In:Perception Metaphors
Edited by Laura J. Speed, Carolyn O'Meara, Lila San Roque and Asifa Majid
[Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 19] 2019
► pp. 105–126
Chapter 6Synaesthetic metaphors are neither synaesthetic nor metaphorical
Published online: 21 February 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.19.06win
https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.19.06win
Abstract
Speakers often use metaphor when talking about the contents of perception. For example, a word such as sweet can be used to talk metaphorically about sensory impressions that are not directly related to taste, as in so-called “synaesthetic metaphors” such as sweet fragrance and sweet melody. In this chapter, I present arguments against the synaesthetic and metaphorical nature of such expressions. First, a look at the neuropsychological literature reveals that the phenomenon commonly called “synaesthesia” bears little resemblance to the metaphors investigated by linguists. Moreover, in contrast to synaesthesia as a neuropsychological phenomenon, most “synaesthetic” metaphors involve mappings between highly similar and perceptually integrated sensory modalities, such as taste and smell. Finally, combinations of words that involve dissimilar sensory modalities, such as sweet melody, appear to perform largely evaluative functions. Thus, evaluation might be driving the use of these terms, more so than “synaesthetic” perception. I will then compare my analyses to the idea that many metaphors are grounded in primary metaphors and/or metonymies. All in all, this paper suggests that many and perhaps most “synaesthetic metaphors” are neither synaesthetic nor metaphorical. From a broader perspective, the case study of synaesthetic metaphors presented here fleshes out the way language and perception are related and how sensory content is encoded in the lexicon of human languages.
Keywords: synaesthesia, the senses, perceptual metaphors, primary metaphor
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background on synaesthetic metaphors
- 3.Beware of synaesthesia
- 4.Beyond synaesthesia
- 5.Alternative analyses: Primary metaphors and metonymy
- 6.Conclusions
Acknowledgements Notes References
References (87)
Auvray, M., & Spence, C. (2008). The multisensory perception of flavor. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(3), 1016–1031.
Bagli, M. (2016). “Shaking off so good a wife and so sweet a lady”: Shakespeare’s use of taste words. Journal of Literary Semantics, 45(2), 141–159.
Barcelona, A. (2003). On the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for conceptual metaphor. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads (pp. 31–58). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
(2008). Metonymy is not just a lexical phenomenon: On the operation of metonymy in grammar and discourse. In C. Alm-Arvius, N., Johannesson & D. C. Minugh (Eds.), Selected Papers from the Stockholm 2008 Metaphor Festival (pp. 3–42). Stockholm: Stockholm University Press.
Bond, B., & Stevens, S. S. (1969). Cross-modality matching of brightness to loudness by 5-year-olds. Perception & Psychophysics, 6(6), 337–339.
Buck, C. D. (1949). A Dictionary of Selected Synonyms in the Principal Indo-European Languages: A Contribution to the History of Ideas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Casati, R., Dokic, J., & Le Corre, F. (2015). Distinguishing the commonsense senses. In D. Stokes, M. Matthen & S. Biggs (Eds.), Perception and its Modalities (pp. 462–479). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Classen, C. (1993). Worlds of Sense: Exploring the Senses in History and across Cultures. London: Routledge.
Davies, M. (2008) The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990- present. Available online at [URL]
de Araujo, I. E., Rolls, E. T., Kringelbach, M. L., McGlone, F., & Phillips, N. (2003). Taste olfactory convergence, and the representation of the pleasantness of flavour, in the human brain. European Journal of Neuroscience, 18(7), 2059–2068.
van Dantzig, S., Cowell, R. A., Zeelenberg, R., & Pecher, D. (2011). A sharp image or a sharp knife: Norms for the modality-exclusivity of 774 concept-property items. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 145-154.
De Houwer, J., & Randell, T. (2004). Robust affective priming effects in a conditional pronunciation task: evidence for the semantic representation of evaluative information. Cognition & Emotion, 18(2), 251–264.
Delwiche, J. F., & Heffelfinger, A. L. (2005). Cross-modal additivity of taste and smell. Journal of Sensory Studies, 20(6), 512–525.
Deroy, O., & Spence, C. (2013). Why we are not all synesthetes (not even weakly so). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(4), 643–664.
Fainsilber, L., & Ortony, A. (1987). Metaphorical uses of language in the expression of emotions. Metaphor and Symbol, 2(4), 239–250.
González, J., Barros-Loscertales, A., Pulvermüller, F., Meseguer, V., Sanjuán, A., Belloch, V., & Ávila, C. (2006). Reading cinnamon activates olfactory brain regions. Neuroimage, 32(2), 906–912.
(2005). Primary metaphors as inputs to conceptual integration. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(10), 1595–1614.
Grady, J., Oakley, T., & Coulson, S. (1999). Blending and metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs & G. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 101–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
Guest, S., Catmur, C., Lloyd, D., & Spence, C. (2002). Audiotactile interactions in roughness perception. Experimental Brain Research, 146(2), 161–171.
Holz, P. (2007). Cognition, olfaction and linguistic creativity: Linguistic synesthesia as a poetic device in cologne advertising. In Plümacher, M., & P. Holz (Eds.), Speaking of colors and odors (pp. 185–202). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Howes, D. (1991) (Ed.). The Varieties of Sensory Experience: A Sourcebook in the Anthropology of the Senses. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Hunston, S. (2011). Corpus approaches to evaluation: Phraseology and evaluative language. New York: Routledge.
Jousmäki, V., & Hari, R. (1998). Parchment-skin illusion: sound-biased touch. Current Biology, 8(6), R190–R191.
Julius, D., & Basbaum, A. I. (2001). Molecular mechanisms of nociception. Nature, 413(6852), 203–210.
Kövecses, Z. (2013). The metaphor–metonymy relationship: Correlation metaphors are based on metonymy. Metaphor and Symbol, 28(2), 75–88.
Levänen, S., Jousmäki, V., & Hari, R. (1998). Vibration-induced auditory-cortex activation in a congenitally deaf adult. Current Biology, 8(15), 869–872.
Levinson, S. C., & Majid, A. (2014). Differential ineffability and the senses. Mind & Language, 29(4), 407–427.
Littlemore, J. (2015). Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Louwerse, M., & Connell, L. (2011). A taste of words: Linguistic context and perceptual simulation predict the modality of words. Cognitive Science, 35(2), 381–398.
Lynott, D., & Connell, L. (2009). Modality exclusivity norms for 423 object properties. Behavior Research Methods, 41(2), 558–564.
Marks, L. E. (1978). The Unity of the Senses: Interrelations Among the Modalities. New York: Academic Press.
Martino, G., & Marks, L. E. (2001). Synesthesia: Strong and weak. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(2), 61–65.
McBurney, D. H. (1986). Taste, smell, and flavor terminology: Taking the confusion out of the fusion. In H. L. Meiselman, & R. S. Rivkin (Eds.), Clinical Measurement of Taste and Smell (pp. 117–125). New York: Macmillan.
Miller, G. A., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1976). Language and Perception. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Møller, A. (2012). Sensory Systems: Anatomy and Physiology (2nd Edition). Richardson: A. R. Møller Publishing.
Paradis, C., & Eeg-Olofsson, M. (2013). Describing sensory experience: The genre of wine reviews. Metaphor and Symbol, 28(1), 22–40.
Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Verifying different-modality properties for concepts produces switching costs. Psychological Science, 14(2), 119–124.
Pink, S. (2011). Multimodality, multisensoriality and ethnographic knowing: social semiotics and the phenomenology of perception. Qualitative Research, 11(3), 261–276.
Prandi, M. (2012). A plea for living metaphors: Conflictual metaphors and metaphorical swarms. Metaphor & Symbol, 27(2), 148–170.
Rakova, M. (2003). The Extent of the Literal: Metaphor, Polysemy and Theories of Concepts. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ramachandran, V. S., & Hubbard, E. M. (2001). Synaesthesia – a window into perception, thought and language. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 8(12), 3–34.
Rolls, E. (2008). Functions of the orbitofrontal and pregenual cingulate cortex in taste, olfaction, appetite and emotion. Acta Physiologica Hungarica, 95(2), 131–164.
Schroeder, C. E., Lindsley, R. W., Specht, C., Marcovici, A., Smiley, J. F., & Javitt, D. C. (2001). Somatosensory input to auditory association cortex in the macaque monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 85(3), 1322–1327.
Schürmann, M., Caetano, G., Jousmäki, V., & Hari, R. (2004). Hands help hearing: facilitatory audiotactile interaction at low sound-intensity levels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115 (2), 830–832.
Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., & Shimojo, S. (2000). Illusions: What you see is what you hear. Nature, 408(6814), 788–788.
Shen, Y., & Aisenman, R. (2008). Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard are sweeter: Synaesthetic metaphors and cognition. Language and Literature, 17(2), 107–121.
Shen, Y., & Gadir, O. (2009). How to interpret the music of caressing: Target and source assignment in synaesthetic genitive constructions. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(2), 357–371.
Shen, Y., & Gil, D. (2007). Sweet fragrances from Indonesia: A universal principle governing directionality in synaesthetic Metaphors. In W. van Peer, & J. Auracher (Eds.), New Beginnings in Literary Studies (pp. 49–71). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Shibuya, Y., Nozawa, H., & Kanamaru, T. (2007). Understanding synesthetic expressions: Vision and olfaction with the physiological = psychological model. In M. Plümacher, & P. Holz (Eds.), Speaking of colors and odors (pp. 203–226). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Simner, J., Mulvenna, C., Sagiv, N., Tsakanikos, E., Witherby, S. A., Fraser, C., Scott, K., & Ward, J. (2006). Synaesthesia: The prevalence of atypical cross-modal experiences. Perception, 35(8), 1024–1033.
Sorabji, R. (1971). Aristotle on demarcating the five senses. The Philosophical Review, 80(1), 55–79.
Spence, C. (2011). Crossmodal correspondences: A tutorial review. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73(4), 971–995.
Spence, C., & Bayne, T. (2015). Is consciousness multisensory? In D. Stokes, M. Matthen & S. Biggs (Eds.), Perception and its Modalities (pp. 95–132). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Spence, C., Smith, B., & Auvray, M. (2015). Confusing tastes and flavours. In D. Stokes, M. Matthen, & S. Biggs (Eds.), Perception and its Modalities (pp. 247–274). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Strik Lievers, F. (2015). Synaesthesia: A corpus-based study of cross-modal directionality. In R. Caballero, & C. Paradis (Eds.), Functions of Language, Sensory Perceptions in Language and Cognition (pp. 69–95). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2017). Figures and the senses. Towards a definition of synaesthesia. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 15(1), 83–101
Sullivan, K., & Jiang, W. (2013). When my eyes are on you, do you touch my eyes? A reclassification of metaphors mapping from physical contact to perception. In T. Fuyin Li (Eds.), Compendium of Cognitive Linguistics Research Volume 2 (pp. 189–200). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
Suzuki, Y., Gyoba, J., & Sakamoto, S. (2008). Selective effects of auditory stimuli on tactile roughness perception. Brain Research, 1242, 87-94.
Tsur, R. (2012). Playing by Ear and the Tip of the Tongue: Precategorical Information in Poetry. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ullmann, S. (1945). Romanticism and synaesthesia: A comparative study of sense transfer in Keats and Byron. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 60, 811–827.
Williams, J. (1976). Synaesthetic adjectives: A possible law of semantic change. Language, 52, 461–478.
Winter, B., Marghetis, T., & Matlock, T. (2015). Of magnitudes and metaphors: Explaining cognitive interactions between space, time, and number. Cortex, 64, 209–224.
Winter, B. (2014). Horror movies and the cognitive ecology of primary metaphors. Metaphor & Symbol, 29(3), 151–170.
(2016a). Taste and smell words form an affectively loaded part of the English lexicon. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(8), 975–988.
Cited by (30)
Cited by 30 other publications
Zhao, Qingqing, Yunfei Long, Xiaotong Jiang, Zhongqing Wang, Chu-Ren Huang & Guodong Zhou
Boieblan, Mostafa
2024. Grounded cognition and the role of musical expertise in shaping synesthetic metaphors among a music speech
community. International Journal of Language and Culture 11:2 ► pp. 180 ff.
Galac, Ádám
2024. Bold colors, sweeping melodies, offensive smells. International Journal of Language and Culture 11:1 ► pp. 58 ff.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José
Sanz-Valdivieso, Lucía & Belén López Arroyo
Spence, Charles & Nicola Di Stefano
Tóth, Máté
Zhong, Yin, Kathleen Ahrens & Chu-Ren Huang
Galac, Ádám & Daler Zayniev
2023. Paths of linguistic synesthesia across cultures. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 10:2 ► pp. 450 ff.
Keränen, Jarkko
Winter, Bodo & Francesca Strik-Lievers
2023. Semantic distance predicts metaphoricity and creativity judgments in synesthetic metaphors. Metaphor and the Social World 13:1 ► pp. 59 ff.
Damian, Mihaela Marieta
Di Stefano, Nicola, Maddalena Murari & Charles Spence
Fishman, Alon
Poulton, Thomas
Rakhilina, Ekaterina, Daria Ryzhova & Yulia Badryzlova
Zhao, Qingqing, Kathleen Ahrens & Chu-Ren Huang
Coschignano, Serena
HARTMAN, JENNY & CARITA PARADIS
Hartman, Jenny & Carita Paradis
NAKIBOĞLU, Gülsün
CABALLERO, ROSARIO & CARITA PARADIS
Zhao, Qingqing
Zhao, Qingqing
Nuckolls, Janis B.
2019. The sensori-semantic clustering of ideophonic meaning in Pastaza Quichua. In Ideophones, Mimetics and Expressives [Iconicity in Language and Literature, 16], ► pp. 167 ff.
Zawisławska, Magdalena
2019. Narrative metaphors in Polish perfumery discourse. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 6:2 ► pp. 221 ff.
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
2019. Conclusion. In Sensory Linguistics [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research, 20], ► pp. 235 ff.
[no author supplied]
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.
