TY - JOUR
T1 - 'Simple as a fire'
T2 - Making sense of the non-standard poetic simile
AU - Tartakovsky, Roi
AU - Shen, Yeshayahu
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.
PY - 2018/10/1
Y1 - 2018/10/1
N2 - Our topic is an under-theorized type of closed simile in which the ground represents a non-salient feature of the source term (e.g., as quiet as a weight, as opposed to a standard simile, e.g., as heavy as a weight). The non-standard simile introduces a semantic difficulty, a result of the unexpected mismatch between ground and source. Since they are highly prevalent in poetic texts there is special interest in investigating the ways subjects attempt to comprehend such similes. To that end, we have asked 62 subjects to interpret pairs of similes distinguished only by the salience of the ground. We identify 5 response types and find that these are unevenly distributed across the two simile types (standard and non-standard). The structural difference between the two kinds of similes, therefore, evokes different interpretational strategies. Additionally, we find that the non-standard simile entails a hit-or-miss potentiality, creating conditions for either an insightful interpretation or a rejection of any possibility of its coherent comprehension.
AB - Our topic is an under-theorized type of closed simile in which the ground represents a non-salient feature of the source term (e.g., as quiet as a weight, as opposed to a standard simile, e.g., as heavy as a weight). The non-standard simile introduces a semantic difficulty, a result of the unexpected mismatch between ground and source. Since they are highly prevalent in poetic texts there is special interest in investigating the ways subjects attempt to comprehend such similes. To that end, we have asked 62 subjects to interpret pairs of similes distinguished only by the salience of the ground. We identify 5 response types and find that these are unevenly distributed across the two simile types (standard and non-standard). The structural difference between the two kinds of similes, therefore, evokes different interpretational strategies. Additionally, we find that the non-standard simile entails a hit-or-miss potentiality, creating conditions for either an insightful interpretation or a rejection of any possibility of its coherent comprehension.
KW - cognition and figurative language
KW - empirical study of literature
KW - poetry
KW - reading strategies
KW - simile
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058508688&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1515/jls-2018-2002
DO - 10.1515/jls-2018-2002
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:85058508688
SN - 0341-7638
VL - 47
SP - 103
EP - 119
JO - Journal of Literary Semantics
JF - Journal of Literary Semantics
IS - 2
ER -