Cover not available

Article published In: Review of Cognitive Linguistics
Vol. 13:1 (2015) ► pp.140–166

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

Beyond compare

Similes in interaction

Published online: 23 June 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.13.1.06cue
This paper deals with the formal properties and discourse features of “A és com B” (“A is like B”) similes in Catalan. In contrast with most previous approaches, the examples are naturally-occurring and the whole text has been analyzed so that their context, and not only the similes, is considered. The analysis of similes in interaction puts forward that: (i) a simile is a three-slot comparative construction, including a target and a source belonging to different conceptual domains, and an optional but frequent and highly significant elaboration; (ii) a simile is a figurative comparison between a source and a target (grammatically expressed by noun phrases or clauses) generally considered completely distinct or non-comparable; (iii) similes are powerful mechanisms to catch the addressee’s attention and put in a nutshell someone’s opinion, and (iv) they tend to have a prominent text status and are often found as headlines.
References (34)
Addison, C. (1993). From literal to figurative: An introduction to the study of simile. College English, 55(4), 402–419. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aisenman, R.A. (1999). Structure mapping and simile-metaphor preference. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 14(1), 45–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bernárdez, E. (2009). Comparaciones explícitas con wie en Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, de Robert Musil: Una aproximación cognitiva. Revista de Filología Alemana, anejo I, 57–72. Available at: <[URL]>. Access: 2. 7.2012.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Black, M. (1979). More about metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 19–43). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bowdle, B.F., & Gentner, D. (2005). The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 112(1), 193–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bredin, H. (1998). Comparisons and similes. Lingua, 1051, 67–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chiappe, D., & Kennedy, J. (2000). Are metaphors elliptical similes? Journal of Pshycholinguistic Research, 29(4), 371–398. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2001). Literal bases for metaphor and simile. Metaphor and Symbol, 161, 249–276. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chiappe, D., Kennedy, J., & Chiappe, P. (2003). Aptness is more important than comprehensibility in preference for metaphors and similes. Poetics, 311, 51–68. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coulson, S. (2001). Semantic leaps: Frame shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuenca, M.J., & Romano, M. (2013). Similes in interaction: Beyond (metaphor and) compare. Paper presented at the 12th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference , Edmonton (Canada), June, 23rd–28th, 2013.
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E. (2014). Grammatical constructions and figurative meaning. In Figurative Language (pp. 127–161). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. (1988). Grammatical construction theory and the familiar dichotomies. In R. Dietrich & C.F. Graumann (Eds.), Language processing in social context (pp. 17–38). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fromilhague, C. (1995). Les figures de style. Paris: Nathan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 71, 155– 170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199–241). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gentner, D., & Bowdle, B.F. (2001). Convention, form, and figurative language processing. Metaphor and Symbol, 16 (3/4), 223–247 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gentner, D., & Markman, A.B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1), 45–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glucksberg, S. (2001). Understanding figurative language: From metaphor to idioms. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glucksberg, S., & Haught, C. (2006). On the relation between metaphor and simile: When comparison fails. Mind & Language, 21(3), 360–378. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glucksberg, S., & Keysar, B. (1990). Understanding metaphorical comparisons: Beyond similarity. Psychological Review, 971, 3–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1993). How metaphors work. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought, 2nd edition (pp. 401–424). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Israel, M., Riddle Harding, J., & Tobin, V. (2004). On simile. In M. Achard & S. Kemmer (Eds.) Language, culture, and mind (pp. 123–135). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moder, C.L. (2008). It’s like making a soup: metaphors and similes in spoken news discourse. In A. Tyler, Y. Kim, & A. Takada (Eds.). Language in the context of use: Discourse and cognitive approaches to language (pp. 301–320). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2012). Two puzzle pieces: Fitting discourse context and constructions into cognitive metaphor theory. In B. Dancygier, J. Sanders, & L. Vandelanotte (Eds.) Textual choices in discourse: A view from Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 157–183). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ortony, A. (Ed.). (1993). Metaphor and thought, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pierini, P. (2007). Simile in English: From description to translation. CÍRCULO de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación (clac), 291, 21–43. [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Romano, M. (in progress). Are metaphor and similes interchangeable? A case study in opinion discourse.
Roncero, C., Kennedy, J., & Smyth, R. (2006). Similes on the Internet have Explanations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(1), 74–77. Available at: [URL]. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sullivan, K. (2009). Grammatical constructions in metaphoric language. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & K. Dziwirek (Eds.), Cognitive Corpus Linguistics (pp. 57–80). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 841, 327–352. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Utsumi, A. (2007). Interpretative diversity explains metaphor-simile distinction. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(4), 291–312. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (11)

Cited by 11 other publications

Reda, Ghsoon
2024.  Like-simile and metaphor in cooperation: from expressing similarities to expressing contrasts. Language and Semiotic Studies 10:4 ► pp. 504 ff. DOI logo
Romano, Manuela & Maria Josep Cuenca
2024. Conceptualizing the Covid-19 pandemic through similes. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 11:1 ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo
Hrdličková, Zuzana
2023. EXPLORING THE DEVELOPMENT OF STUDENTS’ KNOWLEDGE OF CONVENTIONALISED SIMILES IN ENGLISH LEXICOLOGY AND PHRASEOLOGY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY. Advanced Education 10:22 ► pp. 72 ff. DOI logo
Cuenca, Maria-Josep & Manuela Romano
2022. Like a Virus. Similes for a Pandemic. Metaphor and Symbol 37:4 ► pp. 269 ff. DOI logo
Panagiotidou, Maria-Eirini
2022. Representation and Narrativization in Ekphrasis. In The Poetics of Ekphrasis, ► pp. 85 ff. DOI logo
Tartakovsky, Roi, David Fishelov & Yeshayahu Shen
2019. Not as Clear as Day: On Irony, Humor, and Poeticity in the Closed Simile. Metaphor and Symbol 34:3 ► pp. 185 ff. DOI logo
Tartakovsky, Roi & Yeshayahu Shen
2019. Meek as milk and large as logic: A corpus study of the non-standard poetic simile. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 28:3 ► pp. 203 ff. DOI logo
Tartakovsky, Roi & Yeshayahu Shen
2023. “Insistent as anesthetic”: difficult similes subserving the poetic context. Journal of Literary Semantics 52:1 ► pp. 23 ff. DOI logo
Hartman, Jenny & Carita Paradis
2018. Emotive and sensory simulation through comparative construal. Metaphor and Symbol 33:2 ► pp. 123 ff. DOI logo
Romano, Manuela
2017. Are similes and metaphors interchangeable?. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 15:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Figuring out Figuration [Figurative Thought and Language, 14], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 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