Cover not available

In:Visual Metaphor: Structure and process
Edited by Gerard J. Steen
[Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 18] 2018
► pp. 11–46

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

Chapter 2
Ways with pictures

Visual incongruities and metaphor

Published online: 6 December 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.18.02sch
Article outline
  • 2.1Introduction
  • 2.2Visual incongruities: Three examples
  • 2.3Visual incongruities defined
    • 2.3.1Two-domain incongruities
    • 2.3.2One-domain incongruities
  • 2.4Incongruity resolution
    • 2.4.1Substitute
    • 2.4.2Merge
    • 2.4.3Insert
    • 2.4.4Distort and Erase
    • 2.4.5Summary
  • 2.5Closing remarks
  • Notes
  • References
References (61)
References
Attardo, S. & Raskin, V. (1991). Script theory revis(it)ed: Joke similarity and joke representation model. Humor 4, 293–347.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biederman, I. (1981). On the semantics of a glance at a scene. In M. Kubovy & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.) Perceptual Organization (pp. 213–263). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bowdle, B. F. & Gentner, D. (2005). The Career of Metaphor. Psychological Review, 112, 193–216.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brône, G. & Feyaerts, K. (2003). The cognitive linguistics of incongruity resolution: Marked reference-point structures in humor. Document retrieved 04032016, [URL].
Burford, B., Bricks, P. & Eakins, J. P. (2003). A taxonomy of the image: on the classification of content for image retrieval. Visual Communication 2, 123–161.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burke, K. (1954). Permanence and Change. Indianapolis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Callister, M. A. & Stern, L. A. (2008). Inspecting the Unexpected: Schema and the Processing of Visual Deviations. In E. F. McQuarrie & B. J. Phillips (Eds.) Go Figure; New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric, (pp. 137–159). New York, London, Sharpe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chambers, D. & Reisberg, D. (1985). Can mental images be ambiguous? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 317–328.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohn, N. (2007). A visual lexicon. Public Journal of Semiotics, 1, 53–84.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Visual narrative structure. Cognitive Science, 37, 413–452.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Mey, T., (2005). Tales of the unexpected. Incongruity-resolution in humor comprehension, scientific discovery and thought experimentation. Logic and Logical Philosophy, 14, 69–88.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Enschot, R. Van (2006). Retoriek in Reclame. Waardering voor schema’s en tropen in tekst en beeld (Rhetorics in Advertisement. Appreciation of schemes and tropes in text and image). Doctoral Dissertation, Nijmegen University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Festinger, L., (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forabosco, G., (2008). Is the Concept of Incongruity Still a Useful Construct for the Advancement of Humor Research? Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 4, 45–62.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forceville, C. J. (1996). Pictorial Metaphor in Advertising. London/New York, Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Pictorial and Multimodal Metaphor in Commercials. In E. F. McQuarrie & B. J. Phillips (Eds.), Go Figure; New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric (pp. 178–205). New York, London, Sharpe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. Jr. (1994). The poetics of mind: figurative thought, language and understanding. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giora, R., Fein, O., Kronrod, A., Elnatan, I., Shuval, N. & Zur, A. (2004). Weapons of Mass Distraction: Optimal Innovation and Pleasure Ratings. Metaphor and Symbol, 19, 115–141.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gounden, Y. & Nicolas, S. (2012). The impact of processing time on the bizarreness and orthographic distinctiveness effects. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 53, 287–94.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heckler, S. E. & Childers, T. L. (1992). The Role of Expectancy and Relevancy in Memory for Verbal and Visual Information: What is Incongruency? Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 475–492.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Henderson, J. M., & Ferreira, F. (2004). Scene perception for psycholinguists. In J. M. Henderson & F. Ferreira (Eds.), The interface of language, vision, and action (pp. 1–58). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hariman, R. & Lucaites, J. L. (2008). Visual Tropes and Late-Modern Emotion in U.S. Public Culture. Poroi, 5, 47–93.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffman, R. R., Eskridge, T. & Cameron, S. (2009). A Naturalistic Exploration of Forms and Functions of Analogizing. Metaphor and Symbol, 24, 125–154.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Humphreys, G. W. & Forde, E. M. E. (2001). Hierachies, similarity, and interactivity in object recognition: ‘Category-specific’ neuropsychological deficits. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 453–509.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jakesch, M., Leder, H. & Forster, M. (2013). Image Ambiguity and Fluency. PloS ONE, 8, 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, P. N., Legrenzi, P., Girotto, V., Legrenzi, M. S. & Caverni, J. (1999). Naïve Probability: A mental model theory of extensional reasoning. Psychological Review, 106, 62–88.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaplan, S. (2005). Visual metaphors in print advertising for fashion products. In: K. Smith, S. Moriarty, G. Barbatsis & K. Kennedy (Eds.) Handbook of Visual Communication: Theory, Methods, and Media. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pp. 167–177.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ketelaar, P., Grinsbergen, M. S. van & Beentjes, J. W. J. (2008). The Dark Side of Openess for Consumer Response. In E. F. McQuarrie & B. J. Phillips (Eds.) Go Figure; New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric. New York, London, Sharpe. Pp. 114–137.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koestler, A., (1970). The Act of Creation. London: Pan Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krebs, R. M., Schott, H. B., Schütze, H., & Düzel, E. (2009). The novelty exploration bonus and its attentional modulation. Neuropsychologica, 47, 2272–2281.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kulvicki, J. (2003). Image Structure. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 61, 323–340.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lankveld, G. Van, Spronck, P. & Van den Herik, J. (2010). Incongruity-Based Adaptive Game balancing. Advances in Computer Games, 68, 208–220 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ludden, G. D. S., Schifferstein, H. N. J. & Hekkert, P. (2009). Visual-Tactual Incongruities in Products as Sources of Surprise. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 27, 61–87.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maes, A. & Schilperoord, J. (2008). Classifying Visual Rhetoric: Conceptual and Structural Heuristics. In E. F. McQuarrie & B. J. Phillips (Eds.) Go Figure; New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric (pp. 227–257). New York, London, Sharpe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mandler, G., (1982). The structure of value: Accounting for taste. In: M. S. Clark & T. Fiske (Eds.). Affect and Cognition (pp. 3–36) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A. & Einstein, G. O. (1986). Bizarre imagery as an effective memory aid: The importance of distinctiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 12, 54–65.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McQuarrie, E. F. (2008). A Visit to the Rhetorician’s Workbench: Developing a Toolkit for Differentiating Advertising Style. In E. F. McQuarrie & B. J. Phillips (Eds.) Go Figure; New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric (pp. 257–277)New York, London, Sharpe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McQuarrie, E. F. & Mick, D. G., (1999). Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text-interpretive, experimental and reader-response analyses. Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 37–54.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michelon, P., Snyder, A. Z., Buckner, R. L., McAvoy, M. & Zacks, J. M. (2003). Neural correlates of incongruous visual information: An event-related fMRI study. NeuroImage, 19, 1612–1626.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oversteegen, E. & Schilperoord, J. (2014). Can pictures say no or not? Negation and denial in the visual mode. Journal of Pragmatics, 67, 89–106.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Phillips, B. J. & McQuarrie, E. F. (2004) Beyond Visual Metaphor: A New Typology of Visual Rhetoric in Advertising. Marketing Theory, 4, 113–126.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quispel, A. (2016) Data for all. How designers and laymen use and evaluate popular information visualizations. Doctoral Dissertation, Tilburg University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raskin, V. (1987). Linguistic heuristics of humor: a script-based semantic approach. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 65, 1987, 11–25.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ritchie, G. (1999). Developing the incongruity-resolution theory. Proceedings of the AISB Symposium on Creative Language, (78–85). Edinburgh.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schilperoord, J. & Maes, A. (2009) Visual metaphoric conceptualizations in editorial cartoons. In: Forceville, C. J. & E. Urios-Aparisi (Eds.) Multimodal Metaphor (pp. 213–243). Berlin/New York, Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Visuele hyperbolen (Visual hyperboles). Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 32, 74–95.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schilperoord, J., Maes, A. & Ferdinandusse, H. (2009). Perceptual and conceptual visual rhetoric: the case of symmetric object alignment. Metaphor and Symbol, 24, 155–174.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schilperoord, J. & Van Weelden, L. (2018). Rhetorical shadows: The conceptual representation of incongruent shadows. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 18, 97–114.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shen, Y. (1999). Principles of Metaphor Interpretation and the Notion of Domain: A Proposal for a Hybrid Model. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 1631–1653.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Šorm, E. & Steen, G. J. (This volume.) VISMIP: Towards a method for visual metaphor identification.
Šorm, E. & Steen, G.J. (2013). Processing visual metaphor; A study in thinking out loud. Metaphor and the Social World, 3, 1–34.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Teng, N. Y. & S. Sun. (2002). Grouping, simile, and oxymoron in pictures: A design-based cognitive approach. Metaphor and Symbol, 17, 295–316.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vandaele, J. (2002). Narrative Humor (II): Exit Perspective. Poetics Today, 33, 59–125.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weelden, L. Van (2013). Metaphor in Good Shape. Doctoral Dissertation, Tilburg University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weelden, L. Van, Maes, A. A., & Schilperoord, J. (This vol.). How visual form affects metaphorical conceptualization: The role of shape similarity.
Westerbeek, H. (2016). Visual realism. Doctoral Dissertation, Tilburg UniversityGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yus, F. (2009). Visual metaphor versus verbal metaphor: A unified account. In: Forceville, C. J. & E. Urios-Aparisi (Eds.) Multimodal Metaphor (pp. 147–173). Berlin/New York, Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (16)

Cited by 16 other publications

A'Beckett, Ludmilla
2025. Appreciation of Black Humour Memes in the Context of the Russo-Ukrainian War. Open Library of Humanities 11:1 DOI logo
Alsaedi, Hayder Tuma Jassim
2025. Social Media Cartooning: Visual and Multimodal Metaphors in Iraqi Newspapers Cartoons. Kufa Journal of Arts 1:64 ► pp. 306 ff. DOI logo
Casalini, Alice
2025. Pathways to Nirvāṇa: Aquatic Imagery and Visual Metaphors in Gandhāra . Annali di Ca’ Foscari. Serie orientale :3 DOI logo
Klomberg, Bien, Klavdiia Fadeeva, Joost Schilperoord & Neil Cohn
2025. Processing Incongruity for Mental Events in Comics: Contours of Character Inferences. Metaphor and Symbol 40:1 ► pp. 51 ff. DOI logo
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
Mitterhofer, Hermann & Silvia Jordan
2024. Using Metaphors in Research. In The Oxford Handbook of Metaphor in Organization Studies, ► pp. 265 ff. DOI logo
Ventalon, Geoffrey
2024.  Visual Metaphors and Aesthetics: A Formalist Theory of Metaphor Visual Metaphors and Aesthetics: A Formalist Theory of Metaphor , by Michalle Gal, Great Britain, Bloomsbury Publishing, 2022, 224 pp., 115.00$ (hardback), ISBN 978135012775 . Metaphor and Symbol 39:1 ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo
Schilperoord, Joost & Neil Cohn
2023. Let there be . . . visual optimal innovations: making visual meaning through Michelangelo’s The Creation of Adam. Visual Communication 22:4 ► pp. 650 ff. DOI logo
Abdel-Raheem, Ahmed
2022. Metaphorical creativity contributing to multimodal impoliteness in political cartoons. Intercultural Pragmatics 19:1 ► pp. 35 ff. DOI logo
Abdel-Raheem, Ahmed
2024. The creative minds of Arab cartoonists: metaphor, culture and context. Text & Talk 44:2 ► pp. 141 ff. DOI logo
Poppi, Fabio I. M., Marianna Bolognesi & Amitash Ojha
2020. Imago Dei: Metaphorical conceptualization of pictorial artworks within a participant-based framework. Semiotica 2020:236-237 ► pp. 349 ff. DOI logo
Ventalon, Geoffrey, Grozdana Erjavec & Charles Tijus
2020. Processing visual metaphors in advertising: an exploratory study of cognitive abilities. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 32:8 ► pp. 816 ff. DOI logo
Virág, Ágnes
2020. Multimodal conceptual patterns of Hungary in political cartoons. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 7:1 ► pp. 222 ff. DOI logo
Virág, Ágnes
2022. Multimodal conceptual patterns of Hungary in political cartoons. In Visual Metaphors [Benjamins Current Topics, 124], ► pp. 231 ff. DOI logo
Bolognesi, Marianna, Benjamin Timmermans & Lora Aroyo
2019. VisMet and the crowd. In Metaphor and Metonymy in the Digital Age [Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication, 8], ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2023. Slowing Metaphor Down [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research, 26], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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