays on the theory of art (pp. 12–29). London: Phaidon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinojosa, J. A., et al. (2009). Electrophysiological differences in the processing of affective information in words and pictures. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 173–189. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyman, J. (2006). The objective eye: Color, form, and reality in the theory of art. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kellman, P. J., & Shipley, T. F. (1991). A Theory of visual interpolation in object perception. Cognitive Psychology, 23(2), 141–221. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kosslyn, S. M., Behrmann, M., & Jeannerod, M. (1995). The cognitive neuroscience of mental imagery. Neuropsychologia, 33, 1335–1344. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kosslyn, S. M., Thompson, W. L., Kim, I. J., & Alpert, N. M. (1995). Topographical representations of mental images in primary visual cortex. Nature, 378, 496–498. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, T. S., & Nguyen, M. (2001). Dynamics of subjective contour formation in the early visual cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98(4), 1907–1911. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mairal, R., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F. (2009). Levels of description and explanation in meaning construction. In C. Butler & J. Martin Arista (Eds.), Deconstructing constructions (pp. 153–198). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michotte, A., Thinès, G., & Crabbé, G. (1964). Les compléments amodaux des structures perceptives [Amodal completions of perceptual structures]. Studia Psychologica. Louvain: Publications Universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nanay, B. (2010). Perception and imagination: Amodal perception as mental imagery. Philosophical Studies, 150, 239–254. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016a). Aesthetics as philosophy of perception. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016b). Imagination and perception. In A. Kind (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy of imagination (pp. 124–134). London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). The Importance of amodal completion in everyday perception. i-Perception, 9, 1–16. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(forthcoming). Perception and the arts. In C. Mag Uidhir (Ed.), Art and philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ortony, A. (1979). Beyond literal similarity. Psychological Review, 86(3), 161–180. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panofsky, E. (1939). Studies in iconology: Humanistic themes in the art of the Renaissance. Boulder: Westview Press (1972).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stampoulidis, G., & Bolognesi, M. (2019). Bringing metaphors back to the streets: A corpus-based study for the identification and interpretation of rhetorical figures in street art. Visual Communication. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stampoulidis, G., Bolognesi, M., & Zlatev, J. (2019). A cognitive semiotic exploration of metaphors in Greek street art. Cognitive Semiotics, 12 (1). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steen, G. (2008). The Paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 23(4), 213–241. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taikh, A., Hargreaves, I. S., Yap, M. J., & Pexman, P. M. (2015). Semantic classification of pictures and words. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(8), 1502–1518. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Mulken, M., Le Pair, R., & Forceville, C. (2010). The impact of perceived complexity, deviation and comprehension on the appreciation of visual metaphor in advertising across three European countries. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 3418–3430. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Mulken, M., van Hooft, A., & Nederstigt, U. (2014). Finding the tipping point: Visual metaphor and conceptual complexity in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 43(4), 333–343. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Türker, Ebru & Jae Hyun Park
2025. Multimodal Metaphoric Creativity, Framing, and Recontextualization in Education Discourse: University Advertisements in South Korea. Metaphor and Symbol 40:2 ► pp. 153 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue