

Grammar


Tenses


Present

Present Simple

Present Continuous

Present Perfect

Present Perfect Continuous


Past

Past Simple

Past Continuous

Past Perfect

Past Perfect Continuous


Future

Future Simple

Future Continuous

Future Perfect

Future Perfect Continuous


Parts Of Speech


Nouns

Countable and uncountable nouns

Verbal nouns

Singular and Plural nouns

Proper nouns

Nouns gender

Nouns definition

Concrete nouns

Abstract nouns

Common nouns

Collective nouns

Definition Of Nouns

Animate and Inanimate nouns

Nouns


Verbs

Stative and dynamic verbs

Finite and nonfinite verbs

To be verbs

Transitive and intransitive verbs

Auxiliary verbs

Modal verbs

Regular and irregular verbs

Action verbs

Verbs


Adverbs

Relative adverbs

Interrogative adverbs

Adverbs of time

Adverbs of place

Adverbs of reason

Adverbs of quantity

Adverbs of manner

Adverbs of frequency

Adverbs of affirmation

Adverbs


Adjectives

Quantitative adjective

Proper adjective

Possessive adjective

Numeral adjective

Interrogative adjective

Distributive adjective

Descriptive adjective

Demonstrative adjective


Pronouns

Subject pronoun

Relative pronoun

Reflexive pronoun

Reciprocal pronoun

Possessive pronoun

Personal pronoun

Interrogative pronoun

Indefinite pronoun

Emphatic pronoun

Distributive pronoun

Demonstrative pronoun

Pronouns


Pre Position


Preposition by function

Time preposition

Reason preposition

Possession preposition

Place preposition

Phrases preposition

Origin preposition

Measure preposition

Direction preposition

Contrast preposition

Agent preposition


Preposition by construction

Simple preposition

Phrase preposition

Double preposition

Compound preposition

prepositions


Conjunctions

Subordinating conjunction

Correlative conjunction

Coordinating conjunction

Conjunctive adverbs

conjunctions


Interjections

Express calling interjection

Phrases

Sentences


Grammar Rules

Passive and Active

Preference

Requests and offers

wishes

Be used to

Some and any

Could have done

Describing people

Giving advices

Possession

Comparative and superlative

Giving Reason

Making Suggestions

Apologizing

Forming questions

Since and for

Directions

Obligation

Adverbials

invitation

Articles

Imaginary condition

Zero conditional

First conditional

Second conditional

Third conditional

Reported speech

Demonstratives

Determiners


Linguistics

Phonetics

Phonology

Linguistics fields

Syntax

Morphology

Semantics

pragmatics

History

Writing

Grammar

Phonetics and Phonology

Semiotics


Reading Comprehension

Elementary

Intermediate

Advanced


Teaching Methods

Teaching Strategies

Assessment
FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE
المؤلف:
John Field
المصدر:
Psycholinguistics
الجزء والصفحة:
P111
2025-08-19
489
FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE
The main issue is how a listener or reader recognises a statement as figurative rather than literal and processes it accordingly. In principle, the process of identifying figurative language can operate lexically in terms of selection restrictions or semantically in terms of failure to conform to a real-world state-of-affairs. Thus, The letter-box disliked the postman could be rejected as a factual statement either because the verb LIKE requires an animate subject or because real-world experience tells us that letter-boxes do not have feelings.
However, this type of analysis does not entirely explain:
a. How to distinguish a literal comparison such as Copper is like tin, from a figurative simile such as Sermons are like sleeping pills.
b. How to recognise the metaphorical intention of a sentence such as No man is an island, when the sentence is also literally true.
There are three major solutions:
Incoherence models, where the listener/reader is assumed to derive a literal interpretation of a sentence, assess its likelihood, then opt for a non-literal meaning if a literal one seems improbable. Against this view, studies of reading have shown no difference in the time taken to process literal and metaphorical interpretations of sentences– provided the supporting context is sufficiently clear. Research has also shown that readers are slower to reject a sentence as literally false when it has a potential metaphorical interpretation than when it has none. The conclusion is that they are unable to block out a metaphorical interpretation, even when they are required simply to make a truth value judgement.
Comparison models, where the reader or listener balances the attributes of two items. One way of distinguishing the sentences in a. is that the literal one is reversible but the figurative one is not. The reason is that there is a salience imbalance in the second sentence which makes the attributes of SERMONS in subject position less important than that of SLEEPING PILLS in complement position.
Interaction models, in which the vehicle of the metaphor illuminates the topic, which then illuminates the vehicle. Thus, in Man is a wolf, wolf serves to point up the animal nature of MAN, while man serves to anthropomorphise WOLF.
An unresolved issue in these approaches is the way in which comprehenders decide which attributes form the basis of the figurative relationship. The attributes selected may be multiple, and not expressible in a single literal word, as with Mary’s been a rock. Or they may involve considerable selectivity similar to that involved in instantiation. The sentence His face was a tomato. potentially draws upon softness, roundness and redness; without a context, the processor has to favour the attribute most likely to be employed in a metaphorical situation. (Major source: Cacciari and Glucksberg, 1994.)
See also: Instantiation, Metaphor
Further reading: Cacciari and Glucksberg (1994)
الاكثر قراءة في Linguistics fields
اخر الاخبار
اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة
الآخبار الصحية

قسم الشؤون الفكرية يصدر كتاباً يوثق تاريخ السدانة في العتبة العباسية المقدسة
"المهمة".. إصدار قصصي يوثّق القصص الفائزة في مسابقة فتوى الدفاع المقدسة للقصة القصيرة
(نوافذ).. إصدار أدبي يوثق القصص الفائزة في مسابقة الإمام العسكري (عليه السلام)